IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aes026/397897.html

How uncertainty and risk preferences shape participation in outcome-based forest carbon PES: A discrete choice and lottery experiment in China

Author

Listed:
  • Liu, Qi
  • Hanley, Nick
  • Yi, Yuanyuan
  • Xu, Jintao
  • Kontoleon, Andreas

Abstract

Payment for Ecosystem Service (PES) schemes, particularly those involving tree-planting initiatives, are increasingly recognized for their great potential to mitigate carbon emissions and address climate change. Among them, Outcome-Based Payments (also known as results-based schemes) have gained attention for their cost-effectiveness and potential to improve environmental efficiency. This study examines farmers’ preferences towards participating in an outcome-based tree planting scheme using a discrete choice experiment conducted in Yunnan, China. We explicitly incorporate uncertainty in environmental outcomes, which in turn affects payment structures. We also elicit farmers’ risk perceptions through incentivized field lottery games and examine its influence on participation decisions and marginal willingness-to-accept (WTA). Based on a sample of 340 respondents, we find that farmers’ willingness to participate is significantly influenced by contract attributes, including the subsidy level, provision of training and technical guidance, environmental performance requirements, and the degree of uncertainty involved. Our findings further highlight the role of uncertainty and risk perceptions in shaping farmers’ decision-making processes in outcome-based PES.

Suggested Citation

  • Liu, Qi & Hanley, Nick & Yi, Yuanyuan & Xu, Jintao & Kontoleon, Andreas, 2026. "How uncertainty and risk preferences shape participation in outcome-based forest carbon PES: A discrete choice and lottery experiment in China," 100th Annual Conference, March 23-25, 2026, Wadham College, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK 397897, Agricultural Economics Society (AES).
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:aes026:397897
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.397897
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/397897/files/Qi%20_Liu_Manuscript_How%20uncertainty%20and%20risk%20preferences%20shape%20participation%20in%20outcome.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.397897?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Simpson, Katherine & Armsworth, Paul R. & Dallimer, Martin & Nthambi, Mary & de Vries, Frans P. & Hanley, Nick, 2023. "Improving the ecological and economic performance of agri-environment schemes: Payment by modelled results versus payment for actions," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 130(C).
    2. Kangas, Johanna & Ollikainen, Markku, 2022. "A PES scheme promoting forest biodiversity and carbon sequestration," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 136(C).
    3. Atkinson, Adele & Burgess, Simon & Croxson, Bronwyn & Gregg, Paul & Propper, Carol & Slater, Helen & Wilson, Deborah, 2009. "Evaluating the impact of performance-related pay for teachers in England," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(3), pages 251-261, June.
    4. Edgardo Moscardi & Alain de Janvry, 1977. "Attitudes Toward Risk Among Peasants: An Econometric Approach," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 59(4), pages 710-716.
    5. Katsuya Tanaka & Nicholas Hanley & Laure Kuhfuss, 2022. "Farmers’ preferences toward an outcome‐based payment for ecosystem service scheme in Japan," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 73(3), pages 720-738, September.
    6. Helena Hansson & Carl Johan Lagerkvist, 2012. "Measuring farmers' preferences for risk: a domain-specific risk preference scale," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(7), pages 737-753, August.
    7. GlennW. Harrison & StevenJ. Humphrey & Arjan Verschoor, 2010. "Choice under Uncertainty: Evidence from Ethiopia, India and Uganda," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 120(543), pages 80-104, March.
    8. Sidemo-Holm, William & Smith, Henrik G. & Brady, Mark V., 2018. "Improving agricultural pollution abatement through result-based payment schemes," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 209-219.
    9. Mu, Ren & Zhang, Xiaobo, 2014. "Do elected leaders in a limited democracy have real power? Evidence from rural China," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 17-27.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Granado-Díaz, Rubén & Villanueva, Anastasio J. & Colombo, Sergio, 2024. "Land manager preferences for outcome-based payments for environmental services in oak savannahs," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 220(C).
    2. Hurley, Terrance M., "undated". "A review of agricultural production risk in the developing world," Working Papers 188476, HarvestChoice.
    3. Wunder, Sven & Fraccaroli, Cecilia & Varela, Elsa & Bruzzese, Stefano & Termansen, Mette, 2025. "Examining innovative designs of agri-environmental schemes in Europe: A case comparison of impact pathways," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    4. Waweru, Caroline Waithira & Nyikal, Rose & Busienei, John R, "undated". "An Analysis Of Risk Attitudes And Risk Management Strategies Among Dairy Farmers In Murang’A County, Kenya," Dissertations and Theses 271063, University of Nairobi, Department of Agricultural Economics.
    5. Tina L. Saitone & Richard J. Sexton & Benoît Malan, 2018. "Price premiums, payment delays, and default risk: understanding developing country farmers’ decisions to market through a cooperative or a private trader," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 49(3), pages 363-380, May.
    6. Süring, Charlotte Marie & Lundhede, Thomas Hedemark, 2025. "Private forest owner preferences for action- and result-based biodiversity restoration contracts – A discrete choice experiment in Denmark and Finland," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 179(C).
    7. Kanchan Joshi & Thiagu Ranganathan & Ram Ranjan, 2021. "Exploring Higher Order Risk Preferences of Farmers in a Water-Scarce Region: Evidence from a Field Experiment in West Bengal, India," Journal of Quantitative Economics, Springer;The Indian Econometric Society (TIES), vol. 19(2), pages 317-344, June.
    8. Granado-Díaz, Rubén & Colombo, Sergio & Romero-Varo, Marina & Villanueva, Anastasio J., 2024. "Farmers' attitudes toward the use of digital technologies in the context of agri-environmental policies," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 221(C).
    9. Waithira, Waweru Caroline, 2017. "An Analysis Of Risk Attitudes And Risk Management Strategies Among Dairy Farmers In Murang’A County, Kenya," Research Theses 276428, Collaborative Masters Program in Agricultural and Applied Economics.
    10. Jason R.V. Franken & Joost M.E. Pennings & Philip Garcia, 2017. "Risk attitudes and the structure of decision†making: evidence from the Illinois hog industry," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 48(1), pages 41-50, January.
    11. Feyisa, Ashenafi Duguma & Maertens, Miet & de Mey, Yann, 2023. "Relating risk preferences and risk perceptions over different agricultural risk domains: Insights from Ethiopia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 162(C).
    12. Géraldine Bocquého & Florence Jacquet & Arnaud Reynaud, 2014. "Expected utility or prospect theory maximisers? Assessing farmers' risk behaviour from field-experiment data," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 41(1), pages 135-172, February.
    13. Hao, Zhengzheng & Nthambi, Mary, 2025. "A comparative analysis of agri-environment schemes in China, Europe and US: Potential for improvement," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    14. Canessa, Carolin & Venus, Terese E. & Wiesmeier, Miriam & Mennig, Philipp & Sauer, Johannes, 2023. "Incentives, Rewards or Both in Payments for Ecosystem Services: Drawing a Link Between Farmers' Preferences and Biodiversity Levels," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 213(C).
    15. Yang Liu & Jing Zhao & Xi Zheng & Xiaoyang Ou & Yaru Zhang & Jiaying Li, 2023. "Evaluation of Biodiversity Maintenance Capacity in Forest Landscapes: A Case Study in Beijing, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-23, June.
    16. Fossen, Frank M. & Glocker, Daniela, 2017. "Stated and revealed heterogeneous risk preferences in educational choice," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 1-25.
    17. Martin Drechsler, 2026. "Result-Based vs. Action-Based Payments in Spatially Heterogeneous Landscapes: A Systematic Model-Based Comparison," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 89(2), pages 1-22, February.
    18. Renate Strobl & Conny Wunsch, 2021. "Risky choices and solidarity: disentangling different behavioural channels," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 24(4), pages 1185-1214, December.
    19. Lee, Yu Na & Chau, Nancy & Just, David, 2014. "The Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) Program for Farmers in the U.S.: Role of Incentives in Program Participation," 2014 Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2014, Minneapolis, Minnesota 176205, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    20. Lai, Weizheng, 2024. "The effect of education on voter turnout in China's rural elections," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 221(C), pages 230-247.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ags:aes026:397897. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aesukea.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.