IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolec/v227y2025ics0921800924003227.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Preferences for drought risk adaptation support in Kenya: Evidence from a discrete choice experiment and three decision-making theories

Author

Listed:
  • Schrieks, Teun
  • Botzen, W.J. Wouter
  • Haer, Toon
  • Aerts, Jeroen C.J.H.

Abstract

Promoting household-level adaptation measures is an important part of climate change adaptation policies to reduce vulnerability to droughts for (agro-)pastoral communities in sub-Saharan Africa. To develop effective supportive policies, it is important to get a better understanding of the needs in the communities. In this study, we, therefore, present the results of a discrete choice experiment in which we identify preferences for four different support types of drought adaptation in (agro-)pastoral communities in Kenya. We include four types of drought and adaptation support: water supply, emergency livestock fodder, adaptation subsidies, and adaptation training. A novelty of our study is that we link the results from our discrete choice experiment to behavioural factors of three established decision-making theories: expected utility theory, protection motivation theory and theory of planned behaviour. Including these theories in our analysis results in an improved understanding of the causal relationship between adaptation behaviour and preferences for adaptation support. We demonstrate that households in (agro-)pastoral communities are willing to pay for both adaptation support and emergency drought support. There is however clear heterogeneity in preferences for support related to behavioural factors. We discuss the implication of our results for drought risk adaptation policy.

Suggested Citation

  • Schrieks, Teun & Botzen, W.J. Wouter & Haer, Toon & Aerts, Jeroen C.J.H., 2025. "Preferences for drought risk adaptation support in Kenya: Evidence from a discrete choice experiment and three decision-making theories," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 227(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:227:y:2025:i:c:s0921800924003227
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2024.108425
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800924003227
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2024.108425?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. Agrawala, Shardul & Carraro, Maelis, 2010. "Assessing the Role of Microfinance in Fostering Adaptation to Climate Change," Sustainable Development Papers 92709, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    2. Diecidue, Enrico & Wakker, Peter P, 2001. "On the Intuition of Rank-Dependent Utility," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 23(3), pages 281-298, November.
    3. Schrieks, Teun & Botzen, W.J. Wouter & Haer, Toon & Aerts, Jeroen C.J.H., 2024. "Drought risk attitudes in pastoral and agro-pastoral communities in Kenya," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    4. Giroux, Stacey & Kaminski, Patrick & Waldman, Kurt & Blekking, Jordan & Evans, Tom & Caylor, Kelly K., 2023. "Smallholder social networks: Advice seeking and adaptation in rural Kenya," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 205(C).
    5. de Brauw, Alan & Eozenou, Patrick, 2014. "Measuring risk attitudes among Mozambican farmers," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 61-74.
    6. Brick, Kerri & Visser, Martine, 2015. "Risk preferences, technology adoption and insurance uptake: A framed experiment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 383-396.
    7. Stein T. Holden & John Quiggin, 2017. "Climate risk and state-contingent technology adoption: shocks, drought tolerance and preferences," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 44(2), pages 285-308.
    8. Tversky, Amos & Kahneman, Daniel, 1992. "Advances in Prospect Theory: Cumulative Representation of Uncertainty," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 5(4), pages 297-323, October.
    9. Salvatore Di Falco & Marcella Veronesi & Mahmud Yesuf, 2011. "Does Adaptation to Climate Change Provide Food Security? A Micro-Perspective from Ethiopia," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 93(3), pages 825-842.
    10. Jianjun Jin & Rui He & Haozhou Gong & Xia Xu & Chunyang He, 2017. "Farmers’ Risk Preferences in Rural China: Measurements and Determinants," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1, June.
    11. Ajzen, Icek, 1991. "The theory of planned behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 179-211, December.
    12. Elaine M. Liu, 2013. "Time to Change What to Sow: Risk Preferences and Technology Adoption Decisions of Cotton Farmers in China," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 95(4), pages 1386-1403, October.
    13. Schaafsma, Marije & Ferrini, Silvia & Turner, R. Kerry, 2019. "Assessing smallholder preferences for incentivised climate-smart agriculture using a discrete choice experiment," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    14. Ward, Patrick S. & Makhija, Simrin, 2018. "New modalities for managing drought risk in rainfed agriculture: Evidence from a discrete choice experiment in Odisha, India," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 163-175.
    15. Quiggin, John, 1982. "A theory of anticipated utility," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 323-343, December.
    16. Charles A. Holt & Susan K. Laury, 2002. "Risk Aversion and Incentive Effects," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(5), pages 1644-1655, December.
    17. van Rooyen, C. & Stewart, R. & de Wet, T., 2012. "The Impact of Microfinance in Sub-Saharan Africa: A Systematic Review of the Evidence," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 40(11), pages 2249-2262.
    18. Tomomi Tanaka & Colin F. Camerer & Quang Nguyen, 2010. "Risk and Time Preferences: Linking Experimental and Household Survey Data from Vietnam," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(1), pages 557-571, March.
    19. Czajkowski, Mikołaj & Budziński, Wiktor, 2019. "Simulation error in maximum likelihood estimation of discrete choice models," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 31(C), pages 73-85.
    20. Schoemaker, Paul J H, 1982. "The Expected Utility Model: Its Variants, Purposes, Evidence and Limitations," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 20(2), pages 529-563, June.
    21. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    22. Daniel McFadden & Kenneth Train, 2000. "Mixed MNL models for discrete response," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(5), pages 447-470.
    23. Ward, Patrick S. & Singh, Vartika, 2013. "Risk and Ambiguity Preferences and the Adoption of New Agricultural Technologies: Evidence from Field Experiments in Rural India," 2013 Annual Meeting, August 4-6, 2013, Washington, D.C. 150794, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    24. Barkmann, J. & Glenk, K. & Keil, A. & Leemhuis, C. & Dietrich, N. & Gerold, G. & Marggraf, R., 2008. "Confronting unfamiliarity with ecosystem functions: The case for an ecosystem service approach to environmental valuation with stated preference methods," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(1), pages 48-62, March.
    25. Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Rose, John M., 2011. "Experimental design influences on stated choice outputs: An empirical study in air travel choice," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 63-79, January.
    26. Alare, Rahinatu S. & Lawson, Elaine T. & Mensah, Adelina & Yevide, Armand & Adiku, Prosper, 2022. "Assessing nuanced social networks and its implication for climate change adaptation in northwestern Ghana," World Development Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 25(C).
    27. Maione, Carol, 2020. "Adapting to drought and extreme climate: Hunger Safety Net Programme, Kenya," World Development Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 20(C).
    28. Nthambi, Mary & Markova-Nenova, Nonka & Wätzold, Frank, 2021. "Quantifying Loss of Benefits from Poor Governance of Climate Change Adaptation Projects: A Discrete Choice Experiment with Farmers in Kenya," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 179(C).
    29. Hoyos, David, 2010. "The state of the art of environmental valuation with discrete choice experiments," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(8), pages 1595-1603, June.
    30. Alphayo I. Lutta & Lance W. Robinson & Oliver V. Wasonga & Eric Ruto & Jason Sircely & Moses M. Nyangito, 2020. "Economic valuation of grazing management practices: discrete choice modeling in pastoral systems of Kenya," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 63(2), pages 335-351, January.
    31. Abhijit Banerjee & Esther Duflo & Rachel Glennerster & Cynthia Kinnan, 2015. "The Miracle of Microfinance? Evidence from a Randomized Evaluation," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 7(1), pages 22-53, January.
    32. Patrick S. Ward & Vartika Singh, 2015. "Using Field Experiments to Elicit Risk and Ambiguity Preferences: Behavioural Factors and the Adoption of New Agricultural Technologies in Rural India," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 51(6), pages 707-724, June.
    33. Philip Bubeck & W. J. Wouter Botzen & Jonas Laudan & Jeroen C.J.H. Aerts & Annegret H. Thieken, 2018. "Insights into Flood‐Coping Appraisals of Protection Motivation Theory: Empirical Evidence from Germany and France," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(6), pages 1239-1257, June.
    34. Tim Forsyth, 2013. "Community‐based adaptation: a review of past and future challenges," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 4(5), pages 439-446, September.
    35. Shardul Agrawala & Maëlis Carraro, 2010. "Assessing the Role of Microfinance in Fostering Adaptation to Climate Change," OECD Environment Working Papers 15, OECD Publishing.
    36. Richard Kofi Asravor, 2019. "Farmers’ risk preference and the adoption of risk management strategies in Northern Ghana," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 62(5), pages 881-900, April.
    37. Hess, Stephane & Palma, David, 2019. "Apollo: A flexible, powerful and customisable freeware package for choice model estimation and application," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 32(C), pages 1-1.
    38. Gloria Otieno & Wesley Mlsna Zebrowski & John Recha & Travis William Reynolds, 2021. "Gender and Social Seed Networks for Climate Change Adaptation: Evidence from Bean, Finger Millet, and Sorghum Seed Systems in East Africa," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-24, February.
    39. Castells-Quintana, David & del Pilar Lopez-Uribe, Maria & McDermott, Thomas K.J., 2018. "A review of adaptation to climate change through a development economics lens," Working Papers 309605, National University of Ireland, Galway, Socio-Economic Marine Research Unit.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Schrieks, Teun & Botzen, W.J. Wouter & Haer, Toon & Aerts, Jeroen C.J.H., 2024. "Drought risk attitudes in pastoral and agro-pastoral communities in Kenya," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    2. Visser, Martine & Jumare, Hafsah & Brick, Kerri, 2020. "Risk preferences and poverty traps in the uptake of credit and insurance amongst small-scale farmers in South Africa," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 180(C), pages 826-836.
    3. Julia Ihli, Hanna & Chiputwa, Brian & Winter, Etti & Gassner, Anja, 2022. "Risk and time preferences for participating in forest landscape restoration: The case of coffee farmers in Uganda," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 150(C).
    4. Stein T. Holden & John Quiggin, 2017. "Climate risk and state-contingent technology adoption: shocks, drought tolerance and preferences," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 44(2), pages 285-308.
    5. Freudenreich, Hanna & Musshoff, Oliver, 2022. "Experience of losses and aversion to uncertainty - experimental evidence from farmers in Mexico," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 195(C).
    6. Luís Santos-Pinto & Adrian Bruhin & José Mata & Thomas Åstebro, 2015. "Detecting heterogeneous risk attitudes with mixed gambles," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 79(4), pages 573-600, December.
    7. Freudenreich, Hanna & Musshoff, Oliver & Wiercinski, Ben, 2017. "The Relationship between Farmers' Shock Experiences and their Uncertainty Preferences - Experimental Evidence from Mexico," GlobalFood Discussion Papers 256212, Georg-August-Universitaet Goettingen, GlobalFood, Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development.
    8. Galarza, Francisco, 2009. "Choices under Risk in Rural Peru," MPRA Paper 17708, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Kanchan Joshi & Thiagu Ranganathan & Ram Ranjan, 2021. "Exploring Higher Order Risk Preferences of Farmers in a Water-Scarce Region: Evidence from a Field Experiment in West Bengal, India," Journal of Quantitative Economics, Springer;The Indian Econometric Society (TIES), vol. 19(2), pages 317-344, June.
    10. Naranjo, Maria A. & Alpízar, Francisco & Martinsson, Peter, 2019. "Alternatives for Risk Elicitation in the Field: Evidence from Coffee Farmers in Costa Rica," EfD Discussion Paper 19-21, Environment for Development, University of Gothenburg.
    11. Amanuel Hadera & Tewodros Tadesse, 2023. "Risk and ambiguity aversion: Incentives or disincentives for adoption of improved agricultural land management practices?," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 54(6), pages 867-883, November.
    12. Visser, Martine & le Roux, Leonard & Mulwa, Chalmers K. & Tibesigwa, Byela & Bezabih, Mintewab, 2024. "Adaptive investment with land tenure and weather risk: Behavioral evidence from Tanzania," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 217(C), pages 398-434.
    13. Holden, Stein T. & Tilahun, Mesfin, 2021. "Shocks and Stability of Risk Preferences," CLTS Working Papers 5/21, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, Centre for Land Tenure Studies.
    14. Immanuel Lampe & Daniel Würtenberger, 2019. "Loss Aversion And The Demand For Index Insurance," Working Papers on Finance 1907, University of St. Gallen, School of Finance.
    15. Ward, Patrick S. & Singh, Vartika, 2013. "Risk and Ambiguity Preferences and the Adoption of New Agricultural Technologies: Evidence from Field Experiments in Rural India," 2013 Annual Meeting, August 4-6, 2013, Washington, D.C. 150794, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    16. Lampe, Immanuel & Würtenberger, Daniel, 2020. "Loss aversion and the demand for index insurance," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 180(C), pages 678-693.
    17. Jumare, Hafsah & Visser, Martine & Brick, Kerri, 2017. "Risk Preferences and the Poverty Trap: A Look at Farm Technology Uptake amongst Smallholder Farmers in the Matzikama Municipality," EfD Discussion Paper 17-14, Environment for Development, University of Gothenburg.
    18. Bocqueho, Geraldine & Jacquet, Florence & Reynaud, Arnaud, 2011. "Expected Utility or Prospect Theory Maximizers? Results from a Structural Model based on Field-experiment Data," 2011 International Congress, August 30-September 2, 2011, Zurich, Switzerland 114257, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    19. Heutel, Garth, 2019. "Prospect theory and energy efficiency," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 236-254.
    20. Stein T. Holden & Mesfin Tilahun, 2024. "Can Climate Shocks Make Vulnerable Subjects More Willing to Take Risks?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 87(4), pages 967-1007, April.

    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:227:y:2025:i:c:s0921800924003227. 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.