Pub Date : 2026-01-12DOI: 10.1016/j.reseneeco.2026.101553
Alexander Hill
Rising CO2 emissions are projected to increase future temperatures, which reduces household heating energy demand and increases cooling demand. This leaves the overall effect, on both energy consumption and future CO2 emissions, unknown. Using a household-level discrete choice estimation strategy, this paper finds the more extreme warming scenario reduces annual U.S. CO2 emissions from residential space heating and cooling by 61 million tons annually by the 2070 s, compared to a scenario without rising temperatures. Rising emissions from space cooling are more than offset by the reduction in emissions from space heating, leading to $19.4 billion in annual reduced damages. JEL Q54 Q41 L90
{"title":"Will global warming reduce future energy consumption and CO2 emissions by U.S. households?","authors":"Alexander Hill","doi":"10.1016/j.reseneeco.2026.101553","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.reseneeco.2026.101553","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Rising CO<sub>2</sub> emissions are projected to increase future temperatures, which reduces household heating energy demand and increases cooling demand. This leaves the overall effect, on both energy consumption and future CO<sub>2</sub> emissions, unknown. Using a household-level discrete choice estimation strategy, this paper finds the more extreme warming scenario reduces annual U.S. CO<sub>2</sub> emissions from residential space heating and cooling by 61 million tons annually by the 2070 s, compared to a scenario without rising temperatures. Rising emissions from space cooling are more than offset by the reduction in emissions from space heating, leading to $19.4 billion in annual reduced damages. JEL Q54 Q41 L90</div></div>","PeriodicalId":47952,"journal":{"name":"Resource and Energy Economics","volume":"85 ","pages":"Article 101553"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2026-01-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145976611","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2026-01-05DOI: 10.1016/j.reseneeco.2026.101552
Maria J. Montoya-Villalobos , Alexandre Cambo
This paper examines the acceptability of taxes and regulatory standards, presented as a full ban, aimed at correcting negative externalities. Using an unframed laboratory experiment, participants engage in a negative externalities game. We analyze the effects of policy trials on acceptability and compare support for bans versus taxes through the lens of cultural worldviews. The results reveal no significant difference in support between the two policies. We find that policy trials increase overall public policy acceptability, but hierarchical worldviews are associated with lower support for public policies, while individualistic orientations have no significant effect. Additionally, we explore how cultural worldviews influence policy preferences and the efficacy of policy trials. The findings suggest that policy preferences are not dependent on worldviews. However, policy trials fail to increase support among individuals with both individualistic and hierarchical orientations, highlighting the challenge of making public policies universally acceptable across different cultural worldviews.
{"title":"To tax or to regulate? Cultural worldviews and the efficacy of policy trials","authors":"Maria J. Montoya-Villalobos , Alexandre Cambo","doi":"10.1016/j.reseneeco.2026.101552","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.reseneeco.2026.101552","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This paper examines the acceptability of taxes and regulatory standards, presented as a full ban, aimed at correcting negative externalities. Using an unframed laboratory experiment, participants engage in a negative externalities game. We analyze the effects of policy trials on acceptability and compare support for bans versus taxes through the lens of cultural worldviews. The results reveal no significant difference in support between the two policies. We find that policy trials increase overall public policy acceptability, but hierarchical worldviews are associated with lower support for public policies, while individualistic orientations have no significant effect. Additionally, we explore how cultural worldviews influence policy preferences and the efficacy of policy trials. The findings suggest that policy preferences are not dependent on worldviews. However, policy trials fail to increase support among individuals with both individualistic and hierarchical orientations, highlighting the challenge of making public policies universally acceptable across different cultural worldviews.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":47952,"journal":{"name":"Resource and Energy Economics","volume":"85 ","pages":"Article 101552"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2026-01-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145925200","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-12-26DOI: 10.1016/j.reseneeco.2025.101551
Pierre-Alexandre Mahieu , Klaus Glenk , Jürgen Meyerhoff
Nearly all discrete choice experiments in environmental valuation have a cost attribute to estimate willingness to pay for the goods and services in question. The composition of the cost vector, however, has received little attention in the literature so far. This paper focuses on whether or not the cost vector should include "prominent amounts" (e.g., €1, €2, €5, €10, €20, €50). On the one hand, these amounts are familiar to participants as they are used in everyday life (e.g., coins or banknotes). On the other hand, respondents may not consider the amounts to reflect the cost of environmental programs, affecting credibility. In a review of published discrete choice experiment articles on wind energy, we find little information on how the levels of the cost attribute vectors were chosen and why prominent amounts are (not) included, reflecting the lack of guidance in the literature. In a split-sample survey on renewable energy, we find that the composition of the cost vector does not affect choice frequencies or the perceived difficulty of the task. However, we observe that the cost vector impacts credibility, suggesting that it may impact the validity of the welfare estimates.
{"title":"Prominent numbers in DCE cost vectors: A review and an application to wind energy","authors":"Pierre-Alexandre Mahieu , Klaus Glenk , Jürgen Meyerhoff","doi":"10.1016/j.reseneeco.2025.101551","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.reseneeco.2025.101551","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Nearly all discrete choice experiments in environmental valuation have a cost attribute to estimate willingness to pay for the goods and services in question. The composition of the cost vector, however, has received little attention in the literature so far. This paper focuses on whether or not the cost vector should include \"prominent amounts\" (e.g., €1, €2, €5, €10, €20, €50). On the one hand, these amounts are familiar to participants as they are used in everyday life (e.g., coins or banknotes). On the other hand, respondents may not consider the amounts to reflect the cost of environmental programs, affecting credibility. In a review of published discrete choice experiment articles on wind energy, we find little information on how the levels of the cost attribute vectors were chosen and why prominent amounts are (not) included, reflecting the lack of guidance in the literature. In a split-sample survey on renewable energy, we find that the composition of the cost vector does not affect choice frequencies or the perceived difficulty of the task. However, we observe that the cost vector impacts credibility, suggesting that it may impact the validity of the welfare estimates.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":47952,"journal":{"name":"Resource and Energy Economics","volume":"85 ","pages":"Article 101551"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2025-12-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145884550","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-12-26DOI: 10.1016/j.reseneeco.2025.101550
Charles F. Mason , Luca Taschini , Neil A. Wilmot
Several recent policies have been promulgated to reduce reliance on fossil fuels in the United States (US) transportation sector. To achieve these ambitious goals, it seems highly likely that refineries will have to accommodate significant inflows of soybeans imported from Brazil; important large-scale (irreversible) investments will also be required. These investments are subject to substantial uncertainty, underscoring the importance of characterizing the stochastic nature of soybean prices. In this paper we investigate the potential presence of jumps in four key prices: the spot price for soybeans and ethanol, in both Brazil the US. We find compelling empirical evidence for the importance of jumps in both markets. The presence of jumps in these markets has important implications for large scale infrastructure investments, as would be necessary to produce ethanol-based motor vehicle fuels, as well as ecological implications associated with deforestation that is likely to accompany any increases in Brazilian soybean production.
{"title":"Jumping beans: Implications of fat tails in international soybean and biofuels markets","authors":"Charles F. Mason , Luca Taschini , Neil A. Wilmot","doi":"10.1016/j.reseneeco.2025.101550","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.reseneeco.2025.101550","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Several recent policies have been promulgated to reduce reliance on fossil fuels in the United States (US) transportation sector. To achieve these ambitious goals, it seems highly likely that refineries will have to accommodate significant inflows of soybeans imported from Brazil; important large-scale (irreversible) investments will also be required. These investments are subject to substantial uncertainty, underscoring the importance of characterizing the stochastic nature of soybean prices. In this paper we investigate the potential presence of jumps in four key prices: the spot price for soybeans and ethanol, in both Brazil the US. We find compelling empirical evidence for the importance of jumps in both markets. The presence of jumps in these markets has important implications for large scale infrastructure investments, as would be necessary to produce ethanol-based motor vehicle fuels, as well as ecological implications associated with deforestation that is likely to accompany any increases in Brazilian soybean production.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":47952,"journal":{"name":"Resource and Energy Economics","volume":"85 ","pages":"Article 101550"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2025-12-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145884551","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-12-16DOI: 10.1016/j.reseneeco.2025.101549
Fayu Chong , Gregory S. Amacher , Kelly Cobourn
Deforestation of native forests is currently driving tropical forest systems across potentially irreversible tipping points, leading to a dramatic loss in globally important ecosystem services. This article explores these tipping points when decision makers cannot perfectly control nor predict deforestation due to uncertainty arising from socio-economic and biophysical factors. We present a model of deforestation defined by a stochastic process with drift and volatility that reflect long- and short-term shocks. In a numerical simulation representative of the Brazilian Amazon, we identify the most influential drivers of the timing and possibility of collapse, offering an estimated time window of tipping threats. Our results indicate that in the context of stochastic deforestation, targeting primary forest harvesting costs is a more efficient policy approach to forestall collapse than efforts to improve land-tenure rights or ecosystem service provision in secondary forests. This suggests that as shocks to native forest become more prevalent through climate change, investments in policies to discourage illegal harvest and technologies to accurately detect deforestation are paramount in avoiding ecosystem collapse.
{"title":"Stochastic deforestation and ecosystem collapse","authors":"Fayu Chong , Gregory S. Amacher , Kelly Cobourn","doi":"10.1016/j.reseneeco.2025.101549","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.reseneeco.2025.101549","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Deforestation of native forests is currently driving tropical forest systems across potentially irreversible tipping points, leading to a dramatic loss in globally important ecosystem services. This article explores these tipping points when decision makers cannot perfectly control nor predict deforestation due to uncertainty arising from socio-economic and biophysical factors. We present a model of deforestation defined by a stochastic process with drift and volatility that reflect long- and short-term shocks. In a numerical simulation representative of the Brazilian Amazon, we identify the most influential drivers of the timing and possibility of collapse, offering an estimated time window of tipping threats. Our results indicate that in the context of stochastic deforestation, targeting primary forest harvesting costs is a more efficient policy approach to forestall collapse than efforts to improve land-tenure rights or ecosystem service provision in secondary forests. This suggests that as shocks to native forest become more prevalent through climate change, investments in policies to discourage illegal harvest and technologies to accurately detect deforestation are paramount in avoiding ecosystem collapse.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":47952,"journal":{"name":"Resource and Energy Economics","volume":"85 ","pages":"Article 101549"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2025-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145790452","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-11-19DOI: 10.1016/j.reseneeco.2025.101539
Kennet Christian Uggeldahl , Thomas Lundhede , Jette Bredahl Jacobsen , Søren Bøye Olsen
Assessing the value of changes in environmental conditions using stated preference valuation studies requires accurate quantification and communication of outcomes that affect human welfare. Using a stated choice experiment to estimate primarily nonuse value of changes in biodiversity per se, i.e., as an inherent characteristic of an ecosystem, we employ a composite metric known as the Biodiversity Intactness Index to capture and communicate the multifaceted nature of biodiversity. However, using complex ecological indices to value abstract concepts might make respondents more susceptible to effects related to the framing of the choice context, thereby raising concerns about validity. Employing a split sample design, we find that value estimates depend on the spatial context in which biodiversity improvements are presented: the larger the spatial scale, the smaller the value. Varying the range of the biodiversity improvement attribute in additional split samples, we find that in two out of the three tested spatial framings, the results are insensitive to the presented attribute range. Respondents thus appear to react to the absolute, rather than the relative, size of the improvements presented. The results from these two spatial framings also exhibit sensitivity to scope, supported by both internal and external scope tests. These findings might alleviate some of the validity concerns associated with employing abstract ecological indices in stated preference valuation studies.
{"title":"The effects of spatial framing and attribute range on the measurement of nonuse values of biodiversity improvements","authors":"Kennet Christian Uggeldahl , Thomas Lundhede , Jette Bredahl Jacobsen , Søren Bøye Olsen","doi":"10.1016/j.reseneeco.2025.101539","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.reseneeco.2025.101539","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Assessing the value of changes in environmental conditions using stated preference valuation studies requires accurate quantification and communication of outcomes that affect human welfare. Using a stated choice experiment to estimate primarily nonuse value of changes in biodiversity per se, i.e., as an inherent characteristic of an ecosystem, we employ a composite metric known as the Biodiversity Intactness Index to capture and communicate the multifaceted nature of biodiversity. However, using complex ecological indices to value abstract concepts might make respondents more susceptible to effects related to the framing of the choice context, thereby raising concerns about validity. Employing a split sample design, we find that value estimates depend on the spatial context in which biodiversity improvements are presented: the larger the spatial scale, the smaller the value. Varying the range of the biodiversity improvement attribute in additional split samples, we find that in two out of the three tested spatial framings, the results are insensitive to the presented attribute range. Respondents thus appear to react to the absolute, rather than the relative, size of the improvements presented. The results from these two spatial framings also exhibit sensitivity to scope, supported by both internal and external scope tests. These findings might alleviate some of the validity concerns associated with employing abstract ecological indices in stated preference valuation studies.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":47952,"journal":{"name":"Resource and Energy Economics","volume":"85 ","pages":"Article 101539"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2025-11-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145617376","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-10-24DOI: 10.1016/j.reseneeco.2025.101538
Scott Behmer
There is an active debate among economists on the value of using clean energy subsidies to address climate change. However, the models used to inform this debate typically make a common simplifying assumption: the preferences of the government are kept constant over time. In reality, control of the government often rotates between parties with very different policy preferences. This paper finds that adding turnover in party control of the government can have significant implications. Specifically, when the two parties are sufficiently polarized, the party more concerned about the environment (“the green party”) finds it optimal to subsidize irreversible investments in clean energy, even when carbon taxes are available and can be placed at any level. We then provide quantitative evidence on the green party’s optimal subsidy using two approaches: sufficient statistic estimation and a calibration exercise. The results suggest that the optimal subsidy is quantitatively significant, between 5% and 17% of the cost of investment. Furthermore, if the green party naively uses just a carbon tax, clean investment is 34% lower than when they use their optimal subsidy.
{"title":"Sticks vs carrots: Climate policy under government turnover","authors":"Scott Behmer","doi":"10.1016/j.reseneeco.2025.101538","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.reseneeco.2025.101538","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>There is an active debate among economists on the value of using clean energy subsidies to address climate change. However, the models used to inform this debate typically make a common simplifying assumption: the preferences of the government are kept constant over time. In reality, control of the government often rotates between parties with very different policy preferences. This paper finds that adding turnover in party control of the government can have significant implications. Specifically, when the two parties are sufficiently polarized, the party more concerned about the environment (“the green party”) finds it optimal to subsidize irreversible investments in clean energy, even when carbon taxes are available and can be placed at any level. We then provide quantitative evidence on the green party’s optimal subsidy using two approaches: sufficient statistic estimation and a calibration exercise. The results suggest that the optimal subsidy is quantitatively significant, between 5% and 17% of the cost of investment. Furthermore, if the green party naively uses just a carbon tax, clean investment is 34% lower than when they use their optimal subsidy.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":47952,"journal":{"name":"Resource and Energy Economics","volume":"84 ","pages":"Article 101538"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2025-10-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145415904","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-10-14DOI: 10.1016/j.reseneeco.2025.101537
Ana Espinola-Arredondo , Felix Munoz-Garcia , Françeska Tomori
We examine how an extreme climate event affects the incentives of regulators to invest in adaptation measures that reduce the impact on firms’ production costs, and how this investment affects environmental policy and firms’ incentives to invest in abatement. Different government agencies implement these policies (adaptation and emission fees) and can exhibit asymmetric preferences for pollution. We find that investment in adaptation and abatement are complements, and more likely climate events decrease firms’ investment in abatement. We also find that severe climate events can induce less investment in adaptation, as they can be used as a tool to reduce expected output and pollution. In addition, we show that symmetric agencies induce a lower investment in adaptation. Finally, we separately identify the welfare gains from adaptation and environmental policy.
{"title":"Climate events and adaptation: Effects on environmental policy and abatement","authors":"Ana Espinola-Arredondo , Felix Munoz-Garcia , Françeska Tomori","doi":"10.1016/j.reseneeco.2025.101537","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.reseneeco.2025.101537","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>We examine how an extreme climate event affects the incentives of regulators to invest in adaptation measures that reduce the impact on firms’ production costs, and how this investment affects environmental policy and firms’ incentives to invest in abatement. Different government agencies implement these policies (adaptation and emission fees) and can exhibit asymmetric preferences for pollution. We find that investment in adaptation and abatement are complements, and more likely climate events decrease firms’ investment in abatement. We also find that severe climate events can induce less investment in adaptation, as they can be used as a tool to reduce expected output and pollution. In addition, we show that symmetric agencies induce a lower investment in adaptation. Finally, we separately identify the welfare gains from adaptation and environmental policy.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":47952,"journal":{"name":"Resource and Energy Economics","volume":"84 ","pages":"Article 101537"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2025-10-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145324325","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Storm is a major risk in forestry. However, due to the more or less pessimistic scenarios of future climate change, storm frequency is now ambiguous and only partially known (i.e., scenario ambiguity). Furthermore, within each scenario, the quantification of storm frequency is also ambiguous due to the differences in risk quantification by experts, creating a second level of ambiguity (i.e., frequency ambiguity). In such an ambiguous context, knowledge of the future climate through accurate information about this risk is fundamental and can be of significant value. In this paper, we question how ambiguity and ambiguity aversion affect forest management, in particular, optimal cutting age. Using a classical Faustmann framework of forest rotation decisions, we compare three different situations: risk, scenario ambiguity and frequency ambiguity. We show that in a context of risk or scenario ambiguity, a forest owner characterized by risk aversion and ambiguity aversion reduces the optimal cutting age, whereas in a context of frequency ambiguity the owner does not change it. The optimal cutting age is always reduced when risk aversion increases, whereas an increase in ambiguity aversion never has an impact. The value of information that resolves scenario ambiguity is low and it is almost null for frequency ambiguity.
{"title":"Ambiguity, value of information and forest rotation decision under storm risk","authors":"Patrice Loisel , Marielle Brunette , Stéphane Couture","doi":"10.1016/j.reseneeco.2025.101536","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.reseneeco.2025.101536","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Storm is a major risk in forestry. However, due to the more or less pessimistic scenarios of future climate change, storm frequency is now ambiguous and only partially known (i.e., scenario ambiguity). Furthermore, within each scenario, the quantification of storm frequency is also ambiguous due to the differences in risk quantification by experts, creating a second level of ambiguity (i.e., frequency ambiguity). In such an ambiguous context, knowledge of the future climate through accurate information about this risk is fundamental and can be of significant value. In this paper, we question how ambiguity and ambiguity aversion affect forest management, in particular, optimal cutting age. Using a classical Faustmann framework of forest rotation decisions, we compare three different situations: risk, scenario ambiguity and frequency ambiguity. We show that in a context of risk or scenario ambiguity, a forest owner characterized by risk aversion and ambiguity aversion reduces the optimal cutting age, whereas in a context of frequency ambiguity the owner does not change it. The optimal cutting age is always reduced when risk aversion increases, whereas an increase in ambiguity aversion never has an impact. The value of information that resolves scenario ambiguity is low and it is almost null for frequency ambiguity.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":47952,"journal":{"name":"Resource and Energy Economics","volume":"84 ","pages":"Article 101536"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2025-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145266205","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-08-21DOI: 10.1016/j.reseneeco.2025.101531
Marion Davin, Dimitri Dubois, Katrin Erdlenbruch, Marc Willinger
Experimenting with dynamic games raises issues about implementing discounting in experiments. Theoretical rational decision-makers evaluate payoff streams by converting them to a reference period, often “time zero.” In experiments, subjects can adapt their strategy continuously. We explore individual behavior in a dynamic resource extraction experiment with two treatments: “z-discounting” (evaluating gains at time zero) and “p-discounting” (evaluating gains in present-time equivalents). Contrary to theoretical predictions, our data shows a significant positive treatment effect, indicating more substantial extraction under p-discounting. This challenges the theoretical model and prompts discussion on methodological considerations for discounting in laboratory settings.
{"title":"Discounting and extraction behavior in continuous time resource experiments","authors":"Marion Davin, Dimitri Dubois, Katrin Erdlenbruch, Marc Willinger","doi":"10.1016/j.reseneeco.2025.101531","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.reseneeco.2025.101531","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Experimenting with dynamic games raises issues about implementing discounting in experiments. Theoretical rational decision-makers evaluate payoff streams by converting them to a reference period, often “time zero.” In experiments, subjects can adapt their strategy continuously. We explore individual behavior in a dynamic resource extraction experiment with two treatments: “z-discounting” (evaluating gains at time zero) and “p-discounting” (evaluating gains in present-time equivalents). Contrary to theoretical predictions, our data shows a significant positive treatment effect, indicating more substantial extraction under p-discounting. This challenges the theoretical model and prompts discussion on methodological considerations for discounting in laboratory settings.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":47952,"journal":{"name":"Resource and Energy Economics","volume":"84 ","pages":"Article 101531"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2025-08-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144912535","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号