x

Please fill out this short user survey of only 3 questions in order to help us improve the site. We appreciate your feedback!
THE IMPACT OF ECONOMIC VALUATION INFORMATION ON ENVIRONMENTAL CHARITABLE GIVING
Last registered on March 01, 2018

Pre-Trial

Trial Information
General Information
Title
THE IMPACT OF ECONOMIC VALUATION INFORMATION ON ENVIRONMENTAL CHARITABLE GIVING
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0002758
Initial registration date
February 28, 2018
Last updated
March 01, 2018 9:53 PM EST
Location(s)
Region
Primary Investigator
Affiliation
Skidmore College
Other Primary Investigator(s)
PI Affiliation
University of Maine
PI Affiliation
University of Maine
Additional Trial Information
Status
On going
Start date
2014-06-18
End date
2018-05-31
Secondary IDs
Abstract
Non-profit entities are increasingly called upon to protect, advocate for and manage natural resources. To complete protection and management objectives these entities must engage the public in funding efforts. One way to engage the public is to underscore the economic value of the natural world. Enhancing our understanding of how citizens use economic valuation information in making contribution decisions strengthens the ability of a diverse set of decision-makers to make choices about unveiling economic valuation information. We draw on (i) a growing literature on charitable environmental giving (Messer, Zarghamee, Kaiser & Schulze, 2007; Bochet, Page & Puttermand, 2006), and (ii) a robust literature indicating that message framing, here economic valuation as information, is an important tool for communicating complex environmental decisions (Goff, Waring and Noblet, 2017; Van de Velde, Verbeke, Popp, & Van Huylenbroeck, 2010; Scannell & Gifford, 2013). We also investigate the effect that environmental motivations (intrinsic versus extrinsic) may play in how people respond to economic valuation information. Key extensions follow from our work in considering the role that economic valuation information may play in citizen support for future environmental policies aimed at protecting and managing public natural resources.
External Link(s)
Registration Citation
Citation
Anthony, Jordan, Sandra Goff and Caroline Noblet. 2018. "THE IMPACT OF ECONOMIC VALUATION INFORMATION ON ENVIRONMENTAL CHARITABLE GIVING ." AEA RCT Registry. March 01. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.2758-1.0.
Former Citation
Anthony, Jordan et al. 2018. "THE IMPACT OF ECONOMIC VALUATION INFORMATION ON ENVIRONMENTAL CHARITABLE GIVING ." AEA RCT Registry. March 01. http://www.socialscienceregistry.org/trials/2758/history/26232.
Experimental Details
Interventions
Intervention(s)
Information regarding the benefits of natural resources/ecosystem services are provided to participants. In treatment condition, participants also receive economic valuation information.
Intervention Start Date
2014-06-18
Intervention End Date
2017-05-31
Primary Outcomes
Primary Outcomes (end points)
Donated (whether or not a participant donated a non-zero amount)
Donation (the amount that a participant donated)
Primary Outcomes (explanation)
Secondary Outcomes
Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)
Experimental Design
Experimental Design
We conduct in-person experiments and a separate natural field experiment to test the impact of various natural-resource scale and communication strategies on environmental charitable giving. In each case participants were provided with information on a natural resource and asked to make a charitable donation. Participants in the control condition were only shown general information about the natural resource in question; our treatment condition participants were also shown information regarding the economic valuation of the resource consistent with other work by the authors (Goff, Waring and Noblet, 2017). The natural field experiment is implemented through fundraising mailers by a Maine-based natural resource conservation advocacy organization.
Experimental Design Details
Randomization Method
Randomization in the field experiment was conducted by the partner organization and based upon last name. The randomization in the in-person lab-based study was performed through Qualtrics randomization.
Randomization Unit
Randomization is performed at the level of the individual.
Was the treatment clustered?
No
Experiment Characteristics
Sample size: planned number of clusters
NA
Sample size: planned number of observations
Over 2000 in natural field experiment; over 100 in in-person experiment
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
Half of each sample receives the treatment in both studies
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
IRB
INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARDS (IRBs)
IRB Name
University of Maine IRB
IRB Approval Date
2014-06-18
IRB Approval Number
2014-05-12
IRB Name
Skidmore IRB
IRB Approval Date
2017-04-25
IRB Approval Number
1704-617
Analysis Plan

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

Request Information
Post-Trial
Post Trial Information
Study Withdrawal
Intervention
Is the intervention completed?
No
Is data collection complete?
Data Publication
Data Publication
Is public data available?
No
Program Files
Program Files
Reports, Papers & Other Materials
Relevant Paper(s)
REPORTS & OTHER MATERIALS