Prosocial incentive versus financial incentive in biodiversity conservation: A field experiment

Last registered on September 12, 2024

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title
Prosocial incentive versus financial incentive in biodiversity conservation: A field experiment
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0010210
Initial registration date
October 12, 2022

Initial registration date is when the trial was registered.

It corresponds to when the registration was submitted to the Registry to be reviewed for publication.

First published
October 17, 2022, 5:29 PM EDT

First published corresponds to when the trial was first made public on the Registry after being reviewed.

Last updated
September 12, 2024, 5:08 AM EDT

Last updated is the most recent time when changes to the trial's registration were published.

Locations

Region

Primary Investigator

Affiliation
Osaka University

Other Primary Investigator(s)

PI Affiliation
National Institute for Environmental Studies

Additional Trial Information

Status
On going
Start date
2022-09-15
End date
2025-03-31
Secondary IDs
Prior work
This trial does not extend or rely on any prior RCTs.
Abstract
Citizens exhibit interests for a variety of social contribution activities, including biodiversity conservation ones. However, it is difficult for one citizen to participate in multiple activities with the same effort. There are both activities in which they want to directly participate and activities in which they would be satisfied to be indirectly involved.

In this study, we introduce a scheme whereby when people contribute to the activity in which they want to directly participate, another positive action also occurs in the social contribution activity in which they want to be indirectly involved. We experimentally test how much the scheme facilitates the former behavior.

Specifically, we introduce a matching scheme whereby people post species information on a smartphone app related to biodiversity conservation, and monetary donations are made to related activities (e.g., saving endangered species, etc.). We conduct a field experiment with the app users, measure the scheme’s effect on their posting behavior during implementation, and evaluate the lasting impact after the scheme is deactivated. To examine the significance of exposures to species under the pandemic, we also measure spillover effects on physical activities and mental health.

Furthermore, we measure the behavior change effect of another scheme that gives financial rewards for posting species information and investigate which charitable matching or reward matching has a greater behavior change effect. We also examine how the relative relationship depends on the app users’ attributes and perceptions.
External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation
Sasaki, Shusaku and Takahiro Kubo. 2024. "Prosocial incentive versus financial incentive in biodiversity conservation: A field experiment." AEA RCT Registry. September 12. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.10210-2.2
Experimental Details

Interventions

Intervention(s)
We randomly assign 900 participants to either of the control group, prosocial treatment group, or financial treatment group (300 participants x 3 groups). We set a two-week treatment period, during which those assigned to the prosocial treatment group, or financial treatment group receive the following interventions, respectively:

Prosocial treatment: Based on the number of species information posted by each user, the experimenter donates to activities related to biodiversity conservation.
Financial treatment: Based on the number of species information posted by each user, the experimenter gives them financial rewards that can be used for their online shopping.
Intervention Start Date
2022-10-17
Intervention End Date
2022-10-28

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
1) Number of species information posted on weekdays
2) Number of species information posted on weekends or holidays
Primary Outcomes (explanation)
The primary outcomes are automatically recorded by the app.

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
1) Number of species photos posted on weekdays
2) Number of species photos posted on weekends or holidays
3) Physical activities (Weekday steps and weekend steps)
4) Mental health (k6)
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)
Among the secondary outcomes, the variables 1) and 2) are are automatically recorded by the app. Here, the primary outcomes (number of posted species information) are not equal to the two secondary outcomes (number of posted species photos), which count even if a user posts multiple photo of the same organism.

The variables 3) and 4) are collected in a self-report format in surveys.

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
In this study, we collaborate with a company that provides a smartphone app for citizens to collect, post, and record species information, and conduct a field experiment with its users.

We randomly assign 900 participants to either of the control group, prosocial treatment group, or financial treatment group (300 participants x 3 groups). We set a two-week treatment period, during which those assigned to the prosocial treatment group, or financial treatment group receive the following interventions, respectively:

Prosocial treatment: Based on the number of species information posted by each user, the experimenter donates to activities related to biodiversity conservation.
Financial treatment: Based on the number of species information posted by each user, the experimenter gives them financial rewards that can be used for their online shopping.
Experimental Design Details
Not available
Randomization Method
Stratified randomization. The strata are based on 1) number of species information posted by users during the baseline period, and 2) their prosocial or selfish motivations for participation.
Randomization Unit
Individuals
Was the treatment clustered?
No

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
N/A
Sample size: planned number of observations
900 app users
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
300 users in the control group, 300 users in the prosocial treatment group, and 300 users in the financial treatment group
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
IRB

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
Center for Infectious Disease Education and Research, Osaka University IRB
IRB Approval Date
2022-09-01
IRB Approval Number
2022CRER0901
Analysis Plan

There is information in this trial unavailable to the public. Use the button below to request access.

Request Information