IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolec/v156y2019icp511-518.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Mottled motivations and narrow incentives: Exploring limitations of direct incentive policies in the Western Ghats, India

Author

Listed:
  • Bose, Arshiya
  • Garcia, Claude
  • Vira, Bhaskar

Abstract

Market-based instruments (MBIs) have proliferated to address environmental degradation outside Protected Areas (PAs). Coffee plantations have been one of the most active spaces for MBIs through third-party certifications. In the certification context, the logic of extrinsic motivators is explicitly used to incentivise coffee growers in the short-term to adopt environmentally sustainable and socially responsible production, including maintaining native tree species on plantations. Coffee growers that qualify with the environmental and social standards are audited, certified and eligible to the incentive. However, there is little empirical evidence on what encourages people to adopt and maintain an ecologically compatible lifestyle. This paper attempts to question the assumption regarding the importance of extrinsic catalysts as a motivation for changes in land management strategies. We test this hypothesis in the Indian context, where the history of direct payments for conservation has been very limited. Our work finally ask the question: have conservation programmes that use direct payments ignored intrinsic motivations in their programme design? The empirical findings presented in this paper contribute to a better understanding of the range of psychological, behavioral and social factors that drive these land-use and land management decisions and explicitly engage with debates on crowding-in and crowding-out in conservation.

Suggested Citation

  • Bose, Arshiya & Garcia, Claude & Vira, Bhaskar, 2019. "Mottled motivations and narrow incentives: Exploring limitations of direct incentive policies in the Western Ghats, India," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 511-518.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:156:y:2019:i:c:p:511-518
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2016.09.007
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800915306625
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2016.09.007?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Norman Myers & Russell A. Mittermeier & Cristina G. Mittermeier & Gustavo A. B. da Fonseca & Jennifer Kent, 2000. "Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities," Nature, Nature, vol. 403(6772), pages 853-858, February.
    2. Frey, Bruno S & Oberholzer-Gee, Felix, 1997. "The Cost of Price Incentives: An Empirical Analysis of Motivation Crowding-Out," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 87(4), pages 746-755, September.
    3. Robert Ryan & Donna Erickson & Raymond De Young, 2003. "Farmers' Motivations for Adopting Conservation Practices along Riparian Zones in a Mid-western Agricultural Watershed," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 46(1), pages 19-37.
    4. Perfecto, Ivette & Vandermeer, John & Mas, Alex & Pinto, Lorena Soto, 2005. "Biodiversity, yield, and shade coffee certification," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(4), pages 435-446, September.
    5. Carl Mellström & Magnus Johannesson, 2008. "Crowding Out in Blood Donation: Was Titmuss Right?," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 6(4), pages 845-863, June.
    6. Kilian, Bernard & Jones, Connie & Pratt, Lawrence & Villalobos, Andres, 2006. "Is sustainable agriculture a viable strategy to improve farm income in Central America? A case study on coffee," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 59(3), pages 322-330, March.
    7. Engel, Stefanie & Pagiola, Stefano & Wunder, Sven, 2008. "Designing payments for environmental services in theory and practice: An overview of the issues," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(4), pages 663-674, May.
    8. Muradian, Roldan & Pelupessy, Wim, 2005. "Governing the coffee chain: The role of voluntary regulatory Systems," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 33(12), pages 2029-2044, December.
    9. Bruno S. Frey & Reto Jegen, 2001. "Motivation Crowding Theory," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(5), pages 589-611, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Isyaku, Usman, 2021. "What motivates communities to participate in forest conservation? A study of REDD+ pilot sites in Cross River, Nigeria," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).
    2. Grillos, Tara & Bottazzi, Patrick & Crespo, David & Asquith, Nigel & Jones, Julia P.G., 2019. "In-kind conservation payments crowd in environmental values and increase support for government intervention: A randomized trial in Bolivia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 166(C), pages 1-1.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kosoy, Nicolás & Corbera, Esteve, 2010. "Payments for ecosystem services as commodity fetishism," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(6), pages 1228-1236, April.
    2. Matthew Chao & Geoffrey Fisher, 2022. "Self-Interested Giving: The Relationship Between Conditional Gifts, Charitable Donations, and Donor Self-Interestedness," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(6), pages 4537-4567, June.
    3. Newman, George E. & Jeremy Shen, Y., 2012. "The counterintuitive effects of thank-you gifts on charitable giving," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 33(5), pages 973-983.
    4. Magnus Bergquist & Andreas Nilsson & Emma Ejelöv, 2019. "Contest-Based and Norm-Based Interventions: (How) Do They Differ in Attitudes, Norms, and Behaviors?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-17, January.
    5. Joachim Fuenfgelt & Stefan Baumgaertner, 2012. "Regulation of morally responsible agents with motivation crowding," Working Paper Series in Economics 241, University of Lüneburg, Institute of Economics.
    6. Joan Costa-Font & Mireia Jofre-Bonet & Steven T. Yen, 2013. "Not All Incentives Wash Out the Warm Glow: The Case of Blood Donation Revisited," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 66(4), pages 529-551, November.
    7. Valkila, Joni, 2009. "Fair Trade organic coffee production in Nicaragua -- Sustainable development or a poverty trap?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(12), pages 3018-3025, October.
    8. Goette, Lorenz & Stutzer, Alois, 2020. "Blood donations and incentives: Evidence from a field experiment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 170(C), pages 52-74.
    9. Martinsson, Peter & Villegas-Palacio, Clara, 2010. "Does disclosure crowd out cooperation?," Working Papers in Economics 446, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.
    10. Andreas Fuster & Stephan Meier, 2010. "Another Hidden Cost of Incentives: The Detrimental Effect on Norm Enforcement," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 56(1), pages 57-70, January.
    11. Ezzine-de-Blas, Driss & Corbera, Esteve & Lapeyre, Renaud, 2019. "Payments for Environmental Services and Motivation Crowding: Towards a Conceptual Framework," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 434-443.
    12. Dan Ariely & Anat Bracha & Stephan Meier, 2009. "Doing Good or Doing Well? Image Motivation and Monetary Incentives in Behaving Prosocially," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(1), pages 544-555, March.
    13. Antoine Beretti & Charles Figuières & Gilles Grolleau, 2013. "Using Money to Motivate Both ‘Saints’ and ‘Sinners’: a Field Experiment on Motivational Crowding-Out," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 66(1), pages 63-77, February.
    14. Jeannette Brosig-Koch & Heike Hennig-Schmidt & Nadja Kairies & Daniel Wiesen, 2013. "How Effective are Pay-for-Performance Incentives for Physicians? – A Laboratory Experiment," Ruhr Economic Papers 0413, Rheinisch-Westfälisches Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-Universität Bochum, Universität Dortmund, Universität Duisburg-Essen.
    15. Géraldine Froger & Valérie Boisvert & Philippe Méral & Jean-François Le Coq & Armelle Caron & Olivier Aznar, 2015. "Market-Based Instruments for Ecosystem Services between Discourse and Reality: An Economic and Narrative Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(9), pages 1-17, August.
    16. Graf, Caroline & Suanet, Bianca & Wiepking, Pamala & Merz, Eva-Maria, 2023. "Social norms offer explanation for inconsistent effects of incentives on prosocial behavior," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 211(C), pages 429-441.
    17. Samuel Bowles & Sandra Polania-Reyes, 2011. "Economic incentives and social preferences: substitutes or complements?," Department of Economics University of Siena 617, Department of Economics, University of Siena.
    18. Bengtsson, Niklas & Engström, Per, 2011. "Control and Efficiency in the Nonprofit Sector Evidence from a Randomized Policy Experiment," Working Paper Series 2011:8, Uppsala University, Department of Economics.
    19. Midler, Estelle & Pascual, Unai & Drucker, Adam G. & Narloch, Ulf & Soto, José Luis, 2015. "Unraveling the effects of payments for ecosystem services on motivations for collective action," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 394-405.
    20. Ramcilovic-Suominen, Sabaheta & Epstein, Graham, 2015. "The impacts of deterrence, social norms and legitimacy on forest rule compliance in Ghana," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 10-20.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:156:y:2019:i:c:p:511-518. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolecon .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.