Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jfpoli/v120y2023ics0306919223000799.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Willing or complying? The delicate interplay between voluntary and mandatory interventions to promote farmers' environmental behavior

Author

Listed:
  • Barreiro-Hurle, Jesus
  • Dessart, Francois J.
  • Rommel, Jens
  • Czajkowski, Mikołaj
  • Espinosa-Goded, Maria
  • Rodriguez-Entrena, Macario
  • Thomas, Fabian
  • Zagorska, Katarzyna
Abstract
Agri-environmental policies generally build around two complementary approaches: mandatory requirements and (compensated) voluntary measures. One of the challenges of the future EU Common Agricultural Policy is precisely to find the right balance between these two types of interventions. We conducted an experiment with farmers in three EU Member States to assess the impact of (1) increasing mandatory contributions to the environment, and of (2) decreasing unconditional income support. We also assess the effect of two key behavioural factors: environmental concern and trait reactance. Results show that both interventions reduce voluntary contributions to the environment, but the reduction is higher when mandatory contributions increase than when income decreases.. However, when mandatory contribution increases substantially, this more than offsets the reduction of voluntary contributions, leading to higher total contributions.

Suggested Citation

  • Barreiro-Hurle, Jesus & Dessart, Francois J. & Rommel, Jens & Czajkowski, Mikołaj & Espinosa-Goded, Maria & Rodriguez-Entrena, Macario & Thomas, Fabian & Zagorska, Katarzyna, 2023. "Willing or complying? The delicate interplay between voluntary and mandatory interventions to promote farmers' environmental behavior," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jfpoli:v:120:y:2023:i:c:s0306919223000799
    DOI: 10.1016/j.foodpol.2023.102481
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306919223000799
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.foodpol.2023.102481?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Keser, Claudia & Markstädter, Andreas & Schmidt, Martin, 2017. "Mandatory minimum contributions, heterogeneous endowments and voluntary public-good provision," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 291-310.
    2. Colin Camerer & Linda Babcock & George Loewenstein & Richard Thaler, 1997. "Labor Supply of New York City Cabdrivers: One Day at a Time," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 112(2), pages 407-441.
    3. DeShazo, J. R., 2002. "Designing Transactions without Framing Effects in Iterative Question Formats," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 43(3), pages 360-385, May.
    4. Sophie Thoyer & Raphaële Préget, 2019. "Enriching the CAP evaluation toolbox with experimental approaches: introduction to the special issue," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 46(3), pages 347-366.
    5. Higgins, Nathaniel & Hellerstein, Daniel & Wallander, Steven & Lynch, Lori, 2017. "Economic Experiments for Policy Analysis and Program Design: A Guide for Agricultural Decisionmakers," Economic Research Report 262456, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    6. Rode, Julian & Gómez-Baggethun, Erik & Krause, Torsten, 2015. "Motivation crowding by economic incentives in conservation policy: A review of the empirical evidence," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 270-282.
    7. Kahneman, Daniel & Knetsch, Jack L & Thaler, Richard H, 1986. "Fairness and the Assumptions of Economics," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 59(4), pages 285-300, October.
    8. 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.
    9. Alekseev, Aleksandr & Charness, Gary & Gneezy, Uri, 2017. "Experimental methods: When and why contextual instructions are important," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 48-59.
    10. Charness, Gary & Gneezy, Uri & Kuhn, Michael A., 2012. "Experimental methods: Between-subject and within-subject design," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 81(1), pages 1-8.
    11. 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.
    12. Karine Nyborg, 2018. "Social Norms and the Environment," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 10(1), pages 405-423, October.
    13. Sophie Clot & Gilles Grolleau & Lisette Ibanez, 2018. "Moral self-licencing and social dilemmas: an experimental analysis from a taking game in Madagascar," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 50(27), pages 2980-2991, June.
    14. Kaczan, David J. & Swallow, Brent M. & Adamowicz, W.L. (Vic), 2019. "Forest conservation policy and motivational crowding: Experimental evidence from Tanzania," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 444-453.
    15. Marianne Lefebvre & Jesus Barreiro‐Hurlé & Ciaran Blanchflower & Liesbeth Colen & Laure Kuhfuss & Jens Rommel & Tanja Šumrada & Fabian Thomas & Sophie Thoyer, 2021. "Can Economic Experiments Contribute to a More Effective CAP?," EuroChoices, The Agricultural Economics Society, vol. 20(3), pages 42-49, December.
    16. Cooter, Robert, 1998. "Expressive Law and Economics," Berkeley Olin Program in Law & Economics, Working Paper Series qt3w34j60j, Berkeley Olin Program in Law & Economics.
    17. Valeria Piñeiro & Joaquín Arias & Jochen Dürr & Pablo Elverdin & Ana María Ibáñez & Alison Kinengyere & Cristian Morales Opazo & Nkechi Owoo & Jessica R. Page & Steven D. Prager & Maximo Torero, 2020. "A scoping review on incentives for adoption of sustainable agricultural practices and their outcomes," Nature Sustainability, Nature, vol. 3(10), pages 809-820, October.
    18. Christoph Engel, 2011. "Dictator games: a meta study," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 14(4), pages 583-610, November.
    19. Engelmann, Dirk & Munro, Alistair & Valente, Marieta, 2017. "On the behavioural relevance of optional and mandatory impure public goods," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 134-144.
    20. Tania Runge & Uwe Latacz‐Lohmann & Lena Schaller & Kristina Todorova & Carsten Daugbjerg & Mette Termansen & Jaan Liira & Fanny Le Gloux & Pierre Dupraz & Jussi Leppanen & József Fogarasi & Enikő Zita, 2022. "Implementation of Eco‐schemes in Fifteen European Union Member States," EuroChoices, The Agricultural Economics Society, vol. 21(2), pages 19-27, August.
    21. Bertoni, Danilo & Curzi, Daniele & Aletti, Giacomo & Olper, Alessandro, 2020. "Estimating the effects of agri-environmental measures using difference-in-difference coarsened exact matching," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    22. Dorner, Zack, 2019. "A behavioral rebound effect," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 98(C).
    23. Erin L. Krupka & Roberto A. Weber, 2013. "Identifying Social Norms Using Coordination Games: Why Does Dictator Game Sharing Vary?," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 11(3), pages 495-524, June.
    24. Kathy Baylis & Jonathan Coppess & Benjamin M. Gramig & Paavani Sachdeva, 2022. "Agri-environmental Programs in the United States and Canada," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 16(1), pages 83-104.
    25. Claassen, Roger & Bowman, Maria & McFadden, Jonathan & Smith, David & Wallander, Steven, 2018. "Tillage Intensity and Conservation Cropping in the United States," Economic Information Bulletin 277566, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    26. Bruno S. Frey & Reto Jegen, 2001. "Motivation Crowding Theory," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(5), pages 589-611, December.
    27. Charness, Gary & Gneezy, Uri & Kuhn, Michael A., 2013. "Experimental methods: Extra-laboratory experiments-extending the reach of experimental economics," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 93-100.
    28. Hendrik Bruns & Grischa Perino, 2021. "Point at, nudge, or push private provision of a public good?," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 59(3), pages 996-1007, July.
    29. Timothy N. Cason & Steven Y. Wu, 2019. "Subject Pools and Deception in Agricultural and Resource Economics Experiments," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 73(3), pages 743-758, July.
    30. Kits, Gerda J. & Adamowicz, Wiktor L. & Boxall, Peter C., 2014. "Do conservation auctions crowd out voluntary environmentally friendly activities?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 118-123.
    31. Fabian Thomas & Estelle Midler & Marianne Lefebvre & Stefanie Engel, 2019. "Greening the common agricultural policy: a behavioural perspective and lab-in-the-field experiment in Germany," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 46(3), pages 367-392.
    32. Liesbeth Colen & Sergio Gomez y Paloma & Uwe Latacz-Lohmann & Marianne Lefebvre & Raphaële Préget & Sophie Thoyer, 2016. "Economic Experiments as a Tool for Agricultural Policy Evaluation: Insights from the European CAP," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 64(4), pages 667-694, December.
    33. Jetske Bouma, 2021. "Evaluating environmental policy: the use and usefulness of experiments," Journal of Environmental Economics and Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(4), pages 468-480, October.
    34. Larney, Andrea & Rotella, Amanda & Barclay, Pat, 2019. "Stake size effects in ultimatum game and dictator game offers: A meta-analysis," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 61-72.
    35. Berit Hasler & Mette Termansen & Helle Ørsted Nielsen & Carsten Daugbjerg & Sven Wunder & Uwe Latacz-Lohmann, 2022. "European Agri-environmental Policy: Evolution, Effectiveness, and Challenges," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 16(1), pages 105-125.
    36. Cooter, Robert, 1998. "Expressive Law and Economics," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 27(2), pages 585-608, June.
    37. Alberto Longo & David Hoyos & Anil Markandya, 2015. "Sequence Effects in the Valuation of Multiple Environmental Programs Using the Contingent Valuation Method," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 91(1), pages 20-35.
    38. Doris Läpple & Hugh Kelley, 2015. "Spatial dependence in the adoption of organic drystock farming in Ireland," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 42(2), pages 315-337.
    39. Madhu Khanna, 2001. "Non‐Mandatory Approaches to Environmental Protection," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(3), pages 291-324, July.
    40. Galli, Francesca & Prosperi, Paolo & Favilli, Elena & D'Amico, Simona & Bartolini, Fabio & Brunori, Gianluca, 2020. "How can policy processes remove barriers to sustainable food systems in Europe? Contributing to a policy framework for agri-food transitions," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    41. Lorenzo Lotti & Shanali Pethiyagoda, 2022. "Generosity during COVID-19: investigating socioeconomic shocks and game framing," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-10, December.
    42. Carpenter, Jeffrey & Verhoogen, Eric & Burks, Stephen, 2005. "The effect of stakes in distribution experiments," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 86(3), pages 393-398, March.
    43. Segerson, Kathleen & Miceli, Thomas J., 1998. "Voluntary Environmental Agreements: Good or Bad News for Environmental Protection?," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 109-130, September.
    44. Leah H. Palm-Forster & Paul J. Ferraro & Nicholas Janusch & Christian A. Vossler & Kent D. Messer, 2019. "Behavioral and Experimental Agri-Environmental Research: Methodological Challenges, Literature Gaps, and Recommendations," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 73(3), pages 719-742, July.
    45. Robert Cooter, 1998. "Expressive Law and Economics," CESifo Working Paper Series 161, CESifo.
    46. Day, Brett & Bateman, Ian J. & Carson, Richard T. & Dupont, Diane & Louviere, Jordan J. & Morimoto, Sanae & Scarpa, Riccardo & Wang, Paul, 2012. "Ordering effects and choice set awareness in repeat-response stated preference studies," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 63(1), pages 73-91.
    47. Eckel, Catherine C. & Grossman, Philip J., 2003. "Rebate versus matching: does how we subsidize charitable contributions matter?," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(3-4), pages 681-701, March.
    48. Thijs Bouman & Linda Steg & Thomas Dietz, 2021. "Insights from early COVID-19 responses about promoting sustainable action," Nature Sustainability, Nature, vol. 4(3), pages 194-200, March.
    49. Michael Kosfeld & Armin Falk, 2006. "The Hidden Costs of Control," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(5), pages 1611-1630, December.
    50. François J Dessart & Jesús Barreiro-Hurlé & René van Bavel, 2019. "Behavioural factors affecting the adoption of sustainable farming practices: a policy-oriented review," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 46(3), pages 417-471.
    51. Brown, Calum & Kovács, Eszter & Herzon, Irina & Villamayor-Tomas, Sergio & Albizua, Amaia & Galanaki, Antonia & Grammatikopoulou, Ioanna & McCracken, Davy & Olsson, Johanna Alkan & Zinngrebe, Yves, 2021. "Simplistic understandings of farmer motivations could undermine the environmental potential of the common agricultural policy," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    52. Khafagy, Amr & Vigani, Mauro, 2022. "Technical change and the Common Agricultural Policy," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    53. Arkes, Hal R. & Blumer, Catherine, 1985. "The psychology of sunk cost," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 124-140, February.
    54. James Andreoni & John Miller, 2002. "Giving According to GARP: An Experimental Test of the Consistency of Preferences for Altruism," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 70(2), pages 737-753, March.
    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. Shukla, Pallavi & Messer, Kent D. & Ferraro, Paul J., 2023. "Applying behavioral science to agriculture, food, and agri-environmental policymaking," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).

    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. Govindan, Pavitra, 2022. "How do informal norms affect rule compliance: Experimental evidence," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    2. Thorsten Chmura & Christoph Engel & Markus Englerth & Thomas Pitz, 2010. "At the Mercy of the Prisoner Next Door. Using an Experimental Measure of Selfishness as a Criminological Tool," Discussion Paper Series of the Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods 2010_27, Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods.
    3. Bicchieri, Cristina & Dimant, Eugen & Xiao, Erte, 2021. "Deviant or wrong? The effects of norm information on the efficacy of punishment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 188(C), pages 209-235.
    4. Kuhfuss, Laure & Préget, Raphaële & Thoyer, Sophie & de Vries, Frans P. & Hanley, Nick, 2022. "Enhancing spatial coordination in payment for ecosystem services schemes with non-pecuniary preferences," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 192(C).
    5. Fehr, Ernst & Falk, Armin, 2002. "Psychological foundations of incentives," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 46(4-5), pages 687-724, May.
    6. Marie Ferré & Stefanie Engel & Elisabeth Gsottbauer, 2023. "External validity of economic experiments on Agri‐environmental scheme design," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 74(3), pages 661-685, September.
    7. Marianne Lefebvre & Jesus Barreiro‐Hurlé & Ciaran Blanchflower & Liesbeth Colen & Laure Kuhfuss & Jens Rommel & Tanja Šumrada & Fabian Thomas & Sophie Thoyer, 2021. "Can Economic Experiments Contribute to a More Effective CAP?," EuroChoices, The Agricultural Economics Society, vol. 20(3), pages 42-49, December.
    8. Christoph Schulze & Katarzyna Zagórska & Kati Häfner & Olimpia Markiewicz & Mikołaj Czajkowski & Bettina Matzdorf, 2024. "Using farmers' ex ante preferences to design agri‐environmental contracts: A systematic review," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 75(1), pages 44-83, February.
    9. Gruner, Sven & Lehberger, Mira & Hirschauer, Norbert & Mußhoff, Oliver, 2022. "How (un)informative are experiments with students for other social groups? A study of agricultural students and farmers," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 66(03), January.
    10. Bowles, Samuel & Hwang, Sung-Ha, 2008. "Social preferences and public economics: Mechanism design when social preferences depend on incentives," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(8-9), pages 1811-1820, August.
    11. Heinz, Nicolai & Koessler, Ann-Kathrin, 2021. "Other-regarding preferences and pro-environmental behaviour: An interdisciplinary review of experimental studies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    12. Arno Apffelstaedt & Jana Freundt, 2018. "Corrupted Votes and Rule Compliance," PPE Working Papers 0018, Philosophy, Politics and Economics, University of Pennsylvania.
    13. Claudia Keser & Andreas Markstädter & Martin Schmidt, 2014. "Mandatory minimum contributions, heterogeneous endowments and voluntary public-good provision," CIRANO Working Papers 2014s-47, CIRANO.
    14. Keser, Claudia & Markstädter, Andreas & Schmidt, Martin, 2014. "Mandatory minimum contributions, heterogenous endowments and voluntary public-good provision," University of Göttingen Working Papers in Economics 224, University of Goettingen, Department of Economics.
    15. Romaniuc Rustam, 2016. "What Makes Law to Change Behavior? An Experimental Study," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 12(2), pages 447-475, July.
    16. Bonan, Jacopo & Burlacu, Sergiu & Galliera, Arianna, 2023. "Prosociality in variants of the dictator game: Evidence from children in El Salvador," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    17. Bartels, Lara & Werthschulte, Madeline, 2023. ""More bang for the buck"? Evidence on the effectiveness of an energy efficiency subsidy," ZEW Discussion Papers 23-022, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    18. Benjamin Ouvrard & Arnaud Reynaud & Stéphane Cezera & Alban Thomas & Dishant Jojit James & Murudaiah Shivamurthy, 2023. "Distributive Justice in the Field: How do Indian Farmers Share Water? ," Working Papers hal-04150233, HAL.
    19. Emin Karagözoğlu & Elif Tosun, 2022. "Endogenous Game Choice and Giving Behavior in Distribution Games," Games, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-32, November.
    20. Bartels, Lara & Kesternich, Martin, 2022. "Motivate the crowd or crowd- them out? The impact of local government spending on the voluntary provision of a green public good," ZEW Discussion Papers 22-040, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.

    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:eee:jfpoli:v:120:y:2023:i:c:s0306919223000799. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/foodpol .

    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.