IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/endeec/v27y2022i3p223-249_2.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

‘Green’ managerial delegation theory

Author

Listed:
  • Buccella, Domenico
  • Fanti, Luciano
  • Gori, Luca

Abstract

This article develops a non-cooperative game with managerial quantity-setting firms in which owners choose whether to delegate output and abatement decisions to managers through a contract based on emissions (conventionally denoted as ‘green’ delegation, GD) instead of sales (sales delegation, SD), and the government levies an emissions tax to incentivise firms’ emissions-reduction actions. First, it compares the Nash equilibrium outcomes between GD and SD and then contrasts them also with profit maximisation (PM). A plethora of Nash equilibria emerges, especially in the case GD versus PM (the ‘green delegation game’), depending on the public awareness toward environmental quality, ranging from the coordination game to the ‘green’ prisoner's dilemma. Second, though the contract under GD incentivises managers for emissions, the environmental damage is lower than under SD. This is because the optimal tax more than compensates the incentive for emissions. These findings suggest that designing GD contracts paradoxically favours environmental quality.

Suggested Citation

  • Buccella, Domenico & Fanti, Luciano & Gori, Luca, 2022. "‘Green’ managerial delegation theory," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 27(3), pages 223-249, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:endeec:v:27:y:2022:i:3:p:223-249_2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1355770X21000206/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lee Sang-Ho & Park Chul-Hi, 2019. "Eco-Firms and the Sequential Adoption of Environmental Corporate Social Responsibility in the Managerial Delegation," The B.E. Journal of Theoretical Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 19(1), pages 1-9, January.
    2. Susumu Cato, 2010. "Emission Taxes and Optimal Refunding Schemes with Endogenous Market Structure," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 46(3), pages 275-280, July.
    3. Fershtman, Chaim & Judd, Kenneth L, 1987. "Equilibrium Incentives in Oligopoly," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 77(5), pages 927-940, December.
    4. Markusen James R. & Morey Edward R. & Olewiler Nancy D., 1993. "Environmental Policy when Market Structure and Plant Locations Are Endogenous," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 24(1), pages 69-86, January.
    5. Bian, Junsong & Guo, Xiaolei & Li, Kevin W., 2018. "Decentralization or integration: Distribution channel selection under environmental taxation," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 170-193.
    6. Lee, Sang-Ho, 1999. "Optimal Taxation for Polluting Oligopolists with Endogenous Market Structure," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 15(3), pages 293-308, May.
    7. Conrad, Klaus & Wang, Jianmin, 1993. "The effect of emission taxes and abatement subsidies on market structure," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 11(4), pages 499-518.
    8. Steven D. Sklivas, 1987. "The Strategic Choice of Managerial Incentives," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 18(3), pages 452-458, Autumn.
    9. Markusen, James R., 1997. "Costly pollution abatement, competitiveness and plant location decisions," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(4), pages 299-320, November.
    10. Nirvikar Singh & Xavier Vives, 1984. "Price and Quantity Competition in a Differentiated Duopoly," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 15(4), pages 546-554, Winter.
    11. Lee, Dwight R., 1975. "Efficiency of pollution taxation and market structure," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 2(1), pages 69-72, September.
    12. Rupayan Pal, 2012. "Delegation And Emission Tax In A Differentiated Oligopoly," Manchester School, University of Manchester, vol. 80(6), pages 650-670, December.
    13. Frederick Ploeg & Aart Zeeuw, 1992. "International aspects of pollution control," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 2(2), pages 117-139, March.
    14. Ulph, Alistair, 1996. "Environmental Policy and International Trade when Governments and Producers Act Strategically," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 265-281, May.
    15. R. Simpson, 1995. "Optimal pollution taxation in a Cournot duopoly," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 6(4), pages 359-369, December.
    16. Elias Asproudis & Maria Gil-Moltó, 2015. "Green Trade Unions: Structure, Wages and Environmental Technology," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 60(2), pages 165-189, February.
    17. Fredrik Carlsson, 2000. "Environmental Taxation and Strategic Commitment in Duopoly Models," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 15(3), pages 243-256, March.
    18. Oates, Wallace E. & Strassmann, Diana L., 1984. "Effluent fees and market structure," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(1), pages 29-46, June.
    19. Bárcena-Ruiz, Juan Carlos & Campo, María Luz, 2012. "Partial cross-ownership and strategic environmental policy," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 198-210.
    20. Zhu Zhu & Feifei Lu, 2020. "Family Ownership and Corporate Environmental Responsibility: The Contingent Effect of Venture Capital and Institutional Environment," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-18, June.
    21. Sheu, Jiuh-Biing, 2011. "Bargaining framework for competitive green supply chains under governmental financial intervention," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 47(5), pages 573-592, September.
    22. Hafezalkotob, Ashkan, 2017. "Competition, cooperation, and coopetition of green supply chains under regulations on energy saving levels," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 228-250.
    23. Michael Rauscher, 1995. "Environmental regulation and the location of polluting industries," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 2(2), pages 229-244, August.
    24. Julie Dekker & Tim Hasso, 2016. "Environmental Performance Focus in Private Family Firms: The Role of Social Embeddedness," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 136(2), pages 293-309, June.
    25. Claudia Arena & Giovanna Michelon, 2018. "A matter of control or identity? Family firms' environmental reporting decisions along the corporate life cycle," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(8), pages 1596-1608, December.
    26. James J. Chrisman & Esra Memili & Kaustav Misra, 2014. "Nonfamily Managers, Family Firms, and the Winner's Curse: The Influence of Noneconomic Goals and Bounded Rationality," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 38(5), pages 1-25, September.
    27. Vickers, John, 1985. "Delegation and the Theory of the Firm," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 95(380a), pages 138-147, Supplemen.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Buccella, Domenico & Fanti, Luciano & Gori, Luca, 2021. "To abate, or not to abate? A strategic approach on green production in Cournot and Bertrand duopolies," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    2. Bian, Junsong & Guo, Xiaolei & Li, Kevin W., 2018. "Decentralization or integration: Distribution channel selection under environmental taxation," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 170-193.
    3. Requate, Till, 2005. "Environmental Policy under Imperfect Competition: A Survey," Economics Working Papers 2005-12, Christian-Albrechts-University of Kiel, Department of Economics.
    4. Domenico Buccella & Luciano Fanti & Luca Gori, 2023. "Managerial firms’ profitability, unions, and environmental taxes," Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 94(2), pages 575-598, June.
    5. Juan Bárcena-Ruiz & María Garzón, 2014. "Multiproduct Firms and Environmental Policy Coordination," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 59(3), pages 407-431, November.
    6. Juan Carlos Bárcena-Ruiz, 2006. "Environmental Taxes and First-Mover Advantages," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 35(1), pages 19-39, September.
    7. Rupayan Pal, 2012. "Delegation And Emission Tax In A Differentiated Oligopoly," Manchester School, University of Manchester, vol. 80(6), pages 650-670, December.
    8. Rupayan Pal, 2009. "Delegation and Emission Tax in a Differentiated Oligopoly," Working Papers id:2263, eSocialSciences.
    9. Bárcena-Ruiz, Juan Carlos & Campo, María Luz, 2012. "Partial cross-ownership and strategic environmental policy," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 198-210.
    10. Buccella Domenico & Wojna Michał, 2019. "”Green” Managerial Delegation and Environmental Corporate Social Responsibility in Different Market Structures," Journal of Management and Business Administration. Central Europe, Sciendo, vol. 27(4), pages 2-22, December.
    11. Lahiri, Sajal & Ono, Yoshiyasu, 2015. "Pollution, foreign direct investment, and welfare," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(2), pages 238-247.
    12. Bárcena-Ruiz, Juan Carlos & Sagasta, Amagoia, 2021. "Environmental policies with consumer-friendly firms and cross-ownership," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 103(C).
    13. Claude d'Aspremont & Rodolphe Dos Santos Ferreira & Louis-André Gérard-Varet, 2007. "Competition For Market Share Or For Market Size: Oligopolistic Equilibria With Varying Competitive Toughness," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 48(3), pages 761-784, August.
    14. Ya‐chin Wang & Leonard F.s. Wang, 2009. "Equivalence Of Competition Mode In A Vertically Differentiated Duopoly With Delegation," South African Journal of Economics, Economic Society of South Africa, vol. 77(4), pages 577-590, December.
    15. Joanna Poyago-Thotoky, 2003. "Optimal Environmental Taxation, R&D Subsidization and the Role of Market Conduct," Finnish Economic Papers, Finnish Economic Association, vol. 16(1), pages 15-26, Spring.
    16. Fischer, Carolyn, 2011. "Market power and output-based refunding of environmental policy revenues," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 212-230, January.
    17. Dinah A. Cohen-Vernik & Li Yang & Amit Pazgal, 2022. "Strategic Delegation with Differentiated Products," Customer Needs and Solutions, Springer;Institute for Sustainable Innovation and Growth (iSIG), vol. 9(3), pages 66-73, December.
    18. Nakamura, Yasuhiko, 2019. "Combining the endogenous choice of the timing of setting incentive parameters and the contents of strategic contracts in a managerial mixed duopoly," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 207-233.
    19. Lambert Schoonbeek & Frans Vries, 2009. "Environmental taxes and industry monopolization," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 36(1), pages 94-106, August.
    20. Pal, Rupayan, 2015. "Cournot vs. Bertrand under relative performance delegation: Implications of positive and negative network externalities," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 94-101.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • H23 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Externalities; Redistributive Effects; Environmental Taxes and Subsidies
    • L1 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance
    • M5 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Personnel Economics
    • Q58 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environmental Economics: Government Policy

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:endeec:v:27:y:2022:i:3:p:223-249_2. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/ede .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.