IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2505.08323.html

When Incentives and Nudges Meet: Promoting Budget Allocations for Undervalued Policies

Author

Listed:
  • Makoto Kuroki
  • Shusaku Sasaki

Abstract

Budget officers often assess public project proposals based on available financial support and expected outcomes. However, behavioral factors such as time discounting and psychological hesitation may lead to underinvestment in programs with delayed but significant benefits. This study investigates whether financial incentives and non-financial nudges can influence budgetary decisions in local governments. We conducted a nationwide mail-based survey experiment targeting budget officers in Japanese municipalities and received 490 valid responses. Using a 2*2 randomized design, we tested the independent and combined effects of a financial incentive (a 50% national subsidy) and a non-financial nudge (loss framing and peer information). All three treatments significantly increased assessed budget amounts compared to the control group. The largest effect appeared in the combination group (approximately 1.1 million JPY higher, p

Suggested Citation

  • Makoto Kuroki & Shusaku Sasaki, 2025. "When Incentives and Nudges Meet: Promoting Budget Allocations for Undervalued Policies," Papers 2505.08323, arXiv.org.
    • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2505.08323
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2505.08323
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Raphael Epperson & Christiane Reif, 2019. "Matching Subsidies And Voluntary Contributions: A Review," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(5), pages 1578-1601, December.
    2. Tversky, Amos & Kahneman, Daniel, 1992. "Advances in Prospect Theory: Cumulative Representation of Uncertainty," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 5(4), pages 297-323, October.
    3. Amos Tversky & Daniel Kahneman, 1991. "Loss Aversion in Riskless Choice: A Reference-Dependent Model," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 106(4), pages 1039-1061.
    4. Dean Karlan & John A. List, 2007. "Does Price Matter in Charitable Giving? Evidence from a Large-Scale Natural Field Experiment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 97(5), pages 1774-1793, December.
    5. Bruno S. Frey & Reto Jegen, 2001. "Motivation Crowding Theory," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(5), pages 589-611, December.
    6. Reck, Jacqueline L., 2001. "The usefulness of financial and nonfinancial performance information in resource allocation decisions," Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, Elsevier, vol. 20(1), pages 45-71.
    7. Mary Jo McGowan & JoEllen V. Pope & Martha E. Kropf & Zachary Mohr, 2021. "Guns or Butter… or Elections? Understanding intertemporal and distributive dimensions of policy choice through the examination of budgetary tradeoffs at the local level," Public Budgeting & Finance, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(4), pages 3-19, December.
    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. Makoto Kuroki & Shusaku Sasaki, 2023. "Nudging public budget officers: A field‐based survey experiment," Public Budgeting & Finance, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(3), pages 3-20, September.
    2. Maria Bigoni & Giancarlo Spagnolo & Paola Valbonesi, 2010. "Sticks and Carrots in Procurement," CEIS Research Paper 157, Tor Vergata University, CEIS, revised 28 May 2010.
    3. Shuli Liu & Xinwang Liu, 2016. "A Sample Survey Based Linguistic MADM Method with Prospect Theory for Online Shopping Problems," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 25(4), pages 749-774, July.
    4. Duncan Luce, R., 1997. "Associative joint receipts," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 51-74, August.
    5. Attema, Arthur E. & Brouwer, Werner B.F., 2012. "A test of independence of discounting from quality of life," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 22-34.
    6. Firpo, Sergio & Galvao, Antonio F. & Kobus, Martyna & Parker, Thomas & Rosa-Dias, Pedro, 2025. "Loss aversion and the welfare ranking of policy interventions," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 252(PB).
    7. Klein, Martin & Deissenroth, Marc, 2017. "When do households invest in solar photovoltaics? An application of prospect theory," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 270-278.
    8. Junior, Peterson Owusu & Tiwari, Aviral Kumar & Padhan, Hemachandra & Alagidede, Imhotep, 2020. "Analysis of EEMD-based quantile-in-quantile approach on spot- futures prices of energy and precious metals in India," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    9. Bendig, David & Schulz, Colin & Möhwald, Maximilian & Pollok, Patrick, 2025. "Fear the loss or welcome the gains? How stock options influence CEO risk-taking in corporate cleantech investments," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 40(2).
    10. Jakusch, Sven Thorsten, 2017. "On the applicability of maximum likelihood methods: From experimental to financial data," SAFE Working Paper Series 148, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE, revised 2017.
    11. Ashby, Rhys & Sharifi, Shahin & Yao, Jun & Ang, Lawrence, 2025. "The influence of the buy-now-pay-later payment mode on consumer spending decisions," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 101(1), pages 103-119.
    12. Drichoutis, Andreas C. & Vassilopoulos, Achilleas & Lusk, Jayson L. & Nayga, Rodolfo M. Jr., 2015. "Reference dependence, consequentiality and social desirability in value elicitation: A study of fair labor labeling," 143rd Joint EAAE/AAEA Seminar, March 25-27, 2015, Naples, Italy 202705, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    13. Mariya Burdina & Scott Hiller, 2021. "When Falling Just Short is a Good Thing: The Effect of Past Performance on Improvement," Journal of Sports Economics, , vol. 22(7), pages 777-798, October.
    14. Pokorny, Kathrin, 2008. "Pay--but do not pay too much: An experimental study on the impact of incentives," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 66(2), pages 251-264, May.
    15. Häckel, Björn & Pfosser, Stefan & Tränkler, Timm, 2017. "Explaining the energy efficiency gap - Expected Utility Theory versus Cumulative Prospect Theory," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 414-426.
    16. Ulrich Schmidt & Horst Zank, 2012. "A genuine foundation for prospect theory," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 45(2), pages 97-113, October.
    17. Wang, Suxin & Rong, Ximin & Zhao, Hui, 2019. "Optimal investment and benefit payment strategy under loss aversion for target benefit pension plans," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 346(C), pages 205-218.
    18. Elbæk, Christian T. & Lystbæk, Martin Nørhede & Mitkidis, Panagiotis, 2022. "On the psychology of bonuses: The effects of loss aversion and Yerkes-Dodson law on performance in cognitively and mechanically demanding tasks," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 98(C).
    19. Han Bleichrodt, 2002. "A new explanation for the difference between time trade‐off utilities and standard gamble utilities," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 11(5), pages 447-456, July.
    20. Tian, Ye & Li, Yudi & Sun, Jian, 2022. "Stick or carrot for traffic demand management? Evidence from experimental economics," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 235-254.

    More about this item

    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:arx:papers:2505.08323. 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: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://arxiv.org/ .

    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.