Determinants of Technology Adoption: Private Value and Peer Effects in Menstrual Cup Take-Up

We estimate the role of benefits and peer effects in technology adoption using data from randomized distribution of menstrual cups in Nepal. Using individual randomization, we estimate causal effects of peer exposure on adoption; using differences in potential returns we estimate effects of benefits. We find both peers and value influence adoption. Using the fact that we observe both trial and usage of the product, we examine the mechanisms driving peer effects. We find that peers matters because individuals learn how to use the technology from their friends, but that they do not affect individual desire to use the cup.

[1]  M. Rosenzweig,et al.  Learning by Doing and Learning from Others: Human Capital and Technical Change in Agriculture , 1995, Journal of Political Economy.

[2]  Kaivan Munshi.  Networks in the Modern Economy: Mexican Migrants in the U. S. Labor Market , 2003 .

[3]  Imran Rasul,et al.  Social Networks and Technology Adoption in Northern Mozambique , 2002 .

[4]  Garth Saloner,et al.  Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2011 with Funding from Adoption of Technologies Uith Network Effects: an Empirical Examination of the Adoption of Automated Teller Machines , 2022 .

[5]  Timothy G. Conley,et al.  Learning About a New Technology: Pineapple in Ghana , 2010 .

[6]  Edward Miguel,et al.  Worms: Identifying Impacts on Education and Health in the Presence of Treatment Externalities, Guide to Replication of Miguel and Kremer (2004) , 2014 .

[7]  Adela Luque,et al.  An option-value approach to technology adoption in U.S. manufacturing: Evidence from microdata , 2002 .

[8]  B. Ryan.  The diffusion of hybrid seed corn in two Iowa communities , 1943 .

[9]  David N. Figlio.  Boys Named Sue: Disruptive Children and Their Peers , 2005, Education Finance and Policy.

[10]  Z. Griliches.  HYBRID CORN: AN EXPLORATION IN THE ECONOMIC OF TECHNOLOGICAL CHANGE , 1957 .

[11]  D. Staiger,et al.  Technology Adoption from Hybrid Corn to Beta Blockers , 2005 .

[12]  Kaivan Munshi,et al.  Social norms and the fertility transition , 2006 .

[13]  P. David.  The Dynamo and the Computer: An Historical Perspective on the Modern Productivity Paradox , 1990 .

[14]  C. Manski.  Identification of Endogenous Social Effects: The Reflection Problem , 1993 .

[15]  Jonathan Robinson,et al.  How High Are Rates of Return to Fertilizer? Evidence from Field Experiments in Kenya , 2008 .

[16]  Wilbur John Coleman,et al.  Cross-Country Technology Diffusion: The Case of Computers , 2001 .

[17]  Jere R. Behrman,et al.  The density of social networks and fertility decisions: evidence from south nyanza district, kenya , 2001, Demography.

[18]  John M. Quigley,et al.  Regulatory Barriers to the Diffusion of Innovation: Some Evidence from Building Codes , 1977 .

[19]  E. Duflo,et al.  The Role of Information and Social Interactions in Retirement Plan Decisions: Evidence from a Randomized Experiment , 2002 .

[20]  S. Oster,et al.  The diffusion of innovation among steel firms: the basic oxygen furnace , 1982 .