IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/jrp/jrpwrp/2017-014.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Does risk communication really decrease cooperation in climate change mitigation?

Author

Listed:
  • Mike Farjam

    (Department of Social Studies, Linnaeus University, Växjö Sweden; and Linnaeus University Centre for Data Intensive Sciences & Applications (DISA@LNU), Växjö Sweden)

  • Olexandr Nikolaychuk

    (Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Friedrich Schiller University, Jena, Germany)

  • Giangiacomo Bravo

    (Department of Social Studies, Linnaeus University, Växjö Sweden; and Linnaeus University Centre for Data Intensive Sciences & Applications (DISA@LNU), Växjö Sweden)

Abstract

Effective communication of risks involved in the climate change discussion is crucial and despite ambitious protection policies, the possibility of irreversible consequences actually occurring can only be diminished but never ruled out completely. We present a laboratory experiment that studies how residual risk of failure affects willingness to contribute to climate protection policies. Contrary to our initial hypothesis, we find that the contributions were higher in treatments with residual risk than in treatments without one. We interpret this as an outcome of a psychological process where residual risk puts participants into an "alarm mode", keeping their contributions high. We discuss the broad practical implications this might have on the real world communication of climate change.

Suggested Citation

  • Mike Farjam & Olexandr Nikolaychuk & Giangiacomo Bravo, 2017. "Does risk communication really decrease cooperation in climate change mitigation?," Jena Economic Research Papers 2017-014, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
  • Handle: RePEc:jrp:jrpwrp:2017-014
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www2.wiwi.uni-jena.de/Papers/jerp2017/wp_2017_014.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ben Greiner, 2015. "Subject pool recruitment procedures: organizing experiments with ORSEE," Journal of the Economic Science Association, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 1(1), pages 114-125, July.
    2. Fischbacher, Urs & Gachter, Simon & Fehr, Ernst, 2001. "Are people conditionally cooperative? Evidence from a public goods experiment," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 71(3), pages 397-404, June.
    3. 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.
    4. Alessandro Tavoni & Astrid Dannenberg & Giorgos Kallis & Andreas L�schel, 2011. "Inequality, communication and the avoidance of disastrous climate change," GRI Working Papers 34, Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment.
    5. Iris Bohnet & Fiona Greig & Benedikt Herrmann & Richard Zeckhauser, 2008. "Betrayal Aversion: Evidence from Brazil, China, Oman, Switzerland, Turkey, and the United States," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 98(1), pages 294-310, March.
    6. Urs Fischbacher, 2007. "z-Tree: Zurich toolbox for ready-made economic experiments," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 10(2), pages 171-178, June.
    7. Schmeidler, David, 1989. "Subjective Probability and Expected Utility without Additivity," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(3), pages 571-587, May.
    8. Mike Farjam, 2015. "On whom would I want to depend; Humans or nature?," Jena Economic Research Papers 2015-019, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    9. Scott Barrett & Astrid Dannenberg, 2014. "Sensitivity of collective action to uncertainty about climate tipping points," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 4(1), pages 36-39, January.
    10. Scott Barrett & Astrid Dannenberg, 2014. "On the Sensitivity of Collective Action to Uncertainty about Climate Tipping Points," CESifo Working Paper Series 4643, CESifo.
    11. Bates, Douglas & Mächler, Martin & Bolker, Ben & Walker, Steve, 2015. "Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models Using lme4," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 67(i01).
    12. Bohnet, Iris & Zeckhauser, Richard, 2004. "Trust, risk and betrayal," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 55(4), pages 467-484, December.
    13. Fairley, Kim & Sanfey, Alan & Vyrastekova, Jana & Weitzel, Utz, 2016. "Trust and risk revisited," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 74-85.
    14. Hirokazu Shirado & Nicholas A. Christakis, 2017. "Locally noisy autonomous agents improve global human coordination in network experiments," Nature, Nature, vol. 545(7654), pages 370-374, May.
    15. Astrid Dannenberg & Andreas Löschel & Gabriele Paolacci & Christiane Reif & Alessandro Tavoni, 2015. "On the Provision of Public Goods with Probabilistic and Ambiguous Thresholds," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 61(3), pages 365-383, July.
    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. Mike Farjam & Olexandr Nikolaychuk & Giangiacomo Bravo, 2019. "Investing into climate change mitigation despite the risk of failure," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 154(3), pages 453-460, June.
    2. Farjam, Mike & Nikolaychuk, Olexandr & Bravo, Giangiacomo, 2019. "Experimental evidence of an environmental attitude-behavior gap in high-cost situations," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 166(C), pages 1-1.
    3. Neli Aparecida de Mello-Théry & Eduardo de Lima Caldas & Beatriz M. Funatsu & Damien Arvor & Vincent Dubreuil, 2020. "Climate Change and Public Policies in the Brazilian Amazon State of Mato Grosso: Perceptions and Challenges," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-20, June.

    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. Calzolari, Giacomo & Casari, Marco & Ghidoni, Riccardo, 2018. "Carbon is forever: A climate change experiment on cooperation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 169-184.
    2. Guilfoos, Todd & Miao, Haoran & Trandafir, Simona & Uchida, Emi, 2019. "Social learning and communication with threshold uncertainty," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 81-101.
    3. Schuch, Esther & Dirks, Simone & Nhim, Tum & Richter, Andries, 2021. "Cooperation under social and strategic uncertainty – The role of risk and social capital in rural Cambodia," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    4. Aseem Mahajan & Reuben Kline & Dustin Tingley, 2022. "Collective Risk and Distributional Equity in Climate Change Bargaining," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 66(1), pages 61-90, January.
    5. Maria Bigoni & Stefania Bortolotti & Marco Casari & Diego Gambetta, 2019. "At the Root of the North–South Cooperation Gap in Italy: Preferences or Beliefs?," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 129(619), pages 1139-1152.
    6. Cloos, Janis & Greiff, Matthias, 2021. "Combating climate change: Is the option to exploit a public good a barrier for reaching critical thresholds? Experimental evidence," MPRA Paper 107144, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Cubitt, Robin & Gächter, Simon & Quercia, Simone, 2017. "Conditional cooperation and betrayal aversion," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 110-121.
    8. Christian Feige & Karl-Martin Ehrhart & Jan Krämer, 2018. "Climate Negotiations in the Lab: A Threshold Public Goods Game with Heterogeneous Contributions Costs and Non-binding Voting," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 70(2), pages 343-362, June.
    9. Blanco, Esther & Dutcher, E. Glenn & Haller, Tobias, 2020. "Social dilemmas with public and private insurance against losses," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 180(C), pages 924-937.
    10. Christoph Engel & Lilia Zhurakhovska, 2016. "When is the risk of cooperation worth taking? The prisoner’s dilemma as a game of multiple motives," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(16), pages 1157-1161, November.
    11. le Roux, Sara, 2020. "Climate change catastrophes and insuring decisions: A study in the presence of ambiguity," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 180(C), pages 992-1002.
    12. Jason Aimone & Sheryl Ball & Brooks King-Casas, 2015. "The Betrayal Aversion Elicitation Task: An Individual Level Betrayal Aversion Measure," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(9), pages 1-12, September.
    13. Martin G. Kocher & Fangfang Tan & Jing Yu, 2018. "Providing Global Public Goods: Electoral Delegation And Cooperation," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 56(1), pages 381-397, January.
    14. Calford, Evan M., 2020. "Uncertainty aversion in game theory: Experimental evidence," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 176(C), pages 720-734.
    15. Ghidoni, Riccardo & Calzolari, Giacomo & Casari, Marco, 2017. "Climate change: Behavioral responses from extreme events and delayed damages," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(S1), pages 103-115.
    16. Sofianos, Andis, 2022. "Self-reported & revealed trust: Experimental evidence," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    17. Cagala, Tobias & Glogowsky, Ulrich & Grimm, Veronika & Rincke, Johannes & Tuset-Cueva, Amanda, 2019. "Rent extraction and prosocial behavior," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 166(C), pages 709-723.
    18. Danz, David, 2020. "Never underestimate your opponent: Hindsight bias causes overplacement and overentry into competition," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 588-603.
    19. Chen Li & Uyanga Turmunkh & Peter P. Wakker, 2019. "Trust as a decision under ambiguity," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 22(1), pages 51-75, March.
    20. Kocher, Martin G. & Martinsson, Peter & Matzat, Dominik & Wollbrant, Conny, 2015. "The role of beliefs, trust, and risk in contributions to a public good," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 236-244.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    collective risk social dilemma; climate change mitigation; voluntary contribution; experiment; risk;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D71 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Social Choice; Clubs; Committees; Associations
    • Q54 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Climate; Natural Disasters and their Management; Global Warming
    • H41 - Public Economics - - Publicly Provided Goods - - - Public Goods
    • D80 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - General

    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:jrp:jrpwrp:2017-014. 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: . General contact details of provider: http://www.wiwiss.uni-jena.de/ .

    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: Markus Pasche (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.wiwiss.uni-jena.de/ .

    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.