Payment Vs. Compensation For Ecosystem Services: Do Words Have A Voice In The Design of Environmental Conservation Programs?

34Citations
Citations of this article
68Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

We examine whether and how word choice can affect individual perceptions about a proposed Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES) program when objective outcomes are similar. From a traditional economic perspective, this type of manipulation would be considered unlikely to affect perceptions and behaviour, especially in the presence of pecuniary incentives and repeated decisions among sophisticated agents. From a behaviourally informed perspective, however, psychological and political theories of wording argue that word choice can have a significant impact on economic behaviour. To substantiate this discussion, we conduct a survey experiment that tests the impact of the words ‘payment’ and ‘compensation’ on favorability ratings of a proposed PES program. These preliminary findings suggest that the words used to describe public policies can be influential non-pecuniary interventions.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Clot, S., Grolleau, G., & Méral, P. (2017). Payment Vs. Compensation For Ecosystem Services: Do Words Have A Voice In The Design of Environmental Conservation Programs? Ecological Economics, 135, 299–303. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2016.12.028

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free