Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/283527 
Year of Publication: 
2024
Series/Report no.: 
AWI Discussion Paper Series No. 741
Publisher: 
University of Heidelberg, Department of Economics, Heidelberg
Abstract: 
Can Attribution Science, a method for quantifying - ex post - humanity's contribution to adverse climatic events, induce pro-environmental behavioral change? We conduct a conceptual test of this question by studying, in an online experiment with 3,031 participants, whether backwards-looking attribution affects future decisions, even when seemingly uninformative to a consequentialist decision-maker. By design, adverse events can arise as a result of participants' pursuit of higher payoffs (anthropogenic cause) or as a result of chance (natural cause). Treatments vary whether adverse events are causally attributable and whether attribution can be acquired at cost. We find that ex-post attributability is behaviorally relevant: Attribution to an anthropogenic cause reduces future anthropogenic stress and leads to fewer adverse events compared to no attributability and compared to attribution to a natural cause. Average willingness-to-pay for ex-post attribution is positive. The conjecture that Attribution Science can be behaviorally impactful and socially valuable has empirical merit.
Subjects: 
Extreme event attribution
attribution science
behavioral change
cause dependence
online experiment
JEL: 
D91
Q54
C99$a
D91
Q54
C99
Persistent Identifier of the first edition: 
Document Type: 
Working Paper

Files in This Item:
File
Size





Items in EconStor are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.