| Field | Before | After |
|---|---|---|
| Field Trial Status | Before in_development | After completed |
| Field Last Published | Before September 08, 2021 04:15 PM | After July 16, 2024 09:28 AM |
| Field Study Withdrawn | Before | After No |
| Field Intervention Completion Date | Before | After November 30, 2022 |
| Field Data Collection Complete | Before | After Yes |
| Field Final Sample Size: Number of Clusters (Unit of Randomization) | Before | After no clusters |
| Field Was attrition correlated with treatment status? | Before | After No |
| Field Final Sample Size: Total Number of Observations | Before | After 456 |
| Field Final Sample Size (or Number of Clusters) by Treatment Arms | Before | After 150/154/152 |
| Field Data Collection Completion Date | Before | After November 30, 2022 |
| Field Is data available for public use? | Before | After No |
| Field | Before | After |
|---|---|---|
| Field Paper Abstract | Before | After Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES) conditional on zero deforestation do not always match the time profile of landowners' opportunity costs. We examined the impact of adding some flexibility to PES contracts to allow landowners the possibility of receiving part of the financial incentive if some deforestation is detected during the contract period. We embedded a Becker-DeGroot-Marschak auction in a randomized controlled trial (RCT), which included one control group and two PES treatment groups. While the flexible PES contract allowing some deforestation saved slightly more forest, the fixed payment contract requiring zero deforestation exhibited a higher benefit-cost ratio. |
| Field Paper Citation | Before | After Gabriela Demarchi, Julie Subervie, Cauê Carrilho, Thibault Catry, Antoine Pfefer, et al.. Greater Flexibility in Payments for Ecosystem Services: Evidence from an RCT in the Amazon. 2024. |
| Field Paper URL | Before | After https://hal.inrae.fr/hal-04462983 |