IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/rwirep/341405.html

Introducing and terminating monetary incentives in non-regenerating forests: Insights from a framed field experiment

Author

Listed:
  • Hönow, Nils Christian
  • Bensch, Gunther
  • Kirk, Michael

Abstract

In regions with low soil fertility, smallholder farmers often clear forest to sustain agricultural yields. This pattern becomes more problematic where forest regrowth is slow, contributing to local forest loss and global environmental challenges such as climate change and biodiversity decline. This paper presents findings from a framed field experiment that examines how different types of monetary incentives affect forest-clearing decisions in northern Namibia, a semi-arid region with negligible forest regrowth. We implemented a common-pool resource game with 518 smallholder farmers across 25 villages, in which a forest stock declines dynamically based on participants' clearing decisions, without immediate regrowth. The game spans three periods: a baseline without incentives, an intervention period with individual or collective rewards or an individual fee, and a post-incentive phase. This setup allows us to assess both the immediate effects of incentives and their persistence after incentive removal. All incentive types reduce clearing compared to the baseline, but not significantly more than in the control condition, where clearing also declined - an unexpected trend likely linked to features of the dynamic game design. Incentive effects largely dissipate after removal, with no strong evidence of lasting motivational crowding-in or crowding-out. Overall, our results suggest that moderate payments may be insufficient to sustain cooperation in persistent resource dilemmas. More broadly, they highlight the importance of multifaceted analysis including control conditions and careful experimental framing in field-laboratory studies, coupled with caution in generalizing findings to other settings or policy applications.

Suggested Citation

  • Hönow, Nils Christian & Bensch, Gunther & Kirk, Michael, 2026. "Introducing and terminating monetary incentives in non-regenerating forests: Insights from a framed field experiment," Ruhr Economic Papers 1209, RWI - Leibniz-Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-University Bochum, TU Dortmund University, University of Duisburg-Essen.
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:rwirep:341405
    DOI: 10.4419/96973394
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/341405/1/1972097539.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.4419/96973394?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Blanco, Esther & Moros, Lina & Pfaff, Alexander & Steimanis, Ivo & Velez, Maria Alejandra & Vollan, Björn, 2023. "No crowding out among those terminated from an ongoing PES program in Colombia," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    2. Moros, Lina & Vélez, María Alejandra & Corbera, Esteve, 2019. "Payments for Ecosystem Services and Motivational Crowding in Colombia's Amazon Piedmont," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 468-488.
    3. Reitmann, Ann-Kristin & Sievert, Maximiliane, 2024. "Using framed field experiments to evaluate real-world policy interventions: A case study on changing environmental preferences," Ruhr Economic Papers 1072, RWI - Leibniz-Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-University Bochum, TU Dortmund University, University of Duisburg-Essen.
    4. Jan Börner & Dario Schulz & Sven Wunder & Alexander Pfaff, 2020. "The Effectiveness of Forest Conservation Policies and Programs," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 12(1), pages 45-64, October.
    5. Etchart, Nicolle & Freire, José Luis & Holland, Margaret B. & Jones, Kelly W. & Naughton-Treves, Lisa, 2020. "What happens when the money runs out? Forest outcomes and equity concerns following Ecuador’s suspension of conservation payments," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 136(C).
    6. Catherine C Eckel & Enrique Fatas & Sara Godoy & Rick K Wilson, 2016. "Group-Level Selection Increases Cooperation in the Public Goods Game," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(8), pages 1-13, August.
    7. Wunder, Sven & Angelsen, Arild & Belcher, Brian, 2014. "Forests, Livelihoods, and Conservation: Broadening the Empirical Base," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 64(S1), pages 1-11.
    8. Moros, Lina & Vélez, María Alejandra & Quintero, Daniela & Tobin, Danny & Pfaff, Alexander, 2023. "Temporary PES do not crowd-out and may crowd-in lab-in-the-field forest conservation in Colombia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 204(PA).
    9. Travers, Henry & Clements, Tom & Keane, Aidan & Milner-Gulland, E.J., 2011. "Incentives for cooperation: The effects of institutional controls on common pool resource extraction in Cambodia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 151-161.
    10. Krister P. Andersson & Nathan J. Cook & Tara Grillos & Maria Claudia Lopez & Carl F. Salk & Glenn D. Wright & Esther Mwangi, 2018. "Experimental evidence on payments for forest commons conservation," Nature Sustainability, Nature, vol. 1(3), pages 128-135, March.
    11. Sven Wunder & Jan Börner & Driss Ezzine-de-Blas & Sarah Feder & Stefano Pagiola, 2020. "Payments for Environmental Services: Past Performance and Pending Potentials," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 12(1), pages 209-234, October.
    12. Handberg, Øyvind Nystad & Angelsen, Arild, 2019. "Pay little, get little; pay more, get a little more: A framed forest experiment in Tanzania," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 454-467.
    13. Jon Barnes & James MacGregor & Olimpio Nhuleipo & Petrus Muteyauli, 2010. "The value of Namibia's forest resources: Preliminary economic asset and flow accounts," Development Southern Africa, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(2), pages 159-176.
    14. Angelsen, Arild & Jagger, Pamela & Babigumira, Ronnie & Belcher, Brian & Hogarth, Nicholas J. & Bauch, Simone & Börner, Jan & Smith-Hall, Carsten & Wunder, Sven, 2014. "Environmental Income and Rural Livelihoods: A Global-Comparative Analysis," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 64(S1), pages 12-28.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Vorlaufer, Tobias & Steimanis, Ivo & Plassenberg, Jan, 2025. "Payment for ecosystem services and crowding of conservation behavior: A meta-analysis of lab-in-the-field experiments," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    2. Toba Stephen Olasehinde & Zhongan Wu & Siyu Yue & Fangbin Qiao & Yubing Fan, 2026. "Does Payment for Ecosystem Services Improve Technical Efficiency of Forage Production? Evidence From China's Grassland Ecological Compensation Policy," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 57(1), January.
    3. Lina Moros & Maria Alejandra VÔøΩlez & Alexander Pfaff & Daniela Quintero, 2020. "Effects of Ending Payments for Ecosystem Services: removal does not crowd prior conservation out," Documentos CEDE 18590, Universidad de los Andes, Facultad de Economía, CEDE.
    4. Hoenow, Nils Christian & Kirk, Michael, 2021. "Does competitive scarcity affect the speed of resource extraction? A common-pool resource lab-in-the-field experiment on land use in northern Namibia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    5. Moros, Lina & Vélez, María Alejandra & Quintero, Daniela & Tobin, Danny & Pfaff, Alexander, 2023. "Temporary PES do not crowd-out and may crowd-in lab-in-the-field forest conservation in Colombia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 204(PA).
    6. Carrilho, Cauê D. & Demarchi, Gabriela & Duchelle, Amy E. & Wunder, Sven & Morsello, Carla, 2022. "Permanence of avoided deforestation in a Transamazon REDD+ project (Pará, Brazil)," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 201(C).
    7. Andrews, Jeffrey & Borgerhoff Mulder, Monique, 2024. "The value of failure: The effect of an expired REDD+ conservation program on residents’ willingness for future participation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 220(C).
    8. Ngoma, Hambulo & Hailu, Amare Teklay & Kabwe, Stephen & Angelsen, Arild, 2020. "Pay, talk or ‘whip’ to conserve forests: Framed field experiments in Zambia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 128(C).
    9. Naime, Julia & Angelsen, Arild & Rodriguez-Ward, Dawn & Sills, Erin O., 2024. "Participation, anticipation effects and impact perceptions of two collective incentive-based conservation interventions in Ucayali, Peru," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 217(C).
    10. Nyanghura, Qambemeda M. & Biber-Freudenberger, Lisa & Börner, Jan, 2024. "Incentives for biodiversity conservation under asymmetric land ownership," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 219(C).
    11. Grillos, Tara & Bottazzi, Patrick & Crespo, David & Asquith, Nigel & Jones, Julia P.G., 2019. "In-kind conservation payments crowd in environmental values and increase support for government intervention: A randomized trial in Bolivia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 166(C), pages 1-1.
    12. Blanco, Esther & Moros, Lina & Pfaff, Alexander & Steimanis, Ivo & Velez, Maria Alejandra & Vollan, Björn, 2023. "No crowding out among those terminated from an ongoing PES program in Colombia," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    13. Yehouenou, Lauriane & Morgan, Stephen N. & Grogan, Kelly A., 2020. "Management of timber and non-timber forest products: Evidence from a framed field experiment in Benin, West Africa," 2020 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, Kansas City, Missouri 304627, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    14. Kanittha Tambunlertchai & Sittidaj Pongkijvorasin, 2020. "The impacts of collective threshold requirements for rewards in a CPR experiment," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 22(4), pages 537-554, October.
    15. Londres, Marina & Schmink, Marianne & Börner, Jan & Duchelle, Amy E. & Frey, Gabriel Ponzoni, 2023. "Multidimensional forests: Complexity of forest-based values and livelihoods across Amazonian socio-cultural and geopolitical contexts," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 165(C).
    16. Jonas Ngouhouo-Poufoun & Sabine Chaupain-Guillot & Youba Ndiaye & Denis Jean Sonwa & Kevin Yana Njabo & Philippe Delacote, 2024. "Cocoa, livelihoods, and deforestation within the Tridom landscape in the Congo Basin: A spatial analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 19(6), pages 1-29, June.
    17. Mugido, Worship & Shackleton, Charlie M., 2019. "The contribution of NTFPS to rural livelihoods in different agro-ecological zones of South Africa," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    18. Isyaku, Usman, 2021. "What motivates communities to participate in forest conservation? A study of REDD+ pilot sites in Cross River, Nigeria," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).
    19. Felkner, John S. & Lee, Hyun & Shaikh, Sabina & Kolata, Alan & Binford, Michael, 2022. "The interrelated impacts of credit access, market access and forest proximity on livelihood strategies in Cambodia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    20. De Oñate-Calvín, Ruth & Oviedo, José L. & Salo, Matti, 2018. "Forest Resource-based Household Economy in the Communities of the Nanay River Basin, Peruvian Amazonia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 218-227.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • C91 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Individual Behavior
    • D91 - Microeconomics - - Micro-Based Behavioral Economics - - - Role and Effects of Psychological, Emotional, Social, and Cognitive Factors on Decision Making
    • Q15 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Land Ownership and Tenure; Land Reform; Land Use; Irrigation; Agriculture and Environment
    • Q23 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Forestry
    • 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:zbw:rwirep:341405. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/rwiesde.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.