IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/kch/wpaper/sdes-2017-24.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Intergenerational retrospective viewpoints and individual prefe ences of policies for future: A deliberative experiment for forest management

Author

Listed:
  • Yoshinori Nakagawa

    (Research Center for Future Design, Kochi University of Technology)

  • Koji Kotani

    (Research Center for Future Design, Kochi University of Technology)

  • Mika Matsumoto

    (Research Center for Future Design, Kochi University of Technology)

  • Tatsuyoshi Saijo

    (Research Center for Future Design, Kochi University of Technology)

Abstract

Brain scientists establish that projecting future events can influence how human brains function and possibly current decisions (Schultz et al., 1997, Gilbert and Wilson, 2007, Gerlach et al., 2014, Szpunara et al., 2014). We design and institute a deliberative experiment to test whether acquisition and experience of intergenerational retrospective viewpoints as one way of projecting future events affect individual preferences for policies. To this end, we employ a case-method approach for forest management policies in Kochi prefecture, Japan, because the problems extend over multiple generations in nature. We prepare two treatments of non-retrospective and retrospective settings where subjects are asked to read through a case of forest management and to reveal preferences for policies at individual and group levels through deliberative discussions. Subjects in the retrospective treatment go through a series of procedures to acquire intergenerational retrospective viewpoints, while those in the non-retrospective treatment do not. The results reveal that acquisition and experience of intergenerational retrospective viewpoints affect individual preferences for forest policies in the sense that the most favorite policies chosen by subjects in the retrospective treatment are different from those in the non-retrospective treatment. Subjects in the retrospective treatment have tendencies to choose the policies as the most favorite that fundamentally change status-quo, while those in the non-retrospective treatment are opposite. Overall, this result suggests that some education or training for acquiring intergenerational retrospective viewpoints as part of projecting future could possibly affect the ways of thinking and preferences for possible betterment of the future.

Suggested Citation

  • Yoshinori Nakagawa & Koji Kotani & Mika Matsumoto & Tatsuyoshi Saijo, 2017. "Intergenerational retrospective viewpoints and individual prefe ences of policies for future: A deliberative experiment for forest management," Working Papers SDES-2017-24, Kochi University of Technology, School of Economics and Management, revised Nov 2017.
  • Handle: RePEc:kch:wpaper:sdes-2017-24
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.souken.kochi-tech.ac.jp/seido/wp/SDES-2017-24.pdf
    File Function: First version, 2017
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Shibly Shahrier & Koji Kotani & Tatsuyoshi Saijo, 2016. "Intergenerational sustainability and the degree of capitalism in the society: A field experiment," Working Papers SDES-2016-10, Kochi University of Technology, School of Economics and Management, revised Jul 2016.
    2. Callen, Mike & Isaqzadeh, Mohammad & Long, James D. & Sprenger, Charles, 2014. "Violence and risk preference: experimental evidence from Afghanistan," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 102932, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    3. Prediger, Sebastian & Vollan, Björn & Herrmann, Benedikt, 2014. "Resource scarcity and antisocial behavior," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 1-9.
    4. Michael Callen & Mohammad Isaqzadeh & James D. Long & Charles Sprenger, 2014. "Violence and Risk Preference: Experimental Evidence from Afghanistan," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(1), pages 123-148, January.
    5. Shibly Shahrier & Koji Kotani & Makoto Kakinaka, 2016. "Social Value Orientation and Capitalism in Societies," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(10), pages 1-19, October.
    6. John A. List, 2002. "Preference Reversals of a Different Kind: The "More Is Less" Phenomenon," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(5), pages 1636-1643, December.
    7. Kim, Young-Il & Lee, Jungmin, 2014. "The long-run impact of a traumatic experience on risk aversion," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 174-186.
    8. Maarten J. Voors & Eleonora E. M. Nillesen & Philip Verwimp & Erwin H. Bulte & Robert Lensink & Daan P. Van Soest, 2012. "Violent Conflict and Behavior: A Field Experiment in Burundi," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(2), pages 941-964, April.
    9. Sean L. Maxwell & Richard A. Fuller & Thomas M. Brooks & James E. M. Watson, 2016. "Biodiversity: The ravages of guns, nets and bulldozers," Nature, Nature, vol. 536(7615), pages 143-145, August.
    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. Pankaj Koirala & Raja Rajendra Timilsina & Koji Kotani, 2021. "Deliberative Forms of Democracy and Intergenerational Sustainability Dilemma," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-18, July.
    2. Keiichiro Kobayashi & Asako Chiba, 2020. "Intergenerational Bubbles of Beliefs for Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(24), pages 1-10, December.
    3. Tatsuyoshi Saijo, 2020. "Future Design: Bequeathing Sustainable Natural Environments and Sustainable Societies to Future Generations," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(16), pages 1-21, August.
    4. Mst Asma Khatun & Yu Nakamura & Koji Kotani, 2021. "Mis(match) and happiness in marital relationship: Importance of future planning and inquisitiveness," Working Papers SDES-2021-7, Kochi University of Technology, School of Economics and Management, revised Jul 2021.
    5. Raja Timilsina & Koji Kotani & Yoshinori Nakagawa & Tatsuyoshi Saijo, 2018. "Does deliberation change individual opinions and hence resolve the intergenerational sustainability dilemma in societies?," Working Papers SDES-2018-7, Kochi University of Technology, School of Economics and Management, revised Oct 2018.
    6. Yoshinori Nakagawa & Tatsuyoshi Saijo, 2020. "Future Design as a Metacognitive Intervention for Presentism," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(18), pages 1-15, September.
    7. Naoko Nishimura & Nobuhiro Inoue & Hiroaki Masuhara & Tadahiko Musha, 2020. "Impact of Future Design on Workshop Participants’ Time Preferences," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(18), pages 1-25, September.
    8. Yoshinori Nakagawa, 2020. "Taking a Future Generation’s Perspective as a Facilitator of Insight Problem-Solving: Sustainable Water Supply Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-15, January.
    9. Saijo, Tatsuyoshi, 2017. "Future Design," Economic Review, Hitotsubashi University, vol. 68(1), pages 33-45, January.
      • Tatsuyoshi Saijo, 2019. "Future Design," Working Papers SDES-2019-5, Kochi University of Technology, School of Economics and Management, revised Jun 2019.
    10. Timilsina, Raja R. & Kotani, Koji & Nakagawa, Yoshinori & Saijo, Tatsuyoshi, 2022. "Intragenerational deliberation and intergenerational sustainability dilemma," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    11. Toshiaki Hiromitsu & Yoko Kitakaji & Keishiro Hara & Tatsuyoshi Saijo, 2021. "What Do People Say When They Become “Future People”?―Positioning Imaginary Future Generations (IFGs) in General Rules for Good Decision-Making," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-27, June.
    12. Yoshinori Nakagawa & Real Arai & Koji Kotani & Masanobu Nagano & Tatsuyoshi Saijo, 2018. "Is an intergenerational retrospective viewpoint effective in forming policy preferences for financial sustainability in local and national economies? A deliberative experimental approach," Working Papers SDES-2018-6, Kochi University of Technology, School of Economics and Management, revised Sep 2018.
    13. Mostafa E. Shahen & Wada Masaya & Koji Kotani & Tatsuyoshi Saijo, 2020. "Motivational Factors in Intergenerational Sustainability Dilemma: A Post-Interview Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-16, August.
    14. Raja R. Timilsina & Yoshinori Nakagawa & Koji Kotani, 2020. "Exploring the Possibility of Linking and Incorporating Future Design in Backcasting and Scenario Planning," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-14, November.
    15. Tatsuyoshi Saijo, 2018. "Õåüà ãüûǶ¤Ã³Ï¼Š Æœ ǶŠå ¯Èƒ½Ã ªâ¾Ƒ然à ¨Ç¤¾Ä¼Šã‚’Å°†Æ ¥Ä¸–Ä»£Ã «Å¼•Ã Ƕ™Ã à Ÿã‚ à «," Working Papers SDES-2018-3, Kochi University of Technology, School of Economics and Management, revised Jul 2018.
    16. Katariina Kulha & Mikko Leino & Maija Setälä & Maija Jäske & Staffan Himmelroos, 2021. "For the Sake of the Future: Can Democratic Deliberation Help Thinking and Caring about Future Generations?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-13, May.
    17. Michinori Uwasu & Yusuke Kishita & Keishiro Hara & Yutaka Nomaguchi, 2020. "Citizen-Participatory Scenario Design Methodology with Future Design Approach: A Case Study of Visioning of a Low-Carbon Society in Suita City, Japan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-17, 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. Kenta Tanaka & Keisaku Higashida & Arvin Vista & Anton Setyo Nugroho & Budi Muhamad Ruslan, 2016. "Do resource depletion experiences affect social cooperative preferences? Analysis using field experimental data on fishers in the Philippines and Indonesia," Discussion Paper Series 143, School of Economics, Kwansei Gakuin University, revised Jun 2016.
    2. Gangadharan, Lata & Islam, Asad & Ouch, Chandarany & Wang, Liang Choon, 2022. "The long-term effects of genocide on antisocial preferences," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 160(C).
    3. Bartoš, Vojtěch, 2021. "Seasonal scarcity and sharing norms," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 185(C), pages 303-316.
    4. Jin, Miao & Liu, Yu-Jane & Meng, Juanjuan, 2019. "Fat-finger event and risk-taking behavior," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 126-143.
    5. Géraldine Bocqueho & Marc Deschamps & Jenny Helstroffer & Julien Jacob & Majlinda Joxhe & Ofce Observatoire Français Des Conjonctures Économiques, 2018. "The risk and refugee migration," SciencePo Working papers Main hal-03607866, HAL.
    6. Jetter, Michael & Magnusson, Leandro M. & Roth, Sebastian, 2020. "Becoming sensitive: Males’ risk and time preferences after the 2008 financial crisis," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 128(C).
    7. Abatayo, Anna Lou & Lynham, John, 2020. "Risk preferences after a typhoon: An artefactual field experiment with fishers in the Philippines," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    8. Hetschko, Clemens & Preuss, Malte, 2020. "Income in jeopardy: How losing employment affects the willingness to take risks," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    9. Bucciol, Alessandro & Hu, Alessio & Zarri, Luca, 2019. "The effects of prior outcomes on managerial risk taking: Evidence from Italian professional soccer," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 75(PB).
    10. James Banks & Elena Bassoli & Irene Mammi, 2019. "Changing Risk Preferences at Older Ages," Working Papers 2019:01, Department of Economics, University of Venice "Ca' Foscari".
    11. Chen, Yangyang & Fan, Qingliang & Yang, Xin & Zolotoy, Leon, 2021. "CEO early-life disaster experience and stock price crash risk," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    12. Chuang, Yating & Schechter, Laura, 2015. "Stability of experimental and survey measures of risk, time, and social preferences: A review and some new results," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 151-170.
    13. Betzer, André & Limbach, Peter & Rau, P. Raghavendra & Schürmann, Henrik, 2021. "Till death (or divorce) do us part: Early-life family disruption and investment behavior," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 124(C).
    14. Chen, Xiangpo & Hu, Xinyan & Xu, Jinhai, 2023. "When winter is over, its cold remains: Early-life famine experience breeds risk aversion," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 123(C).
    15. Bellucci, Davide & Fuochi, Giulia & Conzo, Pierluigi, 2020. "Childhood exposure to the Second World War and financial risk taking in adult life," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    16. Fang, Guanfu & Li, Wei & Zhu, Ying, 2022. "The shadow of the epidemic: Long-term impacts of meningitis exposure on risk preference and behaviors," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    17. Bucciol, Alessandro & Zarri, Luca, 2015. "The shadow of the past: Financial risk taking and negative life events," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 1-16.
    18. Alessandro Bucciol & Alessio Hu & Luca Zarri, 2017. "The Effects of Prior Shocks on Managerial Risk Taking: Evidence from Italian Professional Soccer," Working Papers 17/2017, University of Verona, Department of Economics.
    19. Brown, Philip & Daigneault, Adam J. & Tjernström, Emilia & Zou, Wenbo, 2018. "Natural disasters, social protection, and risk perceptions," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 310-325.
    20. Cavatorta, Elisa & Groom, Ben, 2020. "Does deterrence change preferences? Evidence from a natural experiment," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    intergenerational retrospective viewpoint; preferences of policies;

    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:kch:wpaper:sdes-2017-24. 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: Sachiko Minami (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/smkocjp.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.