Beyond Homo economicus: evidence from experimental economics

By Herbert Gintis. 2000

425 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Economics and Econometrics, General Decision Sciences, Safety Research

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/32e6d167d1b7f6fa7feb52762c2db664a75a7b19

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Economics and Econometrics

1. J. Paavola
2. C. Spash
3. W. Adger
4. C. Schleyer
5. A. Vatn
6. J. Gowdy
7. Elinor Ostrom
8. M. Faber

In General Decision Sciences

1. J. Paavola
2. W. Adger
3. A. Vatn
4. M. Faber
5. J. Gowdy
6. Thomas Petersen
7. Elinor Ostrom
8. P. Ehrlich

In Safety Research

1. A. Vatn
2. M. Faber
3. J. Gowdy
4. Thomas Petersen
5. Elinor Ostrom
6. J. Paavola
7. P. Ehrlich
8. Varun Rai

Citations in the corpus

• Challenges and growth: the development of the interdisciplinary field of institutional analysis (2007, background): “Scholars are now positing a family of individual models that change the basic assumptions of the classical model (see Rabin, 1993; Ito, Saijo, and Une, 1995; Chan et al., 1997; Levine, 1998; Fehr and Gächter, 2000; Bolton and Ockenfels, 2000; Gintis, 2000; Casari and Plott, 2003; Cox, 2004).”
• The approach of ecological economics (2005, background): “Results from behavioral economics and psychology indicate the existence of endowment effects (people place higher values on things they already possess), hyperbolic discounting (people discount the near future at a higher rate than the distant future), loss aversion (people are much more averse to t”
• Human Natures, Nature Conservation, and Environmental Ethics (2002, methodology): “…around attempts to discover whether human beings in some sense act rationally and have more or less stable preferences (Tversky and Kahneman 1974, 1986, Stigler and Becker 1977, Goetze and Galderisi 1989, Thaler 1992, Hines and Thaler 1995, Siegel and Thaler 1997, Gintis 2000, Bowles 2001).”
• Diffusion of environmentally-friendly energy technologies: buy versus lease differences in residential PV markets (2013, positive): “…that individual decision-makers are rational and information-prescient, there is increasing evidence that individual decision-makers depart significantly from the neoclassical model (Camerer et al 2004, Frederick et al 2002, Gintis 2000, Todd and Gigerenzer 2003, Wilson and Dowlatabadi 2007).”
• Homo oeconomicus and homo politicus in Ecological Economics (2002, background): “This is, however, only possible under very restrictive conditions, which in general fail to be fulfilled for issues of environmental policy (cf. Gintis, 2000). the model of homo oeconomicus, this model requires the existence of clearly determinable and definite alternatives.”
• An institutional analysis of methods for environmental appraisal (2009, background): “people hold in individualistic vs. social settings (e.g., Swaney 1987; Gintis 2000; Ostrom”
• Determinants of households’ investment in energy efficiency and renewables: evidence from the OECD survey on household environmental behaviour and attitudes (2015, background): “Indeed, people prefer short-term gains or immediate consumption, even if this implies relatively large negative effects in the long term (Gintis 2000).”
• Institutional ecological economics (2005, background): “Game theory and its experimental applications accommodate plural motivations and clarify their implications for collective action (Gintis, 2000) but they make it more difficult to make use of transaction cost reasoning.”
• Why do farmers join Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES) schemes? An Assessment of PES water scheme participation in Brazil (2014, background): “Moving beyond homo economicus (Gintis, 2000) will assist PES scheme managers in shaping better schemes.”
• Limits to CBA in UK and European environmental policy: retrospects and future prospects (2007, neutral): “is it fair?) may be influential (Sagoff, 1988; Gintis, 1998; Gowdy, 2004).”