食物政治：关于对专家监管信任与政治极化经济成本的实验
Politics of Food: An Experiment on Trust in Expert Regulation and Economic Costs of Political Polarisation
The Economic Journal · 2026 · [{"name": "Christopher Burnitt", "affiliation": ["University of Warwick"]}, {"name": "Jared Gars", "affiliation": ["Joint Institute for Laboratory Astrophysics"]}, {"name": "Mateusz Stalinski", "affiliation": ["University of Warwick"]}]
中文摘要
摘要 日益加剧的政治极化提高了人们对监管机构政治化的担忧, 促使人们重新评估问责与独立性之间的权衡。我们研究感知到的外群体监督是否会影响对监管的信任与市场行为。利用美国电视节目文字稿, 我们表明媒体会将监管机构与总统联系起来。随后, 我们开展了一项田野实验 (N=5,566), 所用案例为美国环保署 (EPA) 在特朗普和拜登两任总统任期内均认可在柑橘作物上喷洒抗生素。在保持科学依据不变的情况下, 外群体监督使对喷洒的支持降低 26%, 降低了对 EPA 评估的信任, 并使对反对该做法的非政府组织的捐款增加 15%。在一项经过掩饰 (不揭示真实研究目的) 的后续实验中, 柑橘需求未发生变化, 但效应因消费习惯而异。
Abstract
Abstract Rising polarisation heightens concerns about politicising regulatory agencies, prompting reassessment of the accountability–independence trade-off. We study whether perceived out-group oversight affects trust in regulation and market behaviour. Using US television transcripts, we show that media link agencies with presidents. We then conduct a field experiment (N=5,566) using a case where the EPA endorsed antibiotic spraying on citrus crops during both Trump’s and Biden’s presidencies. Holding science constant, out-group oversight reduces support for spraying by 26%, lowers trust in EPA’s evaluation, and increases donations to an opposing NGO by 15%. In an obfuscated follow-up, citrus demand is unchanged, but effects differ by consumption habits.