IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/iaae18/277062.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Nudging farmers to comply with water protection rules Experimental evidence from Germany

Author

Listed:
  • Peth, D.
  • Mushoff, O.
  • Funke, K.
  • Hirschauer, N.

Abstract

Nitrogen runoffs induced by agricultural fertilisation cause serious environmental damage to surface waters. Environmental and consumer protectionists demand government intervention to mitigate these externalities. With this in mind, the present study examines the effects of nudge-based regulatory strategies. We use an incentivised single-player multi-period business management game as an experimental device to study how nudges affect compliance with the minimum-distance-to-water rule in a sample of German farmers. We investigate two different nudge treatments: a nudge with information and pictures showing environmental and health damages that are presumably caused by breaching the minimum-distance-to-water rule, and a nudge with an additional social comparison suggesting that the majority of farmers in the same region comply with the rule. We observe three core experimental outcomes: first, nudging has a preventive effect and reduces the share of non-compliant participants. Second, against all expectations, the preventive effect of the nudge with an additional social comparison is weaker than that of the nudge with information and pictures alone. Third, despite the overall positive effects of nudging, the nudge with social comparison even increased the severity of non-complying behaviour in the deviant subpopulation. Acknowledgement : The authors gratefully acknowledge ?nancial support from the German Research Foundation (DFG). We thank Dr. Matthias Buchholz, Dr. Daniel Hermann and the Centre for Statistics of the University of G ttingen for helpful comments and statistical advice. We also thank Manfred Tietze for support by programming of the experiment.

Suggested Citation

  • Peth, D. & Mushoff, O. & Funke, K. & Hirschauer, N., 2018. "Nudging farmers to comply with water protection rules Experimental evidence from Germany," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 277062, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:iaae18:277062
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.277062
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/277062/files/782.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Laure Kuhfuss & Raphaële Préget & Sophie Thoyer & Nick Hanley & Philippe Le Coent & Mathieu Désolé, 2016. "Nudges, Social Norms, and Permanence in Agri-environmental Schemes," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 92(4), pages 641-655.
    2. Laure Kuhfuss & Raphaële Préget & Sophie Thoyer & Nick Hanley, 2016. "Nudging farmers to enrol land into agri-environmental schemes: the role of a collective bonus," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Foundation for the European Review of Agricultural Economics, vol. 43(4), pages 609-636.
    3. Smith, Vernon L & Walker, James M, 1993. "Monetary Rewards and Decision Cost in Experimental Economics," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 31(2), pages 245-261, April.
    4. Michalek, Gabriela & Meran, Georg & Schwarze, Reimund & Yildiz, Özgür, 2016. "Nudging as a new "soft" policy tool: An assessment of the definitional scope of nudges, practical implementation possibilities and their effectiveness," Economics Discussion Papers 2016-18, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW).
    5. Bartke, Simon & Friedl, Andreas & Gelhaar, Felix & Reh, Laura, 2017. "Social comparison nudges—Guessing the norm increases charitable giving," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 73-75.
    6. Falk, Armin & Fischbacher, Urs, 2006. "A theory of reciprocity," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 54(2), pages 293-315, February.
    7. Daniel Hellerstein & Nathaniel Higgins & John Horowitz, 2013. "The predictive power of risk preference measures for farming decisions -super-†," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Foundation for the European Review of Agricultural Economics, vol. 40(5), pages 807-833, December.
    8. Rachel Croson & Nicolas Treich, 2014. "Behavioral Environmental Economics: Promises and Challenges," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 58(3), pages 335-351, July.
    9. Lisa Anderson & Jennifer Mellor, 2009. "Are risk preferences stable? Comparing an experimental measure with a validated survey-based measure," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 39(2), pages 137-160, October.
    10. Norbert Hirschauer & Stefan Zwoll, 2008. "Understanding and managing behavioural risks: the case of malpractice in poultry production," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 26(1), pages 27-60, August.
    11. Camerer, Colin F & Hogarth, Robin M, 1999. "The Effects of Financial Incentives in Experiments: A Review and Capital-Labor-Production Framework," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 19(1-3), pages 7-42, December.
    12. Frans P. Vries & Nick Hanley, 2016. "Incentive-Based Policy Design for Pollution Control and Biodiversity Conservation: A Review," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 63(4), pages 687-702, April.
    13. Christine Jolls & Cass R. Sunstein, 2006. "Debiasing through Law," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 35(1), pages 199-242, January.
    14. repec:feb:artefa:0087 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Tong, Edward N.C. & Mues, Christophe & Thomas, Lyn, 2013. "A zero-adjusted gamma model for mortgage loan loss given default," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 29(4), pages 548-562.
    16. Levitt, Steven D. & List, John A., 2009. "Field experiments in economics: The past, the present, and the future," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 1-18, January.
    17. Samuli Reijula & Jaakko Kuorikoski & Timo Ehrig & Konstantinos Katsikopoulos & Shyam Sunder, 2018. "Nudge, Boost, or Design? Limitations of behaviorally informed policy under social interaction," Journal of Behavioral Economics for Policy, Society for the Advancement of Behavioral Economics (SABE), vol. 2(1), pages 99-105, March.
    18. Donna Bobek & Robin Roberts & John Sweeney, 2007. "The Social Norms of Tax Compliance: Evidence from Australia, Singapore, and the United States," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 74(1), pages 49-64, August.
    19. F. Bailey Norwood & Jayson L. Lusk, 2011. "Social Desirability Bias in Real, Hypothetical, and Inferred Valuation Experiments," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 93(2), pages 528-534.
    20. Patel, Pankaj C. & Fiet, James O., 2010. "Enhancing the internal validity of entrepreneurship experiments by assessing treatment effects at multiple levels across multiple trials," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 76(1), pages 127-140, October.
    21. Charness, Gary & Gneezy, Uri & Kuhn, Michael A., 2013. "Experimental methods: Extra-laboratory experiments-extending the reach of experimental economics," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 93-100.
    22. Cass Sunstein, 2014. "Nudging: A Very Short Guide," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 37(4), pages 583-588, December.
    23. Thomas Böcker & Robert Finger, 2016. "European Pesticide Tax Schemes in Comparison: An Analysis of Experiences and Developments," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 8(4), pages 1-22, April.
    24. Maart-Noelck, Syster C. & Musshoff, Oliver, 2014. "Measuring the risk attitude of decision-makers: are there differences between groups of methods and persons?," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 58(3), July.
    25. Allcott, Hunt, 2011. "Social norms and energy conservation," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(9-10), pages 1082-1095, October.
    26. Guala,Francesco, 2005. "The Methodology of Experimental Economics," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521618618.
    27. List, John A. & Rasul, Imran, 2011. "Field Experiments in Labor Economics," Handbook of Labor Economics, in: O. Ashenfelter & D. Card (ed.), Handbook of Labor Economics, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 2, pages 103-228, Elsevier.
    28. Charles A. Holt & Susan K. Laury, 2002. "Risk Aversion and Incentive Effects," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(5), pages 1644-1655, December.
    29. Allcott, Hunt, 2011. "Social norms and energy conservation," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(9), pages 1082-1095.
    30. Czap, Natalia V. & Czap, Hans J. & Lynne, Gary D. & Burbach, Mark E., 2015. "Walk in my shoes: Nudging for empathy conservation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 147-158.
    31. Paul J. Ferraro & Michael K. Price, 2013. "Using Nonpecuniary Strategies to Influence Behavior: Evidence from a Large-Scale Field Experiment," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 95(1), pages 64-73, March.
    32. James Shortle & Richard D. Horan, 2013. "Policy Instruments for Water Quality Protection," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 5(1), pages 111-138, June.
    33. Noah J. Goldstein & Robert B. Cialdini & Vladas Griskevicius, 2008. "A Room with a Viewpoint: Using Social Norms to Motivate Environmental Conservation in Hotels," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 35(3), pages 472-482, March.
    34. Oliver Musshoff & Norbert Hirschauer, 2014. "Using business simulation games in regulatory impact analysis - the case of policies aimed at reducing nitrogen leaching," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 46(25), pages 3049-3060, September.
    35. R. A. Rigby & D. M. Stasinopoulos, 2005. "Generalized additive models for location, scale and shape," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 54(3), pages 507-554, June.
    36. Thea Nielsen & Alwin Keil & Manfred Zeller, 2013. "Assessing farmers’ risk preferences and their determinants in a marginal upland area of Vietnam: a comparison of multiple elicitation techniques," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 44(3), pages 255-273, May.
    37. Stasinopoulos, D. Mikis & Rigby, Robert A., 2007. "Generalized Additive Models for Location Scale and Shape (GAMLSS) in R," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 23(i07).
    38. Henning, Christian H.C.A. & Michalek, Jerzy, 2008. "Ökonometrische Methoden der Politikevaluation: Meilenstein für eine sinnvolle Agrarpolitik der 2. Säule oder akademische Fingerübung?," German Journal of Agricultural Economics, Humboldt-Universitaet zu Berlin, Department for Agricultural Economics, vol. 57(03-04), pages 1-12.
    39. Jules Pretty & Craig Brett & David Gee & Rachel Hine & Chris Mason & James Morison & Matthew Rayment & Gert Van Der Bijl & Thomas Dobbs, 2001. "Policy Challenges and Priorities for Internalizing the Externalities of Modern Agriculture," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 44(2), pages 263-283.
    40. Schubert, Christian, 2017. "Green nudges: Do they work? Are they ethical?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 329-342.
    41. Armin Falk & Urs Fischbacher & Simon Gächter, 2013. "Living In Two Neighborhoods—Social Interaction Effects In The Laboratory," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 51(1), pages 563-578, January.
    42. James Shortle & Richard D. Horan, 2017. "Nutrient Pollution: A Wicked Challenge for Economic Instruments," Water Economics and Policy (WEP), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 3(02), pages 1-39, April.
    43. Gary Burtless, 1995. "The Case for Randomized Field Trials in Economic and Policy Research," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 9(2), pages 63-84, Spring.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Robert Böhm & Özgür Gürerk & Thomas Lauer, 2020. "Nudging Climate Change Mitigation: A Laboratory Experiment with Inter-Generational Public Goods," Games, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 11(4), pages 1-20, October.
    2. Grilli, Gianluca & Curtis, John, 2019. "Encouraging pro-environmental behaviours: a review of methods and approaches," Papers WP645, Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI).
    3. J. Nicolas Hernandez-Aguilera & Max Mauerman & Alexandra Herrera & Kathryn Vasilaky & Walter Baethgen & Ana Maria Loboguerrero & Rahel Diro & Yohana Tesfamariam Tekeste & Daniel Osgood, 2020. "Games and Fieldwork in Agriculture: A Systematic Review of the 21st Century in Economics and Social Science," Games, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 11(4), pages 1-22, October.
    4. Chakravarty, Sujoy & Mishra, Rajan, 2019. "Using social norms to reduce paper waste: Results from a field experiment in the Indian Information Technology sector," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 1-1.
    5. Vroege, Willemijn & Meraner, Manuela & Polman, Nico & Storm, Hugo & Heijman, Wim & Finger, Robert, 2020. "Beyond the single farm – A spatial econometric analysis of spill-overs in farm diversification in the Netherlands," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    6. Funke, Katja & Hirschauer, Norbert & Peth, Denise & Mußhoff, Oliver & Becker, Oliver Arránz, 2019. "Can personality traits explain compliance behaviour? - A study of compliance with water-protection rules in German agriculture," SocArXiv jnexr, Center for Open Science.

    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. Buchholz, Matthias & Peth, Denise & Mußhoff, Oliver, 2018. "Tax or green nudge? An experimental analysis of pesticide policies in Germany," DARE Discussion Papers 1813, Georg-August University of Göttingen, Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development (DARE).
    2. Peth, Denise & Mußhoff, Oliver, 2018. "Comparing compliance behaviour of students and farmers: Implications for agricultural policy impact analysis," DARE Discussion Papers 1809, Georg-August University of Göttingen, Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development (DARE).
    3. Denise Peth & Oliver Mußhoff, 2020. "Comparing Compliance Behaviour of Students and Farmers. An Extra‐laboratory Experiment in the Context of Agri‐environmental Nudges in Germany," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 71(2), pages 601-615, June.
    4. Buchholz, Matthias & Holst, Gesa & Musshoff, Oliver, 2015. "Water and irrigation policy impact assessment using business simulation games: evidence from northern Germany," Department of Agricultural and Rural Development (DARE) Discussion Papers 260781, Georg-August-Universitaet Goettingen, Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development (DARE).
    5. Funke, Katja & Hirschauer, Norbert & Peth, Denise & Mußhoff, Oliver & Becker, Oliver Arránz, 2019. "Can personality traits explain compliance behaviour? - A study of compliance with water-protection rules in German agriculture," SocArXiv jnexr, Center for Open Science.
    6. François J Dessart & Jesús Barreiro-Hurlé & René van Bavel, 2019. "Behavioural factors affecting the adoption of sustainable farming practices: a policy-oriented review," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Foundation for the European Review of Agricultural Economics, vol. 46(3), pages 417-471.
    7. Mikolaj Czajkowski & Katarzyna Zagórska & Nick Hanley, 2018. "Social Norms and Pro-Environment Behaviours: Heterogeneous Response to Signals," Discussion Papers in Environment and Development Economics 2018-02, University of St. Andrews, School of Geography and Sustainable Development.
    8. Sylvain Chabé-Ferret & Philippe Le Coent & Arnaud Reynaud & Julie Subervie & Daniel Lepercq, 2019. "Can we nudge farmers into saving water? Evidence from a randomised experiment," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Foundation for the European Review of Agricultural Economics, vol. 46(3), pages 393-416.
    9. Schleich, Joachim & Gassmann, Xavier & Faure, Corinne & Meissner, Thomas, 2016. "Making the implicit explicit: A look inside the implicit discount rate," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 321-331.
    10. Denis Hilton & Nicolas Treich & Gaetan Lazzara & Philippe Tendil, 2018. "Designing effective nudges that satisfy ethical constraints: the case of environmentally responsible behaviour," Mind & Society: Cognitive Studies in Economics and Social Sciences, Springer;Fondazione Rosselli, vol. 17(1), pages 27-38, November.
    11. Czap, Natalia V. & Czap, Hans J. & Banerjee, Simanti & Burbach, Mark E., 2019. "Encouraging farmers' participation in the Conservation Stewardship Program: A field experiment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 161(C), pages 130-143.
    12. Boun My, Kene & Ouvrard, Benjamin, 2019. "Nudge and tax in an environmental public goods experiment: Does environmental sensitivity matter?," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 24-48.
    13. John A. List & Michael K. Price, 2013. "Using Field Experiments in Environmental and Resource Economics," NBER Working Papers 19289, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    14. Grüner, S. & Hirschauer, N. & Mußhoff, O., 2015. "Potenzial verschiedener experimenteller Designs für die Politikfolgenabschätzung," Proceedings “Schriften der Gesellschaft für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften des Landbaues e.V.”, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA), vol. 50, March.
    15. Ennio Bilancini & Leonardo Boncinelli & Valerio Capraro & Roberto Di Paolo, 2020. "The effect of norm-based messages on reading and understanding COVID-19 pandemic response governmental rules," Journal of Behavioral Economics for Policy, Society for the Advancement of Behavioral Economics (SABE), vol. 4(S), pages 45-55, June.
    16. Benjamin Ouvrard & Raphaële Préget & Arnaud Reynaud & Laetitia Tuffery, 2020. "Nudging and Subsidizing Farmers to Foster Smart Water Meter Adoption," Working Papers hal-02958784, HAL.
    17. Zack Dorner, 2017. "A Behavioural Rebound Effect: Results from a laboratory experiment," Monash Economics Working Papers 17-17, Monash University, Department of Economics.
    18. Cristina Bicchieri & Eugen Dimant, 2019. "Nudging with Care: The Risks and Benefits of Social Information," Discussion Papers 2019-02, The Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of Nottingham.
    19. Dorner, Zack, 2017. "A Behavioural Rebound Effect: Results from a laboratory experiment," 2017 Conference, October 19-20, Rotorua, New Zealand 269390, New Zealand Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    20. Mitra, Arnab & Shahriar, Quazi, 2020. "Why is dishonesty difficult to mitigate? The interaction between descriptive norm and monetary incentive," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Resource/Energy Economics and Policy;

    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:iaae18:277062. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (AgEcon Search). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iaaeeea.html .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.