IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/sss/wpaper/2017-11.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Nudging Participation and Spatial Agglomeration in Payment for Environmental Service Schemes

Author

Listed:
  • Laure Kuhfuss

    () (School of Geography and Sustainable Development, University of St. Andrews)

  • Raphaële Préget

    (INRA, UMR 1135 LAMETA, F-34000 Montpellier, France)

  • Sophie Thoyer

    (Montpellier Supagro, UMR 1135 LAMETA, F-34000 Montpellier, France)

  • Frans P. de Vries

    (Division of Economics, University of Stirling Management School, Stirling FK9 4LA, Scotland, UK)

  • Nick Hanley

    () (School of Geography and Sustainable Development, University of St. Andrews)

Abstract

The environmental benefits from Payment for Environmental Service (PES) schemes can often be enhanced if landowners can be induced to enrol land in a spatially - coordinated manner. This is because the achievement of many targets for biodiversity conservation policy or water quality improvements are increasing in the spatial connectedness of enrolled land. One incentive mechanism which has been proposed by economists to achieve such connectedness is the Agglomeration Bonus (AB). There has also been an interest within the literature on PES design in using “nudges” to enhance participation and scheme performance. This paper explores whether a specific nudge in the form of information provided to participants on the relative environmental performance of their group can improve participation and spatial coordination, and enhance the AB performance. We design a laboratory experiment whereby the environmental benefits generated by a PES scheme are materialized by real contributions to an environmental charity, mirroring the situation in actual PES schemes where participants derive utility from contributing to the environmental outputs of the scheme, in addition to the monetary payoffs they receive. The experimental results confirm positive environmental outcomes derived under an AB, but the impact of the nudge is less environmentally effective. Interestingly, we find that the nudge does not significantly supercharge the AB, and can even worsen its performance

Suggested Citation

  • Laure Kuhfuss & Raphaële Préget & Sophie Thoyer & Frans P. de Vries & Nick Hanley, 2017. "Nudging Participation and Spatial Agglomeration in Payment for Environmental Service Schemes," Discussion Papers in Environment and Development Economics 2017-11, University of St. Andrews, School of Geography and Sustainable Development.
  • Handle: RePEc:sss:wpaper:2017-11
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/media/dept-of-geography-and-sustainable-development/pdf-s/DP%202017-11%20Kuhfuss%20et%20alpdf.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Cong, Rong-Gang & Smith, Henrik G. & Olsson, Ola & Brady, Mark, 2014. "Managing ecosystem services for agriculture: Will landscape-scale management pay?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 53-62.
    2. Riechmann, Thomas & Weimann, Joachim, 2008. "Competition as a coordination device: Experimental evidence from a minimum effort coordination game," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 437-454, June.
    3. Laure Kuhfuss & Raphaële Préget & Sophie Thoyer & Nick Hanley & Philippe Le Coent & Mathieu Désolé, 2016. "Nudges, Social Norms, and Permanence in Agri-environmental Schemes," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 92(4), pages 641-655.
    4. Banerjee, Simanti & Cason, Timothy N. & de Vries, Frans P. & Hanley, Nick, 2017. "Transaction costs, communication and spatial coordination in Payment for Ecosystem Services Schemes," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 68-89.
    5. Simanti Banerjee & Frans P. de Vries & Nick Hanley & Daan P. van Soest, 2014. "The Impact of Information Provision on Agglomeration Bonus Performance: An Experimental Study on Local Networks," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 96(4), pages 1009-1029.
    6. Abbott, Andrew & Nandeibam, Shasikanta & O'Shea, Lucy, 2013. "Recycling: Social norms and warm-glow revisited," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 10-18.
    7. Mikołaj Czajkowski & Nick Hanley & Karine Nyborg, 2014. "Social norms, morals and self-interest as determinants of pro-environment behaviour," Working Papers 2014-17, Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Warsaw.
    8. Robert J. Sheeder & Gary D. Lynne, 2011. "Empathy-Conditioned Conservation: “Walking in the Shoes of Others” as a Conservation Farmer," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 87(3), pages 433-452.
    9. Sophie Clot & Gilles Grolleau & Lisette Ibanez, 2016. "Do good deeds make bad people?," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 42(3), pages 491-513, December.
    10. Bornstein, Gary & Gneezy, Uri & Nagel, Rosmarie, 2002. "The effect of intergroup competition on group coordination: an experimental study," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 1-25, October.
    11. Parkhurst, Gregory M. & Shogren, Jason F., 2007. "Spatial incentives to coordinate contiguous habitat," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(2), pages 344-355, December.
    12. Rachel Croson & Nicolas Treich, 2014. "Behavioral Environmental Economics: Promises and Challenges," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 58(3), pages 335-351, July.
    13. Laure Kuhfuss & Raphaële Préget & Sophie Thoyer & Nick Hanley, 2016. "Nudging farmers to enrol land into agri-environmental schemes: the role of a collective bonus," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Foundation for the European Review of Agricultural Economics, vol. 43(4), pages 609-636.
    14. Gunnthorsdottir, Anna & Rapoport, Amnon, 2006. "Embedding social dilemmas in intergroup competition reduces free-riding," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 101(2), pages 184-199, November.
    15. Banerjee, Simanti & Kwasnica, Anthony M. & Shortle, James S., 2012. "Agglomeration bonus in small and large local networks: A laboratory examination of spatial coordination," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 142-152.
    16. Mari Rege, 2004. "Social Norms and Private Provision of Public Goods," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 6(1), pages 65-77, February.
    17. Laure Kuhfuss & Raphaële Préget & Sophie Thoyer & Nick Hanley & Philippe Le Coent & Mathieu Désolé, 2016. "Nudges, Social Norms, and Permanence in Agri-environmental Schemes," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 92(4), pages 641-655.
    18. Laure Kuhfuss & Raphaële Préget & Sophie Thoyer & Nick Hanley, 2016. "Nudging farmers to enrol land into agri-environmental schemes: the role of a collective bonus," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Foundation for the European Review of Agricultural Economics, vol. 43(4), pages 609-636.
    19. Jacob R. Fooks & Nathaniel Higgins & Kent D. Messer & Joshua M. Duke & Daniel Hellerstein & Lori Lynch, 2016. "Conserving Spatially Explicit Benefits in Ecosystem Service Markets: Experimental Tests of Network Bonuses and Spatial Targeting," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 98(2), pages 468-488.
    20. Parkhurst, Gregory M. & Shogren, Jason F. & Bastian, Chris & Kivi, Paul & Donner, Jennifer & Smith, Rodney B. W., 2002. "Agglomeration bonus: an incentive mechanism to reunite fragmented habitat for biodiversity conservation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 305-328, May.
    21. Andreoni, James, 1989. "Giving with Impure Altruism: Applications to Charity and Ricardian Equivalence," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 97(6), pages 1447-1458, December.
    22. Andreoni, James, 1990. "Impure Altruism and Donations to Public Goods: A Theory of Warm-Glow Giving?," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 100(401), pages 464-477, June.
    23. Dimitri Dubois & Stefano Farolfi & Mabel Tidball & Mathieu Desole & Annie Hofstetter, 2015. "Does Environmental Connotation Affect Coordination Issues in Experimental Stag Hunt Game?," Working Papers 15-12, LAMETA, Universtiy of Montpellier, revised Oct 2015.
    24. Paul J. Ferraro & Michael K. Price, 2013. "Using Nonpecuniary Strategies to Influence Behavior: Evidence from a Large-Scale Field Experiment," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 95(1), pages 64-73, March.
    25. Goldman, Rebecca L. & Thompson, Barton H. & Daily, Gretchen C., 2007. "Institutional incentives for managing the landscape: Inducing cooperation for the production of ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(2), pages 333-343, December.
    26. Lawley, Chad & Yang, Wanhong, 2015. "Spatial interactions in habitat conservation: Evidence from prairie pothole easements," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 71-89.
    27. Tan, Jonathan H.W. & Bolle, Friedel, 2007. "Team competition and the public goods game," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 96(1), pages 133-139, July.
    28. Alós-Ferrer, Carlos & Weidenholzer, Simon, 2008. "Contagion and efficiency," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 143(1), pages 251-274, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Social norms; Laboratory experiments; Coordination games; Agricultural policy; Environmental performance; Agri-environmental schemes; Charity;

    JEL classification:

    • C91 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Individual Behavior
    • C92 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Group Behavior
    • Q15 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Land Ownership and Tenure; Land Reform; Land Use; Irrigation; Agriculture and Environment
    • Q18 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Agricultural Policy; Food Policy
    • Q57 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Ecological Economics

    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:sss:wpaper:2017-11. 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: (Laure Kuhfuss). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/eestauk.html .

    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 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.

    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.