Short- & long-term effects of monetary and non-monetary incentives to cooperate in public good games: An experiment
Autoři:
Mathieu Lefebvre aff001; Anne Stenger aff002
Působiště autorů:
BETA- University of Strasbourg, Strasbourg, France
aff001; INRA and BETA- University of Strasbourg, Strasbourg, France
aff002
Vyšlo v časopise:
PLoS ONE 15(1)
Kategorie:
Research Article
doi:
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0227360
Souhrn
Using a common experimental framework, this paper addresses both the question of the short-term and the long-lasting effects of temporary monetary and non-monetary incentive mechanisms on increasing individual contributions to the public good. The results show that both punishments and rewards significantly increase contributions compared to the baseline, but that monetary sanctions lead to the highest contributions, whereas non-monetary sanctions lead to the lowest contributions. The four types of incentives display long-lasting effects, i.e., contributions do not go back to baseline levels directly after the withdrawal of the incentives. However, rewards appear to have much stronger persistent effects than sanctions, revealing some sort of delayed reciprocity.
Klíčová slova:
Conservation of energy – Conservation science – Experimental design – Experimental economics – Habits – Public goods game – Social psychology – Environmental economics
Zdroje
1. Allcott H. and Rogers T. (2014). The Short-Run and Long-run effects of Behavioral Interventions: Experimental Evidence from Energy Conservation, American Economic Review, 104(10), 3003–3037.
2. Fehr E. and Gächter S. (2000). Cooperation and punishment in public goods experiments. American Economic Review, 90(4), 980–994.
3. Sefton M., Shupp R., & Walker J. M. (2007). The effect of rewards and sanctions in provision of public goods. Economic Inquiry, 45(4), 671–690.
4. Masclet D., Noussair C., Tucker S., Villeval M.C. (2003). Monetary and non-monetary punishment in the voluntary contributions mechanism. The American Economic Review. 93(1), 366–380.
5. Dugar S (2013). Non-Monetary Incentives And Opportunistic Behavior: Evidence From A Laboratory Public Good Game, Economic Inquiry, vol. 51(2), 1374–1388
6. Peeters R & Vorsatz M (2013). Immaterial Rewards And Sanctions In A Voluntary Contribution Experiment, Economic Inquiry, 51(2), 1442–1456.
7. Ajzen I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211.
8. Dal Bó E. and Dal Bó P. (2014). « Do the right thing: » The effects of moral suasion on cooperation. Journal of Public Economics, 117, 28–38.
9. Capraro V., Jagfeld G., Klein R., Mul M. and van de Pol I. (2019). Increasing altruistic and cooperative behaviour with simple moral nudges. Scientific Reports, 9, 11880. doi: 10.1038/s41598-019-48094-4 31417106
10. Becker G. S. (1968). Crime and Punishment: An Economic Approach, Journal of Political Economy, 76(2), 169–217.
11. Bryan Gharad, Chowdhury Shyamal, and Mushfiq Mobarak Ahmed (2014). Underinvestment in a Profitable Technology: The Case of Seasonal Migration in Bangladesh. Econometrica, 82(5), 1671–1748.
12. Dupas P. (2014). Short-Run Subsidies and Long-Run Adoption of New Health Products: Evidence From a Field Experiment. Econometrica, 82(1),197–228. doi: 10.3982/ECTA9508 25308977
13. Becker Gary, and Murphy Kevin (1988). A Theory of Rational Addiction. Journal of Political Economy, 96(4), 675–700.
14. Allcott H. (2011). Social Norms and Energy Conservation, Journal of Public Economics, 95 (9–10), 1082–95.
15. d’Adda G., Capraro V. and Tavoni M. (2017). Push, don’t nudge: Behavioral spillovers and policy instruments. Economic Letters, 154, 92–95.
16. Costa F. and Gerard F. (2018). Hysteresis and the social cost of corrective policies: evidence from a temporary energy saving program, CDEP-CDEG working paper 63.
17. Charness G. and Gneezy U. (2009). Incentives to Exercise, Econometrica, 77(3), 909–931
18. Acland D. and Levy M. R. (2015). Naiveté, projection bias, and habit formation in gym attendance, Management Science, 61(1), 146–160.
19. Sattler C., Trampnau S., Schomers S., Meyer C and Matzdorf B. (2013). Multi-classification of payments for ecosystem services: How do classification characteristics relate to overall PES success?, Ecosystem Services, 6, 31–45.
20. Engel S., Pagiola S. and Wunder S. (2008). Designing payments for environmental services in theory and practice: An overview of the issues. Ecological economics, 65(4), 663–674.
21. Ito K, Ida T. and Tanaka M. (2018). Moral Suasion and Economic Incentives: Field Experimental Evidence from Energy Demand, American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 10(1), 240–267.
22. Schall D.L, Wolf M, Mohnen A (2016). Do effects of theoretical training and rewards for energy-efficient behavior persist over time and interact? A natural field experiment on eco-driving in a company fleet, Energy Policy 97, 291–300.
23. Ferraro P. J., and Price M. K. (2013). Using Nonpecuniary Strategies to Influence Behavior: Evidence from a Large-Scale Field Experiment. Review of Economics and Statistics, 95(1), 64–73.
24. Brandts J. and Cooper D. J. (2006). A change would do you good. . . . An experimental study on how to overcome coordination failure in organizations. The American Economic Review, 96(3), 669–693.
25. Hamman J., Rick S., and Weber R.A, (2007). Solving coordination failure with “all-or-none” group-level incentives. Experimental Economics, 10(3), 285–303.
26. Bruttel L. and Friehe T., (2014). Can short-term incentives induce long-lasting cooperation? Results from a public-goods experiment. Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics 53, 120–130.
27. Kamm A., Koch C. and Nikiforakis N. (2017). The ghost of institutions past: History as an obstacle to fighting tax evasion. NYU Abu Dhabi Working Paper n°008.
28. Ledyard O. (1995). Public goods: some experimental results. In Kagel J. & Roth A. (Eds.), Handbook of experimental economics, Princeton University Press.
29. Nikiforakis N. (2010). Feedback, punishment and cooperation in public good experiments. Games and Economic Behavior, 68(2), 689–702.
30. Egas M. and Riedl A. (2008). The economics of altruistic punishment and the maintenance of cooperation. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 275(1637), 871–878. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2007.1558 18198144
31. Fehr E. and Gächter S. (2002). Altruistic punishment in humans. Nature, 415, 137–140. doi: 10.1038/415137a 11805825
32. Sutter M., Haigner S. & Kocher M. G. (2010). Choosing the Carrot or the Stick? Endogenous Institutional Choice in Social Dilemma Situations, Review of Economic Studies, vol. 77(4), 1540–1566.
33. Chaudhuri A., (2011). Sustaining cooperation in laboratory public goods experiments: a selective survey of the literature. Experimental Economics, 14(1), 47–83.
34. Fehr E. and Schmidt K. (1999). A theory of fairness, competition and cooperation, The Quaterly Journal of Economics, 114(3), 817–868.
35. Ariely D., Bracha A. and Meier S. (2009). Doing Good or Doing Well? Image Motivation and Monetary Incentives in Behaving Prosocially, American Economic Review, 99(1), 544–55
36. Gneezy U., Meier S. and Rey-Biel P. (2011). When and Why incentives (Don’t) Work to Modify Behavior. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 25(4), 191–209.
37. Meier S. (2007). Do subsidies increase charitable giving in the long run? Matching donations in a field experiment. Journal of the European Economic Association, 5(6), 1203–1222.
38. Greiner B. (2015). Subject Pool Recruitment Procedures: Organizing Experiments with ORSEE. Journal of the Economic Science Association, 1(1), 114–125
39. Nikiforakis N., & Normann H. T. (2008). A comparative statics analysis of punishment in public-good experiments. Experimental Economics, 11(4), 358–369.
40. Andreoni J. (1988). “Why Free Ride? Strategies and Learning in Public Goods Experiments.” Journal of Public Economics. 37, 291–304.
41. Keser C. (1996). Voluntary Contributions to a Public Good When Partial Contribution is a Dominant Strategy, Economics Letters, 50(3), 359–366.
42. Norton D.A. (2015). Killing the (coordination) moment: How ambiguity eliminates the restart effect in volontary contribution mechanism experiments?. Economics Letters, 126, 1–5.
Článek vyšel v časopise
PLOS One
2020 Číslo 1
- Tisícileté topoly, mokří psi, stárnoucí kočky a ospalé octomilky – „jednohubky“ z výzkumu 2024/41
- Jaké jsou aktuální trendy v léčbě karcinomu slinivky?
- Může hubnutí souviset s vyšším rizikem nádorových onemocnění?
- Menstruační krev má značný diagnostický potenciál, mimo jiné u diabetu
- Metamizol jako analgetikum první volby: kdy, pro koho, jak a proč?
Nejčtenější v tomto čísle
- Severity of misophonia symptoms is associated with worse cognitive control when exposed to misophonia trigger sounds
- Chemical analysis of snus products from the United States and northern Europe
- Calcium dobesilate reduces VEGF signaling by interfering with heparan sulfate binding site and protects from vascular complications in diabetic mice
- Effect of Lactobacillus acidophilus D2/CSL (CECT 4529) supplementation in drinking water on chicken crop and caeca microbiome
Zvyšte si kvalifikaci online z pohodlí domova
Všechny kurzy