IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/ajagec/v99y2017i4p914-931..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Addressing Participant Inattention in Federal Programs: A Field Experiment with The Conservation Reserve Program

Author

Listed:
  • Steven Wallander
  • Paul Ferraro
  • Nathaniel Higgins

Abstract

Voluntary land conservation programs depend upon the willingness of land owners to participate. Since participation requires commitment to long-term contracts, most studies on participation focus on changes to the pecuniary incentives facing land owners. This study presents a large-scale field experiment within the USDA’s Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) that examines whether informational outreach, including behavioral nudges, could improve land owners’ willingness to participate. The experiment evaluates the impact of three types of reminder letters on the rate at which land is offered into the CRP. We find that for the most well-informed group, farms with expiring CRP contracts, the reminder letters did improve participation. We interpret this result as evidence of inattentive behavior. We do not detect any differences in the estimated treatment effects among the basic reminder letter and the letters augmented with peer comparisons and social norm messaging, nor do we detect any treatment effect among currently unenrolled farms. From a policy perspective, these results imply that the USDA can generate additional CRP offers among farms with expiring contracts at an average cost of $39 per additional offer. Assuming a twenty-five million acre program, reminder letters sent during every sign-up period would result in re-enrollment offers from an additional 420,000 acres. Using simulations based on offers from prior CRP sign-ups, we estimate that these additional offers in the CRP auction would reduce program costs. Depending on the year of simulation, the outreach effort achieves a benefit-cost ratio of between 20:1 and 90:1.

Suggested Citation

  • Steven Wallander & Paul Ferraro & Nathaniel Higgins, 2017. "Addressing Participant Inattention in Federal Programs: A Field Experiment with The Conservation Reserve Program," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 99(4), pages 914-931.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:ajagec:v:99:y:2017:i:4:p:914-931.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/ajae/aax023
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Land conservation; auction participation; outreach effects; field experiment; inattention; peer comparison;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q28 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Government Policy
    • D44 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Auctions
    • D83 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Search; Learning; Information and Knowledge; Communication; Belief; Unawareness

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:ajagec:v:99:y:2017:i:4:p:914-931.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaeaaea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.