Plastic Waste or Fewer Pesticides? Experimental Evidence on Consumer Preference Tradeoffs in Sustainable Vegetable Production

Last registered on July 07, 2025

Pre-Trial

General Information

Title

RCT ID

AEARCTR-0016264

Initial registration date

July 03, 2025

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

July 07, 2025, 3:15 PM EDT

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

Locations

Country

United States of America

Region

Kentucky

Primary Investigator

Name

Jasmin Wehner

Affiliation

Contact Primary Investigator

Other Primary Investigator(s)

PI Name

Tongzhe Li

PI Affiliation

University of Guelph

PI Name

PI Affiliation

PI Name

PI Affiliation

Cornell University

Contact Investigator

Additional Trial Information

Status

In development

Start date

2025-07-12

End date

2025-07-21

Keywords

Agriculture, Environment & Energy

Additional Keywords

JEL code(s)

Secondary IDs

Prior work

This trial does not extend or rely on any prior RCTs.

Abstract

Farmers use a variety of ways to manage pests in vegetable production. A new approach used by Kentucky, Iowa, and New York growers is protective netting. This project investigates consumers’ willingness-to-pay (WTP) for cucumbers produced with and without such protective netting. Information nudges will be tested in a between-subjects design.

External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation

Li, Tongzhe et al. 2025. "Plastic Waste or Fewer Pesticides? Experimental Evidence on Consumer Preference Tradeoffs in Sustainable Vegetable Production." AEA RCT Registry. July 07. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.16264-1.0

Sponsors & Partners

Experimental Details

Interventions

Intervention(s)

Intervention (Hidden)

Intervention Start Date

2025-07-12

Intervention End Date

2025-07-21

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)

Relative Willingness To Pay

Primary Outcomes (explanation)

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)

Secondary Outcomes (explanation)

Experimental Design

We will conduct a framed field experiment in Lexington, KY, starting in July 2025. Participants will be recruited in person and compensated with $10 for their participation, which is expected to last maximum 15 minutes. Our experimental design elicits real purchase decisions using a dichotomous choice format (‘yes/no’), allowing participants to make binding purchases of the product. Each participant will make three purchase decisions and complete a follow-up questionnaire. To examine the effects of anchoring and framing, we employ a between-subject design. Specifically, to mitigate potential price anchoring, prices will be randomly drawn from the same distribution with a wide range between $0 and $5 for all products. For the framing treatments, participants will be randomly assigned to one of four information conditions: (1) positive framing, (2) negative framing, (3) combined positive and negative framing, and (4) a control condition with no information provided. After making their purchase decisions and completing the questionnaire, participants will roll a die to randomly select which of their three purchase decisions will be binding.If a participant chooses “yes” for the binding decision, they will receive a payment equal to $10 minus the posted product price; if they choose “no,” they will receive the full $10 compensation.

Experimental Design Details

Randomization Method

Roll dice

Randomization Unit

Individual

Was the treatment clustered?

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters

Sample size: planned number of observations

600

Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms

143 individuals per treatment (three treatment and one control group)

Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)

The minimum detectable effect size for the relative WTP is $0.11/slicing cucumber, which corresponds to approximately 33% of one standard deviation (SD = $0.33/slicing cucumber), assuming 80% power and alpha = 0.05 with 143 participants per group.

Supporting Documents and Materials

IRB