Collective Contracts as a Risk‐Sharing Mechanism for Result‐Based Agri‐Environmental Payments: Experimental Evidence

ABSTRACT Linking payments from agri‐environment schemes to ecological results or to collective outcomes is viewed as a promising way to increase the effectiveness of agri‐environmental conservation. However, the two approaches are rarely combined. In this study, we test the performance of result‐based payments with collective contracts in a contextualised economic experiment with 540 non‐agricultural and agricultural students in Germany. Combining result‐based payments with collective contracts may hold potential by allowing farmers to share the risks associated with result‐based payments within a group. A downside of collective contracts, however, is the creation of a social dilemma, as individual payments depend on group outcomes. We find no evidence of differences in conservation levels under result‐based payments with collective as compared to individual contracts, suggesting that risk‐sharing benefits and effects of the social dilemma offset each other. We further examine the performance of collective contracts for varying risk levels that could, for example, reflect different geological and climatic conditions across Europe. Result‐based payments with collective contracts motivate higher conservation efforts in our experiment when external risks are high. Further, high risks appear to foster group cooperation under collective contracts, potentially leading to more equitable and predictable outcomes.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Agricultural Economics
Published
2026-04-26
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/1477-9552.70034
Primary Topic
Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Collective Contracts as a Risk‐Sharing Mechanism for Result‐Based Agri‐Environmental Payments: Experimental Evidence

Jens Rommel, Fabian Thomas, Stefanie Engel, Thomas Rellensmann
Journal of Agricultural Economics
Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies
article

Collective Contracts as a Risk‐Sharing Mechanism for Result‐Based Agri‐Environmental Payments: Experimental Evidence

Jens Rommel, Fabian Thomas, Stefanie Engel, Thomas Rellensmann
article en

Abstract

ABSTRACT Linking payments from agri‐environment schemes to ecological results or to collective outcomes is viewed as a promising way to increase the effectiveness of agri‐environmental conservation. However, the two approaches are rarely combined. In this study, we test the performance of result‐based payments with collective contracts in a contextualised economic experiment with 540 non‐agricultural and agricultural students in Germany. Combining result‐based payments with collective contracts may hold potential by allowing farmers to share the risks associated with result‐based payments within a group. A downside of collective contracts, however, is the creation of a social dilemma, as individual payments depend on group outcomes. We find no evidence of differences in conservation levels under result‐based payments with collective as compared to individual contracts, suggesting that risk‐sharing benefits and effects of the social dilemma offset each other. We further examine the performance of collective contracts for varying risk levels that could, for example, reflect different geological and climatic conditions across Europe. Result‐based payments with collective contracts motivate higher conservation efforts in our experiment when external risks are high. Further, high risks appear to foster group cooperation under collective contracts, potentially leading to more equitable and predictable outcomes.

Journal of Agricultural Economics
Osnabrück University (DE), Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences (SE), Hochschule Osnabrück (DE)
Horizon 2020 Framework Programme
Life in Land
Openalex Percentile: Top 4%
Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.