Evaluating environmental policy: the use and usefulness of experiments

References

• Achtnicht, M. 2011. “Do Environmental Benefits Matter? Evidence from a Choice Experiment among House Owners in Germany.” Ecological Economics 70 (11): 2191–2200.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Al-Ubaydli, O., M. S. Lee, J. A. List, C. L. Mackevicius, and D. Suskind. 2019a. How Can Experiments Play a Greater Role in Public Policy ? 12 Proposals from an Economic Model of Scaling, (October), 1–44.
   Google Scholar
• Al-Ubaydli, O., J. A. List, and D. Suskind. 2019b. The Science of Using Science: Towards an Understanding of the Threats to Scaling Experiments (Working Paper No. 25848).
   Google Scholar
• Alm, J., K. M. Bloomquist, and M. McKee. 2015. “On the External Validity of Laboratory Tax Compliance Experiments.” Economic Inquiry 53 (2): 1170–1186.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Angrist, J. D., and J. S. Pischke. 2010. “The Credibility Revolution in Empirical Economics: How Better Research Design is Taking the Con Out of Econometrics.” Journal of Economic Perspectives 24 (2): 3–30.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Athey, S., and G. W. Imbens. 2017. “The State of Applied Econometrics: Causality and Policy Evaluation.” Journal of Economic Perspectives 31 (2): 3–32.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bamberger, M., V. Rao, and M. Woolcock. 2010. “Using Mixed Methods in Monitoring and Evaluation: Experiences from International Development.” World Bank Policy Research Working Paper, 5245.
   Google Scholar
• Banerjee, A., R. Banerji, J. Berry, E. Duflo, H. Kannan, S. Mukerji, … M. Walton. 2017. “From Proof of Concept to Scalable Policies: Challenges and Solutions, with an Application.” Journal of Economic Perspectives 31 (4): 73–102.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Birol, E., and P. Koundouri. 2008. Choice Experiments Informing Environmental Policy: A European Perspective. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Bouma, J. A., J. Brandsma, and M. Koetse. 2020a. Natuurinclusieve landbouw: wat doen boeren en wat willen boeren doen? Verkenning beleidsopties voor natuur-inclusieve landbouw, PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency: the Hague.
   Google Scholar
• Bouma, J. A., and M. Koetse. 2019a. “Mind the Gap: Stated Versus Revealed Donations and the Differential Role of Behavioral Factors.” Land Economics 95 (2), 225–245..
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bouma, J. A., T. B. Nguyen, E. Van Der Heijden, and J. J. Dijk. 2020b. “Analysing Group Contract Design Using a Threshold Public Goods Experiment.” European Review of Agricultural Economics 47 (3): 1250–1275.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bouma, J. A., M. Verbraak, F. Dietz, and R. Brouwer. 2019b. “Policy Mix: Mess or Merit?” Journal of Environmental Economics and Policy 8 (1): 32–47.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brent, D. A., L. Friesen, L. Gangadharan, and A. Leibbrandt. 2017. “Behavioral Insights from Field Experiments in Environmental Economics.” International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics 10: 95–143.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Broch, S. W., and S. E. Vedel. 2012. “Using Choice Experiments to Investigate the Policy Relevance of Heterogeneity in Farmer Agri-environmental Contract Preferences.” Environmental and Resource Economics 51 (4): 561–581.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Camerer, C. 2011. The Promise and Success of Lab-field Generalizability in Experimental Economics: A Critical Reply to Levitt and List.
   Google Scholar
• Carbone, J. C., D. G. Hallstrom, and V. K. Smith. 2006. “Can Natural Experiments Measure Behavioral Responses to Environmental Risks?” Environmental and Resource Economics 33 (3): 273–297.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carlsson, F., and O. Johansson-Stenman. 2012. “Behavioral Economics and Environmental Policy.” Annual Review of Resource Economics 4 (1): 75–99.
   Google Scholar
• Carlsson, F., and P. Martinsson. 2001. “Do Hypothetical and Actual Marginal Willingness to Pay Differ in Choice Experiments?: Application to the Valuation of the Environment.” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 41 (2): 179–192.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Charness, G., U. Gneezy, and M. A. Kuhn. 2012. “Experimental Methods: Between-subject and Within-subject Design.” Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization 81 (1): 1–8.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Charness, G., U. Gneezy, and M. A. Kuhn. 2013. “Experimental Methods: Extra-laboratory Experiments-extending the Reach of Experimental Economics.” Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization 91: 93–100.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chetty, R. 2015. “Behavioral Economics and Public Policy: A Pragmatic Perspective.” American Economic Review 105 (5): 1–33.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Christensen, G., and E. Miguel. 2018. “Transparency, Reproducibility, and the Credibility of Economics Research.” Journal of Economic Literature 56 (3): 920–980.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Colen, L., S. Gomez y Paloma, U. Latacz-Lohmann, M. Lefebvre, R. Préget, and S. Thoyer. 2016. “Economic Experiments as a Tool for Agricultural Policy Evaluation: Insights from the European CAP.” Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue Canadienne D'agroeconomie 64 (4): 667–694.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Collins, A. M., D. Coughlin, and N. Randall. 2019. “Engaging Environmental Policy-makers with Systematic Reviews: Challenges, Solutions and Lessons Learned.” Environmental Evidence 8 (2): 1–8.
   Google Scholar
• Croson, R., and N. Treich. 2014. “Behavioral Environmental Economics: Promises and Challenges.” Environmental and Resource Economics 58 (3): 335–351.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• d’Adda, G., V. Capraro, and M. Tavoni. 2017. “Push, Don’t Nudge: Behavioral Spillovers and Policy Instruments.” Economics Letters 154: 92–95.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dessart, F. J., J. Barreiro-Hurlé, and R. van Bavel. 2019. “Behavioural Factors Affecting the Adoption of Sustainable Farming Practices: A Policy-oriented Review.” European Review of Agricultural Economics 46 (3): 417–471.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dolan, P., and M. M. Galizzi. 2014. “Getting Policy-makers to Listen to Field Experiments.” Oxford Review of Economic Policy 30 (4): 725–752.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dolan, P., and M. M. Galizzi. 2015. “Like Ripples on a Pond: Behavioral Spillovers and Their Implications for Research and Policy.” Journal of Economic Psychology 47: 1–16.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Drèze, J. 2018. “Evidence, Policy and Politics: A Commentary on Deaton and Cartwright.” Social Science and Medicine 210 (1): 45–47.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Duflo, E. 2017. “Richard T. Ely Lecture: The Economist as Plumber.” American Economic Review 107 (5): 1–26.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Espinosa-Goded, M., J. Barreiro-Hurlé, and E. Ruto. 2010. “What do Farmers Want from Agri-environmental Scheme Design? A Choice Experiment Approach.” Journal of Agricultural Economics 61 (2): 259–273.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Falk, A., and J. J. Heckman. 2009. “Lab Experiments are a Major Source of Knowledge in the Social Sciences.” science 326 (5952): 535–538.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ferraro, P. J. 2009. “Counterfactual Thinking and Impact Evaluation in Environmental Policy.” New Directions for Evaluation 2009 (122): 75–84.
   Google Scholar
• Friesen, L., and L. Gangadharan. 2013. “Environmental Markets: What do We Learn from the Lab?” Journal of Economic Surveys 27 (3): 515–535.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frondel, M., and C. M. Schmidt. 2005. “Evaluating Environmental Programs: The Perspective of Modern Evaluation Research.” Ecological Economics 55 (4): 515–526.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Galizzi, M. M. 2012. “Label, Nudge or Tax? A Review of Health Policies for Risky Behaviours.” Journal of Public Health Research 1 (1): 14.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Galizzi, M. M. 2014. “What Is Really Behavioral in Behavioral Health Policy? And Does It Work?” Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy 36 (1): 25–60.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Galizzi, M. M. 2017. “Behavioral Aspects of Policy Formulation: Experiments, Behavioral Insights, Nudges.” Handbook of Policy Formulation, 410–432.
   Google Scholar
• Galizzi, M. M., and D. Navarro-Martínez. 2018. “On the External Validity of Social Preference Games: A Systematic Lab-field Study.” Management Science 65 (3): 976–1002.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gächter, S. 2006. Conditional Cooperation: Behavioral Regularities from the Lab and the Field and Their Policy Implications (No. 2006-03). CeDEx Discussion Paper, The University of Nottingham.
   Google Scholar
• Greenstone, M., and T. Gayer. 2009. “Quasi-experimental and Experimental Approaches to Environmental Economics.” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 57 (1): 21–44.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harrison, G. W., and J. A. List. 2004. “Field Experiments.” Journal of Economic Literature 42 (4): 1009–1055.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hertin, J., J. Turnpenny, A. Jordan, M. Nilsson, D. Russel, and B. Nykvist. 2009. “Rationalising the Policy Mess? Ex Ante Policy Assessment and the Utilisation of Knowledge in the Policy Process.” Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space 41 (5): 1185–1200.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hoyos, D. 2010. “The State of the Art of Environmental Valuation with Discrete Choice Experiments.” Ecological Economics 69 (8): 1595–1603.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Imbens, G. 2018. “Understanding and Misunderstanding Randomized Controlled Trials: A Commentary on Deaton and Cartwright.” Social Science & Medicine 1982 (210): 50–52.
   Google Scholar
• Johnston, R. J., K. J. Boyle, W. Adamowicz, J. Bennett, R. Brouwer, T. A. Cameron, W. M. Hanemann, et al. 2017. “Contemporary Guidance for Stated Preference Studies.” Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists 4 (2): 319–405.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kesternich, M., C. Reif, and D. Rübbelke. 2017. “Recent Trends in Behavioral Environmental Economics.” Environmental and Resource Economics 67 (3): 403–411.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kling, C. L., D. J. Phaneuf, and J. Zhao. 2012. “From Exxon to BP: Has Some Number Become Better Than no Number?” Journal of Economic Perspectives 26 (4): 3–26.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuhfuss, L., R. Préget, S. Thoyer, and N. Hanley. 2016. “Nudging Farmers to Enrol Land Into Agri-environmental Schemes: The Role of a Collective Bonus.” European Review of Agricultural Economics 43 (4): 609–636.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Langeveld, G., D. Van Soest, C. Midden, J. Mastop, A. Weenk, M. Van Rhee, S. Pietersma, K. De Goede, and M. Boomsma. 2020. Improving Waste Separation in High-rise Buildings Increased Source Separation of Organic Waste in Cities Through Behavioural Change. www.vang-hha.nl.
   Google Scholar
• Levitt, S. D., and J. List. 2007. “What Do Laboratory Experiments Measuring Social Preferences Reveal about the Real World?” Journal of Economic Perspectives 21 (2): 153–174.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levitt, S. D., and J. A. List. 2009. “Field Experiments in Economics: The Past, the Present, and the Future.” European Economic Review 53 (1): 1–18.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lienhoop, N., and R. Brouwer. 2015. “Agri-environmental Policy Valuation: Farmers’ Contract Design Preferences for Afforestation Schemes.” Land Use Policy 42: 568–577.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• List, J. A. 2007. “Field Experiments: A Bridge Between Lab and Naturally Occurring Data.” The BE Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy 5: 2.
   Google Scholar
• List, J. A. 2011. “Why Economists Should Conduct Field Experiments and 14 Tips for Pulling One Off.” Journal of Economic Perspectives 25 (3): 3–16.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• List, J. A., and R. Metcalfe. 2014. “Field Experiments in the Developed World: An Introduction.” Oxford Review of Economic Policy 30 (4): 585–596.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• List, J. A., and M. K. Price. 2016. “The Use of Field Experiments in Environmental and Resource Economics.” Review of Environmental Economics and Policy 10 (2): 206–225.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ludwig, J., J. R. Kling, and S. Mullainathan. 2011. “Mechanism Experiments and Policy Evaluations.” The Journal of Economic Perspectives 25 (3): 17–38.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ma, S., S. M. Swinton, F. Lupi, and C. Jolejole-Foreman. 2012. “Farmers’ Willingness to Participate in Payment-for-environmental-services Programmes.” Journal of Agricultural Economics 63 (3): 604–626.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Macura, B., M. Suškevičs, R. Garside, K. Hannes, R. Rees, and R. Rodela. 2019. “Systematic Reviews of Qualitative Evidence for Environmental Policy and Management: An Overview of Different Methodological Options.” Environmental Evidence 8 (24): 1–11.
   Google Scholar
• Mickwitz, P., and M. Birnbaum. 2009. “Key Insights for the Design of Environmental Evaluations.” New Directions for Evaluation 2009 (122): 105–112.
   Google Scholar
• Mullainathan, S., and R. H. Thaler. 2000. Behavioral Economics.NBER Working paper (Vol. 3).
   Google Scholar
• Normann, H. T., and R. Ricciuti. 2009. “Laboratory Experiments for Economic Policy Making.” Journal of Economic Surveys 23 (3): 407–432.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• OECD. 2017. Tackling Environmental Problems with the Help of Behavioural Insights. Paris: OECD Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Palm-Forster, L. H., P. J. Ferraro, N. Janusch, C. A. Vossler, and K. D. Messer. 2019. “Behavioral and Experimental Agri-environmental Research: Methodological Challenges, Literature Gaps, and Recommendations.” . Environmental and Resource Economics 73 (3): 1–24.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pattanayak, S. K. 2009. Rough Guide to Impact Evaluation of Environmental and Development Programs. Kathmandu, NP: SANDEE.
   Google Scholar
• Price, M. K. 2014. “Using Field Experiments to Address Environmental Externalities and Resource Scarcity: Major Lessons Learned and New Directions for Future Research.” Oxford Review of Economic Policy 30 (4): 621–638.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rodrik, D. 2008. The New Development Economics: We Shall Experiment, but How Shall We Learn? HKS Working Paper No. RWP08-055. Cambridge: Harvard.
   Google Scholar
• Rodrik, D. 2010. “Diagnostics Before Prescription.” Journal of Economic Perspectives 24 (3): 33–44.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roe, B. E., and D. R. Just. 2009. “Internal and External Validity in Economics Research: Tradeoffs Between Experiments, Field Experiments, Natural Experiments, and Field Data.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 91 (5): 1266–1271.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ruto, E., and G. Garrod. 2009. “Investigating Farmers’ Preferences for the Design of Agri-environment Schemes: A Choice Experiment Approach.” Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 52 (5): 631–647.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schmalensee, R., and R. N. Stavins. 2013. “The SO 2 Allowance Trading System: the Ironic History of a Grand Policy Experiment.” Journal of Economic Perspectives 27 (1): 103–122.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schulz, N., G. Breustedt, and U. Latacz-Lohmann. 2014. “Assessing Farmers’ Willingness to Accept “Greening”: Insights from a Discrete Choice Experiment in Germany.” Journal of Agricultural Economics 65 (1): 26–48.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shadish, W. R., T. D. Cook, and D. T. Campbell. 2002. Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Generalized Causal Inference. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.
   Google Scholar
• Shogren, J. F. 2012. Behavioural Economics and Environmental Incentives. OECD Environment Working Paper No. 49.
   Google Scholar
• Shogren, J. F., and L. O. Taylor. 2008. “On Behavioral-Environmental Economics.” Review of Environmental Economics and Policy 2 (1): 26–44.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Snilstveit, B. 2012. “Systematic Reviews: From ‘Bare Bones’ Reviews to Policy Relevance.” Journal of Development Effectiveness 4 (3): 388–408.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sturm, B., and J. Weimann. 2006. “Experiments in Environmental Economics and Some Close Relatives.” Journal of Economic Surveys 20 (3): 419–457.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Venkatachalam, L. 2008. “Behavioral Economics for Environmental Policy.” Ecological Economics 67 (4): 640–645.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Villanueva, A. J., K. Glenk, and M. Rodríguez-Entrena. 2017. “Protest Responses and Willingness to Accept: Ecosystem Services Providers’ Preferences Towards Incentive-Based Schemes.” Journal of Agricultural Economics 68 (3): 801–821.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vossler, C. A., M. Doyon, and D. Rondeau. 2012. “Truth in Consequentiality: Theory and Field Evidence on Discrete Choice Experiments.” American Economic Journal: Microeconomics 4: 145–171.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vringer, Kees, Eline van der Heijden, Daan van Soest, Herman Vollebergh, and Frank Dietz. 2017. “Sustainable Consumption Dilemmas.” Sustainability 2017 (9): 942. doi:https://doi.org/10.3390/su9060942. MDPI, June 2017.
   Google Scholar
• Wade, J., and N. Eyre. 2015. Evaluation Good Practice: Is ‘Good Enough’ Better Than ‘Perfect’?, Proceedings ECEEE summer study – Panel: 8. Monitoring and Evaluation: Building Confidence And Enhancing, Practices. Accessed December 9, 2020. https://www.eceee.org/library/conference_proceedings/eceee_Summer_Studies/2015.
   Google Scholar
• Werner, P., and A. Riedl 2019. “The Role of Experiments for Policy Esign.” In Handbook of Research Methods and Applications in Experimental Economics, Chapter 15, edited by A. Schram and A. Ule. Edward Elgar: Cheltenham.
   Google Scholar
• Wichman, C. J. 2017. “Information Provision and Consumer Behavior: A Natural Experiment in Billing Frequency.” Journal of Public Economics 152: 13–33.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Woolcock, M. 2013. “Using Case Studies to Explore the External Validity of ‘Complex’ Development Interventions.” Evaluation 19 (3): 229–248.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar