Effect of decision rules in choice experiments on hunting and bushmeat trade

Abstract

Providing insight on decisions to hunt and trade bushmeat can facilitate improved management interventions that typically include enforcement, alternative employment, and donation of livestock. Conservation interventions to regulate bushmeat hunting and trade have hitherto been based on assumptions of utility-(i.e., personal benefits) maximizing behavior, which influences the types of incentives designed. However, if individuals instead strive to minimize regret, interventions may be misguided. We tested support for 3 hypotheses regarding decision rules through a choice experiment in Tanzania. We estimated models based on the assumptions of random utility maximization (RUM) and pure random regret maximization (P-RRM) and combinations thereof. One of these models had an attribute-specific decision rule and another had a class-specific decision rule. The RUM model outperformed the P-RRM model, but the attribute-specific model performed better. Allowing respondents with different decision rules and preference heterogeneity within each decision rule in a class-specific model performed best, revealing that 55% of the sample used a P-RRM decision rule. Individuals using a P-RRM decision rule responded less to enforcement, salary, and livestock donation than did individuals using the RUM decision rule. Hence, 3 common strategies, enforcement, alternative income-generating activities, and providing livestock as a substitute protein, are likely less effective in changing the behavior of more than half of respondents. Only salary elicited a large (i.e. elastic) response, and only for one RUM class. Policies to regulate the bushmeat trade based solely on the assumption of individuals maximizing utility, may fail for a significant proportion of the sample. Despite the superior performance of models that allow both RUM and P-RRM decision rules there are drawbacks that must be considered before use in the Global South, where very little is known about the social-psychology of decision making.

Utility maximization versus regret minimization in health choice behavior: Evidence from four datasets

“…Next, we estimate within‐class latent classes, to accommodate unobserved preference heterogeneity as distinct from decision rule heterogeneity (Hess & Stathopoulos, 2013; Nielsen & Jacobsen, 2020). Then, the choice probability becomes, where K are additional classes that allow to vary within decision rules.…”

“…latent class model is specified that accommodates the preceding decision rules(Gonzalez-Valdes & Raveau, 2018;Hess & Chorus, 2015;Hess & Stathopoulos, 2013;Nielsen & Jacobsen, 2020). Each of the latent classes corresponds to a particular decision rule.…”

Introduction: New directions in conservation psychology at a critical time

“…2020 [this issue]), homeowners’ compliance with techniques to reduce trash raiding by American black bears ( Ursus americanus ) in the Rocky Mountains (U.S.A.) (Lischka et al. 2020 [this issue]), and social influences on Tanzanian tradespeople's decisions to hunt wildlife to sell as bushmeat (Nielsen & Jacobsen 2020 [this issue]). Collectively, these authors demonstrate how context influences decision making among experts on the job, individuals at home or away, and community members making business‐related transactions.…”

“…Further research would need to determine the durability and generalizability of this type of behavior change. Finally, Nielsen and Jacobsen (2020) discovered that a desire to avoid negative feelings (in this case regret) dissuaded more people from hunting bushmeat than did an offer of increased salary, yet their results overall suggest different strategies worked for different people. Holistically, these results underscore a need to understand how both social context and individual beliefs operate together on conservation decision making and behavior.…”

“…As is the case in its parent discipline, conservation psychology research is also disproportionately focused on Western and developed countries and conducted by Westerners (Henrich et al 2010). Psychological research that can forge multidisciplinary and cross-cultural collaborations can help develop and test theories and interventions through a range of investigative methods to create more effective and lasting behavior changes across time and space (Nielsen et al 2020).…”