An experimental dynamic public goods game with carryover

被引:15
作者
Cadigan, John [1 ]
Wayland, Patrick T. [2 ]
Schmitt, Pamela [2 ]
Swope, Kurtis [2 ]
机构
[1] Gettysburg Coll, Dept Econ, Gettysburg, PA 17325 USA
[2] USN Acad, Dept Econ, Annapolis, MD 21402 USA
关键词
Public Goods; Voluntary Contributions Mechanism; Dynamic; Carryover; VOLUNTARY CONTRIBUTIONS MECHANISM; GROUP-SIZE; PROVISION; BEHAVIOR; COOPERATION; RESOURCES; SANCTIONS; ASYMMETRY; LEVEL;
D O I
10.1016/j.jebo.2011.05.010
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
We examine voluntary contributions in a two-stage public good experiment with 'carryover.' In two treatments, each subject's second-stage endowment is determined by the return from the public good in the first-stage. We manipulate payoffs across treatments such that, relative to our no-carryover baseline, earnings from either Nash Equilibrium (constant NE) play or Pareto Optimal (constant PO) play are held constant. The remaining two treatments maintain a constant endowment in each stage, but vary the marginal per capita return (MPCR high or MCPR low) to contributions in the second-stage. Our results indicate that carryover increases first-stage contributions. Our implementation of carryover enables us to examine the effects of changing endowments and a wide range of MPCR's. Consistent with the literature, we find that MPCR and endowment effects are important determinants of subject contributions to the group account. While stage 1 contributions tend to increase in the presence of carryover, efficiency levels across both stages fall relative to the baseline. Efficiency levels fall because the maximum earnings possible increase with carryover (due to higher endowments or MPCR levels in stage 2). (C) 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:523 / 531
页数:9
相关论文
共 41 条
[1]  
A Reeson., 2008, CISRO WORKING PAPERS
[2]   WHY FREE RIDE - STRATEGIES AND LEARNING IN PUBLIC-GOODS EXPERIMENTS [J].
ANDREONI, J .
JOURNAL OF PUBLIC ECONOMICS, 1988, 37 (03) :291-304
[3]   AN EXPERIMENTAL-ANALYSIS OF UNANIMITY IN PUBLIC-GOODS PROVISION MECHANISMS [J].
BANKS, JS ;
PLOTT, CR ;
PORTER, DP .
REVIEW OF ECONOMIC STUDIES, 1988, 55 (02) :301-322
[4]  
Castro M.F, 2005, ROYAL HOLLOWAY U LON
[5]   The impact of endowment heterogeneity and origin on public good contributions: evidence from the lab [J].
Cherry, TL ;
Kroll, S ;
Shogren, JF .
JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC BEHAVIOR & ORGANIZATION, 2005, 57 (03) :357-365
[6]   Cooperation under the threat of expulsion in a public goods experiment [J].
Cinyabuguma, M ;
Page, T ;
Putterman, L .
JOURNAL OF PUBLIC ECONOMICS, 2005, 89 (08) :1421-1435
[7]   House Money Effects in Public Good Experiments [J].
Clark, Jeremy .
EXPERIMENTAL ECONOMICS, 2002, 5 (03) :223-231
[8]  
Davis Douglas D., 1993, EXP ECON, P317
[9]   Paying for sanctions in social dilemmas: The effects of endowment asymmetry and accountability [J].
De Cremer, David ;
van Dijk, Eric .
ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR AND HUMAN DECISION PROCESSES, 2009, 109 (01) :45-55
[10]  
Dickinson D.L., 2001, EXP ECON, V4, P107, DOI DOI 10.1023/A:1011449606931