The effect of parcel erosion information and peer comparison on rural landowners' willingness to invest in stream restoration
Date
2021
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
University of Delaware
Abstract
In many agricultural watersheds, elevated streambank sediment and nutrient loads can be partially attributed to prior land-use decisions. An active area of economic research has focused on the willingness of farmers to invest in agricultural best management practices that reduce nonpoint source (NPS) pollutants. However, relatively little is known about the willingness to invest in restoration practices intended to mitigate legacy pollutants such as streambank sediment. Although current farmers and landowners may not have directly contributed to the elevated levels of legacy pollutants, their willingness to mitigate legacy pollution is necessary for meeting current water quality goals. ☐ In this study, we conduct economic experiments in the lab and the field to determine the relative effect of different levels of information on voluntary contributions to stream restoration. We randomly assign landowner and student participants different levels of information on the legacy streambank erosion from their parcels. In each round of the experiment, landowners and students receive a new land parcel. Depending on their treatment group, participants receive a level of information that is associated with their treatment and that is specific to the assigned land parcel. ☐ During the landowner pilot, three treatment groups were used: (Group 1) Participants are not shown erosion but are told that the cause of erosion is current land uses; (Group 2) Participants are erosion information, and are told that the cause of erosion is current land uses; (Group 3) Participants are given erosion information, and are told that the cause of erosion is legacy land uses. For this pilot, money that is invested, or contributed, to the stream restoration project is converted to donations to one of five charities. Money not contributed is converted into earnings for the participant. ☐ During the student pilot and future landowner sessions, five treatment groups are used: (Group 1) Participants are not given peer-comparison information, nor parcel specific erosion rates; (Group 2) Participants are given peer-comparison information, but no parcel specific erosion rates; (Group 3) Participants are not given peer-comparison information, but are shown parcel specific erosion rates; (Group 4) Participants are given peer-comparison information, and specific erosion rates; (Group 5) Participants are given peer-comparison information, and specific erosion rates, but told the cause of erosion is legacy land uses. For the student pilot and future landowner sessions, money that is invested in the stream restoration project is converted to donations and money not contributed is converted into earnings for the participant. For the student pilot, donations were given to the Delaware Nature Society. In future sessions with landowners, we will send donate to a real streambank restoration project. ☐ Results suggest that when participants are shown peer comparison information, students and landowners both invest more in restoration practices than those in the control. Similarly, when assigned to erosion parcels with annual erosion rates above 160 tons (i.e., the median erosion rate), participants were more likely to contribute to the streambank restoration project. Policy makers can use this information to maximize contributions to public conservation efforts to improve water quality. Information can be provided to landowners with high erosion parcels to encourage voluntary contributions.
Description
Keywords
Agriculture, Economics, Resources