Preprint Review Version 1 Preserved in Portico This version is not peer-reviewed

Framed Experiments and Games in Agriculture: A Systematic Review of the 21st Century in Economics and Social Science

Version 1 : Received: 9 August 2020 / Approved: 11 August 2020 / Online: 11 August 2020 (10:05:26 CEST)
Version 2 : Received: 12 August 2020 / Approved: 12 August 2020 / Online: 12 August 2020 (14:47:11 CEST)

A peer-reviewed article of this Preprint also exists.

Hernandez-Aguilera, J.N.; Mauerman, M.; Herrera, A.; Vasilaky, K.; Baethgen, W.; Loboguerrero, A.M.; Diro, R.; Tekeste, Y.T.; Osgood, D. Games and Fieldwork in Agriculture: A Systematic Review of the 21st Century in Economics and Social Science. Games 2020, 11, 47. Hernandez-Aguilera, J.N.; Mauerman, M.; Herrera, A.; Vasilaky, K.; Baethgen, W.; Loboguerrero, A.M.; Diro, R.; Tekeste, Y.T.; Osgood, D. Games and Fieldwork in Agriculture: A Systematic Review of the 21st Century in Economics and Social Science. Games 2020, 11, 47.

Journal reference: Games 2020, 11, 47
DOI: 10.3390/g11040047

Abstract

Framed experiments and games are a useful medium to understand how context affects individual and group decision-making. They are particularly relevant for field research in agriculture, where alternative experimental designs can be costly and unfeasible. After a systematic review of the literature, we found that the volume of published studies employing coordination and cooperation games increased during the 2000-2020 period. In recent years, there has been greater attention given to natural resource management, conservation, and ecology areas, especially in strategic regions for agriculture sustainability. Other games, such as trust and risk games, have come to be regarded as standards of framed field experiments in agriculture. Regardless of sectoral focus, most games' results are subject to internal and external validity criticism. In particular, a significant portion of the games showed potential recruitment biases against women and no opportunities for a continued impact assessment. However, games' validity should be judged on a case-by-case basis. Specific cultural aspects of games might reflect the real context, and generalizing games' conclusions to different settings is often constrained by cost and utility. Overall, games in agriculture could benefit from more significant, frequent, and inclusive experiments and data – all possibilities offered by digital technology. Present-day physical distance restrictions may accelerate this shift. New technologies and engaging ways to approach farmers might represent a turning point for games in agriculture in the 21st century.

Subject Areas

review; games; field experiments; agriculture

Comments (0)

We encourage comments and feedback from a broad range of readers. See criteria for comments and our diversity statement.

Leave a public comment
Send a private comment to the author(s)
Views 0
Downloads 0
Comments 0
Metrics 0


×
Alerts
Notify me about updates to this article or when a peer-reviewed version is published.
We use cookies on our website to ensure you get the best experience.
Read more about our cookies here.