Browsing by Author "Ferraro, Paul J."
Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item Ag-E MINDSPACE Effect Size Table(Department of Applied Economics and Statistics, University of Delaware, Newark, DE., 2019-03) Palm-Forster, Leah, H.; Ferraro, Paul J.; Janusch, Nicholas; Vossler, Christian A.; Messer, Kent D.In our recent paper in Environmental & Resource Economics, we recommend that authors report standardized effect sizes when reporting the results of experimental economics studies (Palm-Forster et al., forthcoming). Standardized effect sizes allow readers to compare the magnitudes of estimated treatment effects across different treatments and outcomes. Researchers can also use published effect sizes as priors when conducting ex-ante power analyses. We present a table of standardized effect sizes reported in experimental economics papers that analyze agri-environmental (Ag-E) issues (the table can be found at https://osf.io/cf259/). We use Dolan et al.’s (2012) MINDSPACE framework to classify behavioral nudges into nine categories, all of which can influence the behavior of agricultural producers: messengers, incentives, norms, defaults, salience, priming, affect, commitment, and ego. We refer readers to our paper for more information about this body of literature (https://doi.org/10.1007/s10640-019-00342-x). Our paper also describes key methodological challenges and recommendations for experimental agri-environmental research.Item Behavioral and experimental agri-environmental research: methodological challenges, literature gaps, and recommendations(Department of Applied Economics and Statistics, University of Delaware, Newark, DE., 2019-12) Palm-Forster, Leah; Ferraro, Paul J.; Janusch, Nicholas; Vossler, Christian A.; Messer, Kent D.Insights from behavioral and experimental economics research can inform the design of evidence-based, cost-effective agri-environmental programs that mitigate environmental damages and promote the supply of environmental benefits from agricultural landscapes. To enhance future research on agri-environmental program design and to increase the speed at which credible scientific knowledge is accumulated, we highlight methodological challenges, identify important gaps in the existing literature, and make key recommendations for both researchers and those evaluating research. We first report on four key methodological challenges – underpowered designs, multiple hypothesis testing, interpretation issues, and choosing appropriate econometric methods – and suggest strategies to overcome these challenges. Specifically, we emphasize the need for more detailed planning during the experimental design stage, including power analyses and publishing a pre-analysis plan. Greater use of replication studies and meta-analyses will also help address these challenges and strengthen the quality of the evidence base. In the second part of this paper, we discuss how insights from behavioral and experimental economics can be applied to improve the design of agri-environmental programs. We summarize key insights using the MINDSPACE framework, which categorizes nine behavioral effects that influence decision-making (messenger, incentives, norms, defaults, salience, priming, affect, commitment, and ego), and we highlight recent research that tests these effects in agri-environmental contexts. We also propose a framework for prioritizing policy-relevant research in this domain.Item Private costs of carbon emissions abatement by limiting beef consumption and vehicle use in the United States(PLoS ONE, 2022-01-19) McFadden, Brandon R.; Ferraro, Paul J.; Messer, Kent D.A popular strategy for mitigating climate change is to persuade or incentivize individuals to limit behaviors associated with high greenhouse gas emissions. In this study, adults in the mid-Atlantic United States bid in an auction to receive compensation for eliminating beef consumption or limiting vehicle use. The auction incentivized participants to reveal their true costs of accepting these limits for periods ranging from one week to one year. Compliance with the conditions of the auction was confirmed via a random field audit of the behavioral changes. The estimated median abatement costs were greater than $600 per tCO2e for beef consumption and $1,300 per tCO2e for vehicle use, values much higher than the price of carbon offsets and most estimates of the social cost of carbon. Although these values may decline over time with experience or broader social adoption, they imply that policies that encourage innovations to reduce the costs of behavior change, such as meat alternatives or emission-free vehicles, may be a more fruitful than those that limit beef consumption or vehicle use.