IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-03726448.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Continuous versus Discrete Time in Dynamic Common Pool Resource Game Experiments

Author

Listed:
  • Anmina Murielle Djiguemde

    (CEE-M - Centre d'Economie de l'Environnement - Montpellier - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - INRAE - Institut National de Recherche pour l’Agriculture, l’Alimentation et l’Environnement - Institut Agro Montpellier - Institut Agro - Institut national d'enseignement supérieur pour l'agriculture, l'alimentation et l'environnement - UM - Université de Montpellier)

  • Dimitri Dubois

    (CEE-M - Centre d'Economie de l'Environnement - Montpellier - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - INRAE - Institut National de Recherche pour l’Agriculture, l’Alimentation et l’Environnement - Institut Agro Montpellier - Institut Agro - Institut national d'enseignement supérieur pour l'agriculture, l'alimentation et l'environnement - UM - Université de Montpellier)

  • Alexandre Sauquet

    (CEE-M - Centre d'Economie de l'Environnement - Montpellier - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - INRAE - Institut National de Recherche pour l’Agriculture, l’Alimentation et l’Environnement - Institut Agro Montpellier - Institut Agro - Institut national d'enseignement supérieur pour l'agriculture, l'alimentation et l'environnement - UM - Université de Montpellier)

  • Mabel Tidball

    (CEE-M - Centre d'Economie de l'Environnement - Montpellier - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - INRAE - Institut National de Recherche pour l’Agriculture, l’Alimentation et l’Environnement - Institut Agro Montpellier - Institut Agro - Institut national d'enseignement supérieur pour l'agriculture, l'alimentation et l'environnement - UM - Université de Montpellier)

Abstract

We study the impact of discrete versus continuous time on the behavior of agents in the context of a dynamic common pool resource game. To this purpose, we consider a linear quadratic model in which agents exploit a renewable resource with an infinite horizon and conduct a lab experiment. We use a differential game for continuous time and derive its discrete time approximation. When the agent is the sole owner of the resource, we fail to detect on a battery of indicators any difference between discrete and continuous time. Conversely, in the two-player setting, significantly more agents can be classified as myopic and end up with a low resource level in discrete time. Continuous time seems to allow for better cooperation and thus greater sustainability of the resource than does discrete time. Also, payoffs are more equally distributed in the continuous time setting.

Suggested Citation

  • Anmina Murielle Djiguemde & Dimitri Dubois & Alexandre Sauquet & Mabel Tidball, 2022. "Continuous versus Discrete Time in Dynamic Common Pool Resource Game Experiments," Post-Print hal-03726448, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-03726448
    DOI: 10.1007/s10640-022-00700-2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Evan Calford & Ryan Oprea, 2017. "Continuity, Inertia, and Strategic Uncertainty: A Test of the Theory of Continuous Time Games," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 85, pages 915-935, May.
    2. Mason, Charles F. & Phillips, Owen R., 1997. "Mitigating the Tragedy of the Commons through Cooperation: An Experimental Evaluation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 148-172, October.
    3. Oprea, Ryan & Charness, Gary & Friedman, Daniel, 2014. "Continuous time and communication in a public-goods experiment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 212-223.
    4. Ben Greiner, 2015. "Subject pool recruitment procedures: organizing experiments with ORSEE," Journal of the Economic Science Association, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 1(1), pages 114-125, July.
    5. Marco Battaglini & Salvatore Nunnari & Thomas R. Palfrey, 2016. "The Dynamic Free Rider Problem: A Laboratory Study," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 8(4), pages 268-308, November.
    6. Tasneem, Dina & Engle-Warnick, Jim & Benchekroun, Hassan, 2017. "An experimental study of a common property renewable resource game in continuous time," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 91-119.
    7. Santiago Rubio & Begoña Casino, 2003. "Strategic Behavior and Efficiency in the Common Property Extraction of Groundwater," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 26(1), pages 73-87, September.
    8. Guillaume R. Fréchette & Sevgi Yuksel, 2017. "Infinitely repeated games in the laboratory: four perspectives on discounting and random termination," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 20(2), pages 279-308, June.
    9. Kenneth Matheny & Charles Noussair, 2000. "An experimental study of decisions in dynamic optimization problems," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 15(2), pages 389-419.
    10. Emanuel Vespa, 2020. "An Experimental Investigation Of Cooperation In The Dynamic Common Pool Game," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 61(1), pages 417-440, February.
    11. David G. Rand & Joshua D. Greene & Martin A. Nowak, 2012. "Spontaneous giving and calculated greed," Nature, Nature, vol. 489(7416), pages 427-430, September.
    12. John Hey & Tibor Neugebauer & Abdolkarim Sadrieh, 2009. "An Experimental Analysis of Optimal Renewable Resource Management: The Fishery," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 44(2), pages 263-285, October.
    13. Maria Bigoni & Marco Casari & Andrzej Skrzypacz & Giancarlo Spagnolo, 2015. "Time Horizon and Cooperation in Continuous Time," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 83, pages 587-616, March.
    14. Meta Brown & Christopher J. Flinn & Andrew Schotter, 2011. "Real-Time Search in the Laboratory and the Market," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(2), pages 948-974, April.
    15. Chen, Daniel L. & Schonger, Martin & Wickens, Chris, 2016. "oTree—An open-source platform for laboratory, online, and field experiments," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 9(C), pages 88-97.
    16. Charles N. Noussair & Daan van Soest & Jan Stoop, 2015. "Cooperation in a Dynamic Fishing Game: A Framed Field Experiment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(5), pages 408-413, May.
    17. Herr, Andrew & Gardner, Roy & Walker, James M., 1997. "An Experimental Study of Time-Independent and Time-Dependent Externalities in the Commons," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 19(1), pages 77-96, April.
    18. Dina Tasneem & Jim Engle-Warnick & Hassan Benchekroun, 2019. "Sustainable management of renewable resources: an experimental investigation in continuous time," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 51(35), pages 3804-3833, July.
    19. Daniel Friedman & Ryan Oprea, 2012. "A Continuous Dilemma," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(1), pages 337-363, February.
    20. Jordan F. Suter & Joshua M. Duke & Kent D. Messer & Holly A. Michael, 2012. "Behavior in a Spatially Explicit Groundwater Resource: Evidence from the Lab," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 94(5), pages 1094-1112.
    21. Ailin Leng & Lana Friesen & Kenan Kalayci & Priscilla Man, 2018. "A minimum effort coordination game experiment in continuous time," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 21(3), pages 549-572, September.
    22. Owen O’Donnell & Stephen O’Neill & Tom Van Ourti & Brendan Walsh, 2016. "conindex: Estimation of concentration indices," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 16(1), pages 112-138, March.
    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. Murielle Djiguemde, 2020. "A survey on dynamic common pool resources : theory and experiment," Working Papers hal-03022377, HAL.
    2. Murielle Djiguemde, 2020. "A survey on dynamic common pool resources : theory and experiment," CEE-M Working Papers hal-03022377, CEE-M, Universtiy of Montpellier, CNRS, INRA, Montpellier SupAgro.
    3. Murielle Djiguemde & Dimitri Dubois & Alexandre Sauquet & Mabel Tidball, 2019. "On the modeling and testing of groundwater resource models," Working Papers hal-02316729, HAL.
    4. Tasneem, Dina & Engle-Warnick, Jim & Benchekroun, Hassan, 2017. "An experimental study of a common property renewable resource game in continuous time," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 91-119.
    5. Zhao, Shuchen, 2021. "Taking turns in continuous time," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 191(C), pages 257-279.
    6. He, Simin & Zhu, Xun, 2023. "Real-time monitoring in a public-goods game," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 454-479.
    7. van Leeuwen, Boris & Offerman, Theo & van de Ven, Jeroen, 2018. "Fight or Flight : Endogenous Timing in Conflicts," Discussion Paper 2018-052, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    8. Leng, Ailin, 2023. "A Rubinstein bargaining experiment in continuous time," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 115-131.
    9. Tobias Salz & Emanuel Vespa, 2020. "Estimating dynamic games of oligopolistic competition: an experimental investigation," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 51(2), pages 447-469, June.
    10. Heller, Yuval & Tubul, Itay, 2023. "Strategies in the repeated prisoner’s dilemma: A cluster analysis," MPRA Paper 117444, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Luhan, Wolfgang J. & Poulsen, Anders U. & Roos, Michael W.M., 2017. "Real-time tacit bargaining, payoff focality, and coordination complexity: Experimental evidence," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 687-699.
    12. Selles Jules & Bonhommeau Sylvain & Guillotreau Patrice & Vallée Thomas, 2020. "Can the Threat of Economic Sanctions Ensure the Sustainability of International Fisheries? An Experiment of a Dynamic Non-cooperative CPR Game with Uncertain Tipping Point," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 76(1), pages 153-176, May.
    13. Evan Calford & Ryan Oprea, 2017. "Continuity, Inertia, and Strategic Uncertainty: A Test of the Theory of Continuous Time Games," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 85, pages 915-935, May.
    14. Ailin Leng & Lana Friesen & Kenan Kalayci & Priscilla Man, 2018. "A minimum effort coordination game experiment in continuous time," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 21(3), pages 549-572, September.
    15. García-Pola, Bernardo & Iriberri, Nagore & Kovářík, Jaromír, 2020. "Non-equilibrium play in centipede games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 391-433.
    16. Gunnar Brandt & Micaela M Kulesz & Dennis Nissen & Agostino Merico, 2017. "OGUMI—A new mobile application to conduct common-pool resource experiments in continuous time," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(6), pages 1-14, June.
    17. Johannes Hoelzemann & Nicolas Klein, 2021. "Bandits in the lab," Quantitative Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 12(3), pages 1021-1051, July.
    18. van Leeuwen, Boris & Offerman, Theo & van de Ven, Jeroen, 2018. "Fight or Flight : Endogenous Timing in Conflicts," Discussion Paper 2018-052, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    19. Maria Bigoni & Jan Potters & Giancarlo Spagnolo, 2019. "Frequency of interaction, communication and collusion: an experiment," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 68(4), pages 827-844, November.
    20. Benndorf, Volker & Martínez-Martínez, Ismael & Normann, Hans-Theo, 2021. "Games with coupled populations: An experiment in continuous time," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 195(C).

    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:hal:journl:hal-03726448. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.