Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T06:30:35.810Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Dynamic Field Experiments in Development Economics: Risk Valuation in Morocco, Kenya, and Peru

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 September 2016

Travis J. Lybbert ,
Francisco B. Galarza ,
John McPeak ,
Christopher B. Barrett ,
Stephen R. Boucher ,
Michael R. Carter ,
Sommarat Chantarat ,
Aziz Fadlaoui  and
Andrew Mude
Travis J. Lybbert
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics at the University of California, Davis
Francisco B. Galarza
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics at the University of Wisconsin in Madison
John McPeak
Affiliation:
Department of Public Administration at Syracuse University in Syracuse, New York
Christopher B. Barrett
Affiliation:
Department of Applied Economics and Management at Cornell University in Ithaca, New York
Stephen R. Boucher
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics at the University of California, Davis
Michael R. Carter
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics at the University of California, Davis
Sommarat Chantarat
Affiliation:
Department of Applied Economics and Management at Cornell University in Ithaca, New York
Aziz Fadlaoui
Affiliation:
Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique in Meknes, Morocco
Andrew Mude
Affiliation:
International Livestock Research Institute in Nairobi, Kenya
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The effective design and implementation of interventions that reduce vulnerability and poverty require a solid understanding of underlying poverty dynamics and associated behavioral responses. Stochastic and dynamic benefit streams can make it difficult for the poor to learn the value of such interventions to them. We explore how dynamic field experiments can help (i) intended beneficiaries to learn and understand these complicated benefit streams, and (ii) researchers to better understand how the poor respond to risk when faced with nonlinear welfare dynamics. We discuss and analyze dynamic risk valuation experiments in Morocco, Peru, and Kenya.

Keywords

povertyrisk and uncertaintydynamicsexperimentsKenyaMoroccoPeru
Type
Contributed Papers
Information
Agricultural and Resource Economics Review , Volume 39 , Issue 2 , April 2010 , pp. 176 - 192
Copyright
Copyright © 2010 Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abbink, K., Irlenbusch, B., Renner, E., and Street, H. 2006. “Group Size and Social Ties in Microfinance Institutions.” Economic Inquiry 44(4): 614–628.Google Scholar
Andersen, S., Harrison, G.W., Lau, M.I., and Rutström, E.E. 2006. “Dynamic Choice Behavior in a Natural Experiment.” Working paper, Department of Economics, University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL.Google Scholar
Andersen, S., Harrison, G.W., and Rutström, E.E. 2006. “Choice Behavior, Asset Integration and Natural Reference Points.” Working paper, Department of Economics, University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL.Google Scholar
Barrett, C.B., Marenya, P.P., McPeak, J.G., Minten, B., Murithi, F.M., Kosura, W.O., Place, F., Randrianarisoa, J.C., Rasambainarivo, J., and Wangila, J. 2006. “Welfare Dynamics in Rural Kenya and Madagascar.” Journal of Development Studies 42(2): 248–277.Google Scholar
Becker, D.E., DeGroot, M.H., and Marschak, J. 1964. “Measuring Utility by a Single-Response Sequential Method.” Behavioral Science 9(3): 226–232.Google Scholar
Binswanger, H.P. 1980. “Attitudes toward Risk: Experimental Measurement in Rural India.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 62(3): 395–407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boucher, S., Carter, M.R., and Guirkinger, C. 2008. “Risk Rationing and Wealth Effects in Credit Markets: Theory and Implications for Agricultural Development.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 90(2): 409–423.Google Scholar
Brown, A., Chua, Z., and Camerer, C. 2009. “Learning and Visceral Temptation in Dynamic Saving Experiments.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 124(1): 197–231.Google Scholar
Capra, C.M., Tanaka, T., Camerer, C., Munyan, L., Sovero, V., Wang, L., and Noussair, C. 2009. “The Impact of Simple Institutions in Experimental Economies with Poverty Traps.” Economic Journal 119(539): 977–1009.Google Scholar
Cardenas, J.-C., and Carpenter, J. 2008. “Behavioural Development Economics: Lessons from Field Labs in the Developing World.” Journal of Development Studies 44(3): 311–338.Google Scholar
Cassar, A., Crowley, L., and Wydick, B. 2007. “The Effect of Social Capital on Group Loan Repayment: Evidence from Field Experiments.” Economic Journal 117(517): F85–F106.Google Scholar
Elbers, C., Gunning, J.-W., and Kinsey, B. 2007. “Growth and Risk: Methodology and Micro Evidence.” World Bank Economic Review 21(1): 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Galarza, F. 2009. “Choices under Risk in Rural Peru.” Working paper, Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI.Google Scholar
Gine, X., Jakiela, P., Karlan, D.S., Morduch, J., and Floor, T. 2009. “Microfinance Games.” Working paper, World Bank, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
Harrison, G.W., and List, J.A. 2004. “Field Experiments.” Journal of Economic Literature 42(4): 1009–1055.Google Scholar
Henrich, J., and McElreath, R. 2002. “Are Peasants Risk-Averse Decision Makers?” Current Anthropology 43(1): 172–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoddinott, J. 2006. “Shocks and Their Consequences across and within Households in Rural Zimbabwe.” Journal of Development Studies 42(2): 301–321.Google Scholar
Holt, C.A., and Laury, S.K. 2002. “Risk Aversion and Incentive Effects.” American Economic Review 92(5): 1644–1655.Google Scholar
Humphrey, S.J., and Verschoor, A. 2004a. “Decision-Making under Risk among Small Farmers in East Uganda.” Journal of African Economies 13(1): 44–101.Google Scholar
Humphrey, S.J., and Verschoor, A. 2004b. “The Probability Weighting Function: Experimental Evidence from Uganda, India and Ethiopia.” Economics Letters 84(3): 419–425.Google Scholar
Lybbert, T.J. 2006. “Indian Farmers’ Valuation of Yield Distributions: Will Poor Farmers Value ‘Pro-Poor’ Seeds?” Food Policy 31(5): 415–441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lybbert, T.J., and Barrett, C.B. Forthcoming. “Risk Taking Behavior in the Presence of Nonconvex Asset Dynamics.” Economic Inquiry.Google Scholar
Lybbert, T.J., Barrett, C.B., Desta, S., and Coppock, D.L. 2004. “Stochastic Wealth Dynamics and Risk Management among a Poor Population.” Economic Journal 114: 750–777.Google Scholar
McPeak, J. 2004. “Contrasting Income Shocks with Asset Shocks: Livestock Sales in Northern Kenya.” Oxford Economic Papers 56(2): 263–284.Google Scholar
McPeak, J.G., and Doss, C.R. 2006. “Are Household Production Decisions Cooperative? Evidence on Pastoral Migration and Milk Sales from Northern Kenya.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 88(3): 525–541.Google Scholar
Tanaka, T., Camerer, C., and Nguyen, Q. Forthcoming. “Risk and Time Preferences: Experimental and Household Data from Vietnam.” American Economic Review.Google Scholar
Wik, M., and Holden, S. 1998. “Experimental Studies of Peasants’ Attitudes toward Risk in Northern Zambia.” Agricultural University of Norway Working Paper No. D-14, Agricultural University of Norway, Aas, Norway.Google Scholar