Preferences of extensive livestock farmers for wildfire prevention grazing programs: Evidence from a discrete choice experiment in Spain

Last registered on April 06, 2026
View Trial History

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title
Preferences of extensive livestock farmers for wildfire prevention grazing programs: Evidence from a discrete choice experiment in Spain
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0018148
Initial registration date
April 02, 2026

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
April 06, 2026, 8:17 AM EDT

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

Locations

Country
Spain
Region

Primary Investigator

Name
Elsa Varela
Affiliation
CSIC
Contact Primary Investigator

Other Primary Investigator(s)

PI Name
Ana Maria Olaizola
PI Affiliation
University of Zaragoza
Contact Investigator
PI Name
Helena Resano
PI Affiliation
University of Zaragoza
Contact Investigator
PI Name
Barbara Soriano
PI Affiliation
Polytechnic Univeristy of Madrid (UPM)
Contact Investigator

Additional Trial Information

Status
In development
Start date
2026-04-12
End date
2026-09-30
Keywords
Agriculture, Behavior
Additional Keywords
wildfire prevention, discrete choice experiment, agri-environmental schemes, grazing, result-based payments, Spain
JEL code(s)
Secondary IDs
Prior work
This trial does not extend or rely on any prior RCTs.
Abstract
This study investigates the preferences of extensive livestock farmers for participation in public programs aimed at reducing wildfire risk through targeted grazing. In several Mediterranean regions, grazing is used as a vegetation management tool to reduce fuel loads and maintain strategic firebreaks. Public administrations increasingly consider compensating livestock farmers for providing this ecosystem service.
To understand how such programs should be designed, we implement a discrete choice experiment (DCE) with extensive livestock farmers in Spain. Respondents are asked to choose between alternative program designs characterized by different operational conditions and payment levels. Respondents complete nine choice tasks comparing two program alternatives and an opt-out option.

The study estimates farmers’ preferences using multinomial logit, random parameter logit, and latent class models. Models will also be estimated in willingness-to-accept (WTA) space to derive compensation levels required for participation in wildfire prevention grazing programs.

The results will provide evidence on how targeted grazing policies can be designed to improve participation among livestock farmers.
External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation
Olaizola, Ana Maria et al. 2026. "Preferences of extensive livestock farmers for wildfire prevention grazing programs: Evidence from a discrete choice experiment in Spain." AEA RCT Registry. April 06. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.18148-1.0
Sponsors & Partners
Experimental Details

Interventions

Intervention(s)
This study investigates livestock farmers’ preferences for participation in public programs that use controlled grazing as a wildfire prevention tool. Respondents complete a survey including a discrete choice experiment in which they are asked to choose between alternative program designs for wildfire prevention grazing.
The program alternatives vary in terms of operational requirements and financial compensation. Farmers evaluate different program designs and may also choose not to participate in the program.
Intervention Start Date
2026-04-12
Intervention End Date
2026-09-30

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
The observed outcome variable is the choice made by the respondent in each choice task.
For each choice situation, respondents select one of three alternatives:
• Program A
• Program B
• Opt-out (no participation)
Primary Outcomes (explanation)
These choices constitute the dependent variable used to estimate farmers’ preferences for the attributes of wildfire prevention grazing programs.
The main quantities of interest derived from these models are:
• taste parameters associated with program attributes
• willingness-to-accept (WTA) estimates for participation conditions.

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Secondary outcomes include:
• stated reasons for choosing the opt-out alternative
• attitudinal variables related to cooperation, risk preferences, and farm management objectives
• farm structural characteristics.
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)
These variables will be used to explore observed heterogeneity in preferences.

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
This study uses a survey-based discrete choice experiment to elicit livestock farmers’ preferences for wildfire prevention grazing programs. Respondents are presented with a series of choice tasks in which they select their preferred option among two alternative program contracts and an opt-out alternative (no participation).



Each respondent completes nine choice tasks and is randomly assigned to one of two blocks of the experimental design.
Experimental Design Details
Not available
Randomization Method
Computer-generated random assignment of respondents to blocks by the survey platform.
Randomization Unit
The unit of randomization is the individual respondent (livestock farmer). Each respondent is randomly assigned to one of two blocks of the experimental design.
Was the treatment clustered?
No

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
Not applicable
Sample size: planned number of observations
The study aims to collect 200 responses from livestock farmers while 100 responses is considered as the minimum threshold required to estimating discrete choice models with the number of attributes included in the experiment. Recruitment will occur through livestock cooperatives, farmer associations, and professional networks.
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
Block 1 of the experimental design assigned to half of the sample
Block 2 of the experimental design assigned to half of sample
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
Supporting Documents and Materials
IRB

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
Comisión de Ética en la Investigación (CEIN), Universidad de Zaragoza
IRB Approval Date
2025-07-15
IRB Approval Number
AO_CEIN_2025_22
Analysis Plan