IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Communtication in a Common Pool Resource Environment with Probabilistic Destruction


  • Andrew Muller
  • Michelle Vickers


We replicate and extend an experiment due to Walker and Gardner by investigating the effect of communication in a common pool resource subject to probabilistic destruction when group appropriation exceeds a safe zone. We replicate the Gardner and Walker result that destruction of the resource is rapid and efficiencies are low when communication is not allowed. Face-to-face communication significantly increases mean efficiency. Three groups of five sustain a “good” Nash equilibrium in the safe zone. The remaining two groups quickly destroy the resource. Achieving a “good” equilibrium is highly dependent on the emergence of a leader in the group communication.

Suggested Citation

  • Andrew Muller & Michelle Vickers, 1996. "Communtication in a Common Pool Resource Environment with Probabilistic Destruction," McMaster Experimental Economics Laboratory Publications 1996-01, McMaster University.
  • Handle: RePEc:mcm:mceelp:1996-01

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Friedman,Daniel & Sunder,Shyam, 1994. "Experimental Methods," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521456821, March.
    2. Ayuso, Juan & Restoy, Fernando, 1996. "Interest rate parity and foreign exchange risk premia in the ERM," Journal of International Money and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 15(3), pages 369-382, June.
    3. De Long, J Bradford & Andrei Shleifer & Lawrence H. Summers & Robert J. Waldmann, 1990. "Noise Trader Risk in Financial Markets," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 98(4), pages 703-738, August.
    4. Mayfield, E. Scott & Murphy, Robert G., 1992. "Interest rate parity and the exchange risk premium Evidence from panel data," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 40(3), pages 319-324, November.
    5. Kenneth A. Froot & Jeffrey A. Frankel, 1986. "Interpreting Tests of Forward Discount Bias Using Survey Data on Exchange Rate Expectations," NBER Working Papers 1963, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. Maurice Obstfeld & Kenneth Rogoff, 2001. "The Six Major Puzzles in International Macroeconomics: Is There a Common Cause?," NBER Chapters,in: NBER Macroeconomics Annual 2000, Volume 15, pages 339-412 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Smith, Vernon L & Suchanek, Gerry L & Williams, Arlington W, 1988. "Bubbles, Crashes, and Endogenous Expectations in Experimental Spot Asset Markets," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 56(5), pages 1119-1151, September.
    8. Smith, Vernon L, 1985. "Experimental Economics: Reply," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(1), pages 264-272, March.
    9. Sunder, S., 1992. "Experimental Asset Markets: A Survey," GSIA Working Papers 1992-19, Carnegie Mellon University, Tepper School of Business.
    10. Allan W. Gregory, 1987. "Testing Interest Rate Parity and Rational Expectations for Canada and the United States," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 20(2), pages 289-305, May.
    11. Dutton, Marilyn Miller, 1993. "Real interest rate parity new measures and tests," Journal of International Money and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 12(1), pages 62-77, February.
    12. Fama, Eugene F., 1984. "Forward and spot exchange rates," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 14(3), pages 319-338, November.
    13. Frachot, Antoine, 1996. "A reexamination of the uncovered interest rate parity hypothesis," Journal of International Money and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 15(3), pages 419-437, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • Q22 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Fishery
    • C92 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Group Behavior


    Access and download statistics


    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:mcm:mceelp:1996-01. 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: .

    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.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.