Farmers’ performance and subject pool effect in decentralized bargaining markets

Waichman, Israel; Ness, Christiane

doi:10.1016/j.econlet.2011.12.054

Cited by 7 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In an experiment designed to investigate a decentralised bargaining market, Waichman and Ness () found very similar performance between students and farmers. The only difference was that farmers’ payoffs to buyers were slightly higher than the payoffs of students.…”

Section: Related Literaturementioning

confidence: 98%

Comparing Compliance Behaviour of Students and Farmers. An Extra‐laboratory Experiment in the Context of Agri‐environmental Nudges in Germany

Peth¹,

Mußhoff²

2019

J Agricultural Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Increasing popularity of economic experiments for policy impact analysis has led to an ongoing debate about the suitability of students to substitute professionals as experimental subjects. To date, subject pool effects in agricultural and resource economics experiments have not been sufficiently studied. In order to identify differences and similarities between students and non-students, we carry out an experiment in the form of a multi-period business management game that is adapted to an agri-environmental context. We compare the compliance behaviour of German agricultural students and German farmers with regard to water protection rules and analyse their responses to two different green nudge interventions. The experimental results reveal that the direction of the response to the policy treatments is similar. Even unexpected behaviour could be reproduced by the student sample. Nevertheless, the magnitude of the treatment effects differed between the two samples. This implies that experimenters in the field of agricultural and resource economics could use the subject pool of students to analyse the direction of nudge policies. If predictions should be made about the magnitude effects, we suggest using a professional subject pool.

show abstract

Section: Related Literaturementioning

confidence: 98%

Comparing Compliance Behaviour of Students and Farmers. An Extra‐laboratory Experiment in the Context of Agri‐environmental Nudges in Germany

Peth¹,

Mußhoff²

2019

J Agricultural Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Using a subject pool of farmers may have an impact on coordination success and the relative efficiency of each rule because of their experience in the field of water management. Nevertheless, recent work have shown that experimental outcomes with student subjects are similar to outcomes with subjects from specific professions, such as farmers or environmental scholars (Ahn et al (2011), Waichman and Ness (2012)). Further work could also include an extension to bigger groups with subjects of different types within the group to see what is the best rule in an heterogeneous environment (Janssen et al (2011)).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Can Rationing Rules for Common Resources Impact Self-insurance Decisions?

Lefebvre

2013

SBE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

When users have ex-ante demands over a common resource and when resource size is not sufficient to cover all the individual demands, there is a need to establish a rationing rule. I test whether the choice of the rationing rule impacts the individual decision to self-insure, i.e. to invest in a secure alternative resource, instead of relying on a free but uncertain common resource. Four rationing rules, empirically relevant for water management, are compared using a laboratory experiment. According to Nash predictions, the investment in self-insurance is the same with the four rules. However, the experimental data show that agents' decisions are impacted by the rule. Coordination on the optimal self-insurance level is higher with the no allocation rule. However, total gains are higher with the constrained-equal awards rule, and their variability is reduced. Rules which are defined as a proportion of posted demands, such as the proportional and constrained-equal losses rules, induce sub-optimal levels of self-insurance.

show abstract

“…They also find that students contribute significantly less than real fishermen do. With respect to strategic behaviour, Waichman and Ness (2012) find no differences in a bargaining experiment between students and farmers. Maart‐Noelck and Musshoff (2013) measure risk attitudes and find that the behaviour of students is more risk‐averse than that of the German farmers.…”

Section: Population and Framing Effects In Economic Experiments: Stat...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For instance, students may have no experience with the problem at hand and their socio‐economic and demographic background usually differ from the targeted population. We are only aware of three studies that compare the strategic behaviour or preferences of students and farmers using a laboratory experiment (Carpenter & Seki, 2011; Maart‐Noelck & Musshoff, 2013; Waichman & Ness, 2012). These studies focus, however, on abstract designs, not directly related to concrete insights on agri‐environmental policy design.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

External validity of economic experiments on Agri‐environmental scheme design

Ferré

Engel

Gsottbauer

2023

J Agricultural Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The use of laboratory experiments to study issues in agricultural policy has grown in prominence within the fields of agricultural and environmental economics. Such experiments are often conducted with university students and framed in an abstract manner. This raises questions about whether the findings of these experiments provide reliable insights on the behaviour of actual agents in real settings. We contribute to this methodological debate by analysing the impacts of sample population and framing on behaviour in the experiment and on two policy effects: the direction and the magnitude of the policy impact. We also examine the channels through which differences in results may occur. For this, we test if behaviour is correlated with a set of covariates collected from our samples, including socio‐demographics, social and risk preferences. Our main finding is that the type of subject significantly affects the magnitude of the policy impact. The two populations differ substantially in the representation of key characteristics and preferences, which in consequence affects behaviour in the experiment. We find no significant impact of framing on behaviour.

show abstract

Farmers’ performance and subject pool effect in decentralized bargaining markets

Cited by 7 publications

References 7 publications

Comparing Compliance Behaviour of Students and Farmers. An Extra‐laboratory Experiment in the Context of Agri‐environmental Nudges in Germany

Comparing Compliance Behaviour of Students and Farmers. An Extra‐laboratory Experiment in the Context of Agri‐environmental Nudges in Germany

Can Rationing Rules for Common Resources Impact Self-insurance Decisions?

External validity of economic experiments on Agri‐environmental scheme design

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About