[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/eecrev/v85y2016icp272-287.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Group size and the (in)efficiency of pure public good provision

Author

Listed:
  • Diederich, Johannes
  • Goeschl, Timo
  • Waichman, Israel
Abstract
Are larger groups better at cooperation than smaller groups? This paper investigates, under controlled conditions, the presence and direction of a possible group size effect in pure public good provision by large heterogeneous groups. Employing subjects drawn from the general population and introducing Internet-based procedures to study this question, we collected experimental evidence from 1110 subjects playing a linear public goods game in groups of 10, 40, and 100 members. We find a positive and significant group size effect: Increasing group size by a factor of 10 (4) increased efficiency by 10 (6) percent. The effect arose at the intensive margin and with repetition. Those who contributed contributed more in larger groups. Larger and smaller groups had similar initial contribution levels, but cooperation rates declined more slowly in the larger groups. Free-riding was invariant to group size, despite subjects׳ persistent beliefs of a negative group size effect at the extensive margin. Further econometric examination of the data supports these findings and provides starting points for future theoretical and experimental research on the group size effect.

Suggested Citation

  • Diederich, Johannes & Goeschl, Timo & Waichman, Israel, 2016. "Group size and the (in)efficiency of pure public good provision," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 272-287.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:eecrev:v:85:y:2016:i:c:p:272-287
    DOI: 10.1016/j.euroecorev.2016.03.001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0014292116300435
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.euroecorev.2016.03.001?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Cason, Timothy N. & Tabarrok, Alex & Zubrickas, Robertas, 2021. "Early refund bonuses increase successful crowdfunding," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 78-95.
    2. Tisserand, Jean-Christian & Hopfensitz, Astrid & Blondel, Serge & Loheac, Youenn & Mantilla, César & Mateu, Guillermo & Rosaz, Julie & Rozan, Anne & Willinger, Marc & Sutan, Angela, 2022. "Management of common pool resources in a nation-wide experiment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 201(C).
    3. Weimann, Joachim & Brosig-Koch, Jeannette & Heinrich, Timo & Hennig-Schmidt, Heike & Keser, Claudia, 2019. "Public good provision by large groups – the logic of collective action revisited," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 348-363.
    4. Diederich, Johannes & Goeschl, Timo & Waichman, Israel, 2023. "Self-nudging is more ethical, but less efficient than social nudging," VfS Annual Conference 2023 (Regensburg): Growth and the "sociale Frage" 277679, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    5. Gallier, Carlo & Goeschl, Timo & Kesternich, Martin & Lohse, Johannes & Reif, Christiane & Römer, Daniel, 2019. "Leveling up? An inter-neighborhood experiment on parochialism and the efficiency of multi-level public goods provision," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 500-517.
    6. Maria Bigoni & Gabriele Camera & Marco Casari, 2019. "Partners or Strangers? Cooperation, Monetary Trade, and the Choice of Scale of Interaction," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 11(2), pages 195-227, May.
    7. Shuguang Jiang & Marie Claire Villeval, 2024. "Dishonesty as a collective‐risk social dilemma," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 62(1), pages 223-241, January.
    8. Philipp Chapkovski, 2021. "Strike one hundred to educate one: Measuring the efficacy of collective sanctions experimentally," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(4), pages 1-21, April.
    9. Diederich, Johannes & Goeschl, Timo & Waichman, Israel, 2022. "Self-Nudging vs. Social Nudging in Social Dilemmas: An Experiment," Working Papers 0710, University of Heidelberg, Department of Economics.
    10. Goeschl, Timo & Kettner, Sara Elisa & Lohse, Johannes & Schwieren, Christiane, 2020. "How much can we learn about voluntary climate action from behavior in public goods games?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
    11. Jasmina Arifovic & Cars Hommes & Anita Kopányi-Peuker & Isabelle Salle, 2023. "Ten Isn't Large! Group Size and Coordination in a Large-Scale Experiment," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 15(1), pages 580-617, February.
    12. Skarzhinskaya, E. & Tsurikov, V., 2021. "Endogenous Stackelberg leadership within a team. The coalition effect," Journal of the New Economic Association, New Economic Association, vol. 49(1), pages 53-79.
    13. Weimann, Joachim & Brosig-Koch, Jeannette & Heinrich, Timo & Hennig-Schmidt, Heike & Keser, Claudia, 2022. "CO2 Emission reduction – Real public good provision by large groups in the laboratory," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 200(C), pages 1076-1089.
    14. Bilancini, Ennio & Boncinelli, Leonardo & Nardi, Chiara & Pizziol, Veronica, 2024. "Cooperation is unaffected by the threat of severe adverse events in public goods games," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    15. Panchali Guha, 2023. "School committee composition: Exploring the role of parental and female representation in India," Development Policy Review, Overseas Development Institute, vol. 41(3), May.
    16. Fredrik Carlsson & Claes Ek & Andreas Lange, 2024. "One bad apple spoils the barrel? Public good provision under threshold uncertainty," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 27(3), pages 664-686, July.
    17. Goeschl, Timo & Haberl, Beatrix & Soldà, Alice, 2023. "How to Organize Monitoring and Punishment: Experimental Evidence," Working Papers 0737, University of Heidelberg, Department of Economics.
    18. Cason, Timothy N. & Zubrickas, Robertas, 2019. "Donation-based crowdfunding with refund bonuses," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 452-471.
    19. Kreitmair, Ursula & Bower-Bir, Jacob, 2021. "Too different to solve climate change? Experimental evidence on the effects of production and benefit heterogeneity on collective action," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    20. Nobuyuki Hanaki & Aidas Masiliunas, 2021. "Market Concentration and Incentives to Collude in Cournot Oligopoly Experiments," ISER Discussion Paper 1131, Institute of Social and Economic Research, Osaka University.
    21. Jensen, Thomas & Markussen, Thomas, 2021. "Group size, signaling and the effect of democracy," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 187(C), pages 258-273.
    22. Gabriela Koľveková & Manuela Raisová & Martin Zoričak & Vladimír Gazda, 2021. "Endogenous Shared Punishment Model in Threshold Public Goods Games," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 58(1), pages 57-81, June.
    23. Toke R. Fosgaard, 2018. "Cooperation stability: A representative sample in the lab," IFRO Working Paper 2018/08, University of Copenhagen, Department of Food and Resource Economics.
    24. Alt, Marius, 2024. "Better us later than me now —," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 108(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Public good game; Large group; Extra-laboratory experiment; Free riding; Belief elicitation;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C93 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Field Experiments
    • D74 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Conflict; Conflict Resolution; Alliances; Revolutions
    • H41 - Public Economics - - Publicly Provided Goods - - - Public Goods

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:eecrev:v:85:y:2016:i:c:p:272-287. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/eer .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.