IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/revage/v31y2009i2p222-230..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Are Production Decisions Decoupled under a Bond Scheme? Experimental Evidence

Author

Listed:
  • Amy M. Nagler
  • Dale J. Menkhaus
  • Christopher T. Bastian
  • Nicole S. Ballenger
  • Erik O’Donoghue
  • C. Edwin Young

Abstract

Experimental economics procedures were used to investigate impacts of a proposed bond scheme on production decisions. As expected, production with subsidy payments tied to a support price was substantially higher than with no policy. A shift from the support price to equivalent annual or lump-sum payments not tied to price resulted in production at or near no-policy levels, providing empirical evidence to support the theoretical prediction that bond schemes would not result in production distortions. Potential extensions to the basic model used in this study also are presented.

Suggested Citation

  • Amy M. Nagler & Dale J. Menkhaus & Christopher T. Bastian & Nicole S. Ballenger & Erik O’Donoghue & C. Edwin Young, 2009. "Are Production Decisions Decoupled under a Bond Scheme? Experimental Evidence," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 31(2), pages 222-230.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:revage:v:31:y:2009:i:2:p:222-230.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1111/j.1467-9353.2009.01434.x
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    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. Davis, Douglas D. & Holt, Charles a., 1993. "Experimental economics: Methods, problems and promise," Estudios Económicos, El Colegio de México, Centro de Estudios Económicos, vol. 8(2), pages 179-212.
    2. Friedman,Daniel & Sunder,Shyam, 1994. "Experimental Methods," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521456821, January.
    3. Ashenfelter, Orley, et al, 1992. "An Experimental Comparison of Dispute Rates in Alternative Arbitration Systems," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 60(6), pages 1407-1433, November.
    4. Menkhaus, Dale J. & Bastian, Chris T. & Phillips, Owen R. & O'Neill, Patrick D., 2000. "Supply and Demand Risks in Laboratory Forward and Spot Markets: Implications for Agriculture," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 32(1), pages 159-173, April.
    5. Harry de Gorter & David R. Just & Jaclyn D. Kropp, 2008. "Cross-subsidization Due to Inframarginal Support in Agriculture: A General Theory and Empirical Evidence," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 90(1), pages 42-54.
    6. Dale J. Menkhaus & Owen R. Phillips & Chris T. Bastian, 2003. "Impacts of Alternative Trading Institutions and Methods of Delivery on Laboratory Market Outcomes," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 85(5), pages 1323-1329.
    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. Liesbeth Colen & Sergio Gomez Y Paloma & Uwe Latacz-Lohmann & Marianne Lefebvre & Sophie Thoyer & Raphaële Préget, 2015. "(How) can economic experiments inform EU agricultural policy?," JRC Research Reports JRC97340, Joint Research Centre.

    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. Phillips, Owen R. & Nagler, Amy M. & Menkhaus, Dale J. & Huang, Shanshan & Bastian, Christopher T., 2014. "Trading partner choice and bargaining culture in negotiations," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 178-190.
    2. Nuzzo, Simone & Morone, Andrea, 2017. "Asset markets in the lab: A literature review," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 13(C), pages 42-50.
    3. Chris Starmer, 1999. "Experiments in economics: should we trust the dismal scientists in white coats?," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 6(1), pages 1-30.
    4. Kristiana Hansen & Jonathan Kaplan & Stephan Kroll, 2014. "Valuing Options in Water Markets: A Laboratory Investigation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 57(1), pages 59-80, January.
    5. Nagler, Amy M. & Menkhaus, Dale J. & Bastian, Christopher T. & Ehmke, Mariah D. & Coatney, Kalyn T., 2013. "Subsidy Incidence in Factor Markets: An Experimental Approach," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 45(1), pages 1-17, February.
    6. Iván Barreda-Tarrazona & Juan Matallín-Sáez & Mª Balaguer-Franch, 2011. "Measuring Investors’ Socially Responsible Preferences in Mutual Funds," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 103(2), pages 305-330, October.
    7. Charles F. Mason & Owen R. Phillips, 2016. "Imminent Entry and the Transition to Multimarket Rivalry in a Laboratory Setting," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(4), pages 1018-1039, December.
    8. Croson, Rachel & Gächter, Simon, 2010. "The science of experimental economics," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 73(1), pages 122-131, January.
    9. Pecorino, Paul & Van Boening, Mark, 2001. "Bargaining and Information: An Empirical Analysis of A Multistage Arbitration Game," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 19(4), pages 922-948, October.
    10. Dale J. Menkhaus & Owen R. Phillips & Allison F. M. Johnston & Alla V. Yakunina, 2003. "Price Discovery in Private Negotiation Trading with Forward and Spot Deliveries," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 25(1), pages 89-107.
    11. Dimitrios Koumparoulis, 2013. "Laboratory Experimentation in Economics Classification-JEL: C90, C91, C92," Journal of Knowledge Management, Economics and Information Technology, ScientificPapers.org, vol. 3(1), pages 1-1, February.
    12. Darmon, N. & Lacroix, A. & Muller, L. & Ruffieux, B., 2011. "Experimental economics shows how food price policies may improve diet while increasing socioeconomic inequalities in nutrition," Working Papers 201104, Grenoble Applied Economics Laboratory (GAEL).
    13. Sheryl B. Ball, 1998. "Research, Teaching, and Practice in Experimental Economics: A Progress Report and Review," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 64(3), pages 772-779, January.
    14. Phillips, Owen R. & Menkhaus, Dale J., 2006. "The Culture of Private Negotiation: Price Drift in Bilateral Bargaining," 2006 Annual meeting, July 23-26, Long Beach, CA 21168, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    15. José Holguín-Veras & Ning Xu & Miguel Jaller & John Mitchell, 2016. "A Dynamic Spatial Price Equilibrium Model of Integrated Urban Production-Transportation Operations Considering Freight Delivery Tours," Transportation Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(2), pages 489-519, May.
    16. Armin Falk, 2003. "Homo Oeconomicus versus Homo Reciprocans: Ansätze für ein neues Wirtschaftspolitisches Leitbild?," Perspektiven der Wirtschaftspolitik, Verein für Socialpolitik, vol. 4(1), pages 141-172, February.
    17. Koontz Stephen R & Ward Clement E, 2011. "Livestock Mandatory Price Reporting: A Literature Review and Synthesis of Related Market Information Research," Journal of Agricultural & Food Industrial Organization, De Gruyter, vol. 9(1), pages 1-33, July.
    18. repec:wuk:eaercp:_002 is not listed on IDEAS
    19. Nelson, Robert G., 1995. "Application of Experimental Economics to Problems in Commodity Promotion," New Methodologies for Commodity Promotion Economics, October 5-6, 1995, Sacramento, California 279628, Regional Research Projects > NECC-63: Research Committee on Commodity Promotion.
    20. Claudia M. Landeo & Kathryn E. Spier, 2016. "Stipulated Damages as a Rent-Extraction Mechanism: Experimental Evidence," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 172(2), pages 235-273, June.
    21. Feuz, Dillon M. & Umberger, Wendy J. & Calkins, Chris R. & Killinger, Karen M., 2000. "Consumer Preference For Domestic Versus International Beef Steaks," 2000 Annual Meeting, June 29-July 1, 2000, Vancouver, British Columbia 36385, Western Agricultural Economics Association.

    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:oup:revage:v:31:y:2009:i:2:p:222-230.. 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: Oxford University Press or Christopher F. Baum (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaeaaea.html .

    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.