IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-01992418.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Does the identifiable victim effect matter for plants? Results from a quasi-experimental survey of French farmers

Author

Listed:
  • Claire Pellegrin

    (ECODEVELOPPEMENT - Unité de recherche d'Écodéveloppement - INRA - Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique)

  • Gilles Grolleau

    (CEE-M - Centre d'Economie de l'Environnement - Montpellier - FRE2010 - INRA - Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique - UM - Université de Montpellier - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - Montpellier SupAgro - Institut national d’études supérieures agronomiques de Montpellier, BSB - Burgundy School of Business (BSB) - Ecole Supérieure de Commerce de Dijon Bourgogne (ESC))

  • Naoufel Mzoughi

    (ECODEVELOPPEMENT - Unité de recherche d'Écodéveloppement - INRA - Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique)

  • Claude Napoleone

    (ECODEVELOPPEMENT - Unité de recherche d'Écodéveloppement - INRA - Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique)

Abstract

Numerous studies showed that people respond more generously to individual identified victims than to equivalent statistical victims, which is referred to as the "identifiable victim effect" (IVE). While the previous literature examined the IVE for human and animal victims, we focus on vegetal entities that can be threatened. Thanks to a between design allowing to increase the degree of plants' identifiability, we test whether IVE is likely to enhance farmers' participation in a conservation program, using mail survey data among a sample of French farmers located in the Vaucluse area. Unlike humans and animals, we found that IVE does not matter regarding plants, as farmer willingness to participate in the compensation measures was found to decrease as the (plant) victim(s) become more identifiable. Moreover, this figure is even stronger with respect to organic farmers compared to their conventional counterparts.

Suggested Citation

  • Claire Pellegrin & Gilles Grolleau & Naoufel Mzoughi & Claude Napoleone, 2018. "Does the identifiable victim effect matter for plants? Results from a quasi-experimental survey of French farmers," Post-Print hal-01992418, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-01992418
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2018.05.001
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://institut-agro-montpellier.hal.science/hal-01992418
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://institut-agro-montpellier.hal.science/hal-01992418/document
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2018.05.001?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
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Laure Kuhfuss & Raphaële Preget & Sophie Thoyer, 2014. "Préférences individuelles et incitations collectives : quels contrats agroenvironnementaux pour la réduction des herbicides par les viticulteurs ?," Review of Agricultural and Environmental Studies - Revue d'Etudes en Agriculture et Environnement, INRA Department of Economics, vol. 95(1), pages 111-143.
    2. Small, Deborah A & Loewenstein, George, 2003. "Helping a Victim or Helping the Victim: Altruism and Identifiability," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 26(1), pages 5-16, January.
    3. Joost M.E. Pennings & Scott H. Irwin & Darrel L. Good, 2002. "Surveying Farmers: A Case Study," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 24(1), pages 266-277.
    4. El Harbi, Sana & Bekir, Insaf & Grolleau, Gilles & Sutan, Angela, 2015. "Efficiency, equality, positionality: What do people maximize? Experimental vs. hypothetical evidence from Tunisia," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 77-84.
    5. Kahneman, Daniel & Ritov, Ilana, 1994. "Determinants of Stated Willingness to Pay for Public Goods: A Study in the Headline Method," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 9(1), pages 5-38, July.
    6. Subhrendu K. Pattanayak & Sven Wunder & Paul J. Ferraro, 2010. "Show Me the Money: Do Payments Supply Environmental Services in Developing Countries?," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 4(2), pages 254-274, Summer.
    7. Jenni, Karen E & Loewenstein, George, 1997. "Explaining the "Identifiable Victim Effect."," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 14(3), pages 235-257, May-June.
    8. Graf, Lorenz & König, Andreas & Enders, Albrecht & Hungenberg, Harald, 2012. "Debiasing competitive irrationality: How managers can be prevented from trading off absolute for relative profit," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 386-403.
    9. Robert W. Smith & David Faro & Katherine A. Burson, 2013. "More for the Many: The Influence of Entitativity on Charitable Giving," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 39(5), pages 961-976.
    10. Esther Duflo & Michael Kremer & Jonathan Robinson, 2011. "Nudging Farmers to Use Fertilizer: Theory and Experimental Evidence from Kenya," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(6), pages 2350-2390, October.
    11. Hongjuan Wu & Liberty Mweemba, 2010. "Environmental self-efficacy, attitude and behavior among small scale farmers in Zambia," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 12(5), pages 727-744, October.
    12. Charness, Gary & Gneezy, Uri & Imas, Alex, 2013. "Experimental methods: Eliciting risk preferences," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 43-51.
    13. David Kleijn & Frank Berendse & Ruben Smit & Niels Gilissen, 2001. "Agri-environment schemes do not effectively protect biodiversity in Dutch agricultural landscapes," Nature, Nature, vol. 413(6857), pages 723-725, October.
    14. Charness, Gary & Gneezy, Uri, 2008. "What's in a name? Anonymity and social distance in dictator and ultimatum games," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 68(1), pages 29-35, October.
    15. repec:cup:judgdm:v:10:y:2015:i:5:p:492-502 is not listed on IDEAS
    16. Loewenstein, George & Chater, Nick, 2017. "Putting nudges in perspective," Behavioural Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 1(1), pages 26-53, May.
    17. Daniel Västfjäll & Paul Slovic & Marcus Mayorga & Ellen Peters, 2014. "Compassion Fade: Affect and Charity Are Greatest for a Single Child in Need," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(6), pages 1-10, June.
    18. Mzoughi, Naoufel, 2014. "Do organic farmers feel happier than conventional ones? An exploratory analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 38-43.
    19. Erlandsson, Arvid & Björklund, Fredrik & Bäckström, Martin, 2015. "Emotional reactions, perceived impact and perceived responsibility mediate the identifiable victim effect, proportion dominance effect and in-group effect respectively," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 1-14.
    20. Small, Deborah A. & Loewenstein, George & Slovic, Paul, 2007. "Sympathy and callousness: The impact of deliberative thought on donations to identifiable and statistical victims," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 102(2), pages 143-153, March.
    21. repec:cup:judgdm:v:12:y:2017:i:1:p:60-80 is not listed on IDEAS
    22. repec:cup:judgdm:v:8:y:2013:i:4:p:397-406 is not listed on IDEAS
    23. Beretti, Antoine & Figuières, Charles & Grolleau, Gilles, 2013. "Behavioral innovations: The missing capital in sustainable development?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 187-195.
    24. Ritov, Ilana & Kogut, Tehila, 2011. "Ally or adversary: The effect of identifiability in inter-group conflict situations," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 116(1), pages 96-103, September.
    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. Douadia Bougherara & Lea Gosset & Raphaële Préget & Sophie Thoyer, 2023. "Innovativeness, innovation adoption and priming: Nudging farmers in a large-scale randomized experiment in France," Post-Print hal-04227775, HAL.
    2. Grolleau, Gilles & Ibanez, Lisette & Mzoughi, Naoufel, 2020. "Moral judgment of environmental harm caused by a single versus multiple wrongdoers: A survey experiment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 170(C).
    3. Sergei Schaub & Jaboury Ghazoul & Robert Huber & Wei Zhang & Adelaide Sander & Charles Rees & Simanti Banerjee & Robert Finger, 2023. "The role of behavioural factors and opportunity costs in farmers' participation in voluntary agri‐environmental schemes: A systematic review," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 74(3), pages 617-660, September.

    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. Butts, Marcus M. & Lunt, Devin C. & Freling, Traci L. & Gabriel, Allison S., 2019. "Helping one or helping many? A theoretical integration and meta-analytic review of the compassion fade literature," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 16-33.
    2. Arvid Erlandsson, 2021. "Seven (weak and strong) helping effects systematically tested in separate evaluation, joint evaluation and forced choice," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 16(5), pages 1113-1154, September.
    3. Erlandsson, Arvid & Västfjäll, Daniel & Sundfelt, Oskar & Slovic, Paul, 2016. "Argument-inconsistency in charity appeals: Statistical information about the scope of the problem decrease helping toward a single identified victim but not helping toward many non-identified victims ," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 126-140.
    4. repec:cup:judgdm:v:16:y:2021:i:5:p:1113-1154 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Shreedhar, Ganga & Mourato, Susana, 2019. "Experimental Evidence on the Impact of Biodiversity Conservation Videos on Charitable Donations," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 180-193.
    6. Grolleau, Gilles & Ibanez, Lisette & Mzoughi, Naoufel, 2020. "Moral judgment of environmental harm caused by a single versus multiple wrongdoers: A survey experiment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 170(C).
    7. Heizler, Odelia & Israeli, Osnat, 2021. "The identifiable victim effect and public opinion toward immigration; a natural experiment study," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 93(C).
    8. Arvid Erlandsson & Fredrik Björklund & Martin Bäckström, 2017. "Choice-justifications after allocating resources in helping dilemmas," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 12(1), pages 60-80, January.
    9. van Esch, Patrick & Cui, Yuanyuan (Gina) & Jain, Shailendra Pratap, 2021. "The effect of political ideology and message frame on donation intent during the COVID-19 pandemic," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 201-213.
    10. Cryder, Cynthia E. & Loewenstein, George & Scheines, Richard, 2013. "The donor is in the details," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 120(1), pages 15-23.
    11. Stephan Dickert & Janet Kleber & Daniel Västfjäll & Paul Slovic, 2016. "Mental Imagery, Impact, and Affect: A Mediation Model for Charitable Giving," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(2), pages 1-15, February.
    12. repec:cup:judgdm:v:12:y:2017:i:1:p:60-80 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Abhishek Bhati & Ruth K. Hansen, 2020. "A literature review of experimental studies in fundraising," Journal of Behavioral Public Administration, Center for Experimental and Behavioral Public Administration, vol. 3(1).
    14. repec:cup:judgdm:v:13:y:2018:i:5:p:458-466 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Tehila Kogut & Ilana Ritov & Enrico Rubaltelli & Nira Liberman, 2018. "How far is the suffering? The role of psychological distance and victims’ identifiability in donation decisions," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 13(5), pages 458-466, September.
    16. Sudeep Bhatia & Lukasz Walasek & Paul Slovic & Howard Kunreuther, 2021. "The More Who Die, the Less We Care: Evidence from Natural Language Analysis of Online News Articles and Social Media Posts," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 41(1), pages 179-203, January.
    17. Ben Greiner & Werner Güth & Ro’i Zultan, 2012. "Social communication and discrimination: a video experiment," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 15(3), pages 398-417, September.
    18. Gilles GROLLEAU & Naoufel MZOUGHI & Sophie THOYER, 2015. "Les incitations monétaires dans la politique agro-environnementale : peut-on faire mieux avec moins ?," Review of Agricultural and Environmental Studies - Revue d'Etudes en Agriculture et Environnement, INRA Department of Economics, vol. 96(2), pages 241-258.
    19. repec:cup:judgdm:v:8:y:2013:i:4:p:397-406 is not listed on IDEAS
    20. Kogut, Tehila & Ritov, Ilana, 2005. "The singularity effect of identified victims in separate and joint evaluations," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 97(2), pages 106-116, July.
    21. Zultan, Ro’i, 2012. "Strategic and social pre-play communication in the ultimatum game," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 425-434.
    22. Erlandsson, Arvid & Björklund, Fredrik & Bäckström, Martin, 2015. "Emotional reactions, perceived impact and perceived responsibility mediate the identifiable victim effect, proportion dominance effect and in-group effect respectively," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 1-14.
    23. Werner Güth & M. Vittoria Levati & Matteo Ploner, 2011. "Let Me See You! A Video Experiment on the Social Dimension of Risk Preferences," Czech Economic Review, Charles University Prague, Faculty of Social Sciences, Institute of Economic Studies, vol. 5(2), pages 211-225, August.
    24. repec:cup:judgdm:v:10:y:2015:i:5:p:492-502 is not listed on IDEAS
    25. Johanna Wiss & David Andersson & Paul Slovic & Daniel Västfjäll & Gustav Tinghög, 2015. "The influence of identifiability and singularity in moral decision making," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 10(5), pages 492-502, September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    environmental policy; farmers; identifiable victim effect; nudge; plant blindness;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q19 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Other
    • Q28 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Government Policy
    • Q38 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Nonrenewable Resources and Conservation - - - Government Policy (includes OPEC Policy)
    • Q57 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Ecological Economics

    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:hal:journl:hal-01992418. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.