Abstract:
We conducted framed field experiments (FFEs) with local forest users in Tanzania, testing three different conservation treatments: command and control (CAC), payment for environmental services (PES) and community forest management (CFM). Our participants display more pro-social behaviour than similar studies have shown, indicating that forest specific framing is influential for participants’ behaviour. We also find that treatments have strong impacts through non-pecuniary channels. CFM is as efficient as CAC in increasing pro-social forest use, despite not directly affecting the pecuniary gain. PES – as designed here – is the least effective treatment, but the results might be parameter sensitive. Women use forests more intensively than men, but are also more responsive to the treatments. The behavioural validity of the experiment is supported by strong correlation between behaviour in the experiment and stated real life forest behaviour, while treatment validity cannot be tested directly. We propose that FFEs should become a supplement to traditional impact assessments (IA) of forest conservation policies, as it avoids several challenges facing more traditional IA methods.
