How incentives are structured not only determines how much individual resource users can be influenced, but also impacts wider cobenefits, such as building the capacity of local institutions or changing social norms. The authors find that individual payments performed better in their experiment and note that previous studies draw the opposite conclusion, attributing this to cultural, political, and experimental factors. While Gatiso, Vollan, Vimal, and Kühl ( ) distinguish between payouts given directly to individuals or to a shared resource (a school), both Salk, Lopez, and Wong ( ) and Travers, Clements, Keane, and Milner‐Gulland ( ) focus on whose performance is evaluated: the group's or the individual's. ...the “equity‐based individual payment” (EBIP) treatment in Gatiso et al. ( ) is a group treatment under the Travers/Salk definition since payouts depend on aggregate group behavior.