IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolec/v159y2019icp212-225.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Institutional Credibility Measurement Based on Structure of Transaction Costs: A Case Study of Ongniud Banner in the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region

Author

Listed:
  • Fan, Shengyue
  • Yang, Jinfei
  • Liu, Wenwen
  • Wang, He

Abstract

The need to assess institutional efficiency remains a key issue in institutional economics. Credibility theory is a useful theoretical innovation that uses institution function to analyze institutional efficiency. However, current credibility measurement methods have shortcomings. In this research, we developed a method to measure institutional credibility based on the transaction cost structure. We used the ratio of endogenous transaction costs to transaction costs, and the ratio of transaction costs to total cost, to get the transaction cost structure coefficient. Then, based on the correspondence between institutional credibility and the transaction cost structure, we developed a model to analyze and evaluate institutional credibility. As a case study, we provided a longitudinal and horizontal comparison of the credibility of two ecological governance policies from Ongniud Banner in Inner Mongolia. The study showed that our institutional credibility evaluation model is feasible. The model can compare institutional credibility over time, and provide a horizontal comparison of the credibility of different institutions. Our proposed approach is of significance because it avoids the shortcomings of existing credibility measurement methods, and provides quantitative assessment of institutional credibility.

Suggested Citation

  • Fan, Shengyue & Yang, Jinfei & Liu, Wenwen & Wang, He, 2019. "Institutional Credibility Measurement Based on Structure of Transaction Costs: A Case Study of Ongniud Banner in the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 212-225.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:159:y:2019:i:c:p:212-225
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2019.01.019
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S092180091830908X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2019.01.019?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. McCann, Laura & Colby, Bonnie & Easter, K. William & Kasterine, Alexander & Kuperan, K.V., 2005. "Transaction cost measurement for evaluating environmental policies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(4), pages 527-542, March.
    2. McCann, Laura & Easter, K. William, 2000. "Estimates of Public Sector Transaction Costs in NRCS Programs," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 32(3), pages 555-563, December.
    3. R. H. Coase, 2013. "The Problem of Social Cost," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 56(4), pages 837-877.
    4. Marshall, Graham R., 2013. "Transaction Costs, Collective Action And Adaptation In Managing Social-Ecological Systems," 2013 Conference (57th), February 5-8, 2013, Sydney, Australia 152166, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    5. Dustin Garrick & Bruce Aylward, 2012. "Transaction Costs and Institutional Performance in Market-Based Environmental Water Allocation," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 88(3), pages 536-560.
    6. McCann, Laura, 2013. "Transaction costs and environmental policy design," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 253-262.
    7. Marshall, Graham R., 2013. "Transaction costs, collective action and adaptation in managing complex social–ecological systems," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 185-194.
    8. Coggan, Anthea & Buitelaar, Edwin & Whitten, Stuart & Bennett, Jeff, 2013. "Factors that influence transaction costs in development offsets: Who bears what and why?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 222-231.
    9. Coggan, Anthea & Whitten, Stuart M. & Bennett, Jeff, 2010. "Influences of transaction costs in environmental policy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(9), pages 1777-1784, July.
    10. Mettepenningen, E. & Beckmann, V. & Eggers, J., 2011. "Public transaction costs of agri-environmental schemes and their determinants--Analysing stakeholders' involvement and perceptions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(4), pages 641-650, February.
    11. Garrick, Dustin & Whitten, Stuart M. & Coggan, Anthea, 2013. "Understanding the evolution and performance of water markets and allocation policy: A transaction costs analysis framework," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 195-205.
    12. Ho, Peter, 2005. "Institutions in Transition: Land Ownership, Property Rights, and Social Conflict in China," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199280698, Decembrie.
    13. John J. Wallis & Douglass North, 1986. "Measuring the Transaction Sector in the American Economy, 1870-1970," NBER Chapters, in: Long-Term Factors in American Economic Growth, pages 95-162, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Vatn, Arild, 2023. "The credibility thesis – A commentary from an original institutionalist position," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    2. Ziqi Zhou & Yung Yau, 2021. "The Small Property Rights Housing Institution in Mainland China: The Perspective of Substitutability of Institutional Functions," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-19, August.
    3. Qian, Chen & Antonides, Gerrit & Heerink, Nico & Zhu, Xueqin & Ma, Xianlei, 2022. "An economic-psychological perspective on perceived land tenure security: Evidence from rural eastern China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    4. Goyal, Yugank & Choudhury, Pranab Ranjan & Ghosh, Ranjan Kumar, 2022. "Informal land leasing in rural India persists because it is credible," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    5. Fan, Shengyue & He, Miao & Zhang, Tianyu & Huo, Yajing & Fan, Di, 2022. "Credibility measurement as a tool for conserving nature: Chinese herders’ livelihood capitals and payment for grassland ecosystem services," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    6. Ghorbani, Amineh & Ho, Peter & Bravo, Giangiacomo, 2021. "Institutional form versus function in a common property context: The credibility thesis tested through an agent-based model," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    7. Guo-Hua Cao & Jing Zhang, 2021. "Is a sustainable loop of economy and entrepreneurial ecosystem possible? a structural perspective," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(5), pages 7002-7040, May.
    8. Groenewegen, John, 2022. "Institutional form (blueprints) and institutional function (process): Theoretical reflections on property rights and land," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 121(C).
    9. You, Heyuan & Zhang, Jinrong & Song, Yan, 2022. "Assessing conflict of farmland institutions using credibility theory: Implications for socially acceptable land use," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    10. Chen, Huirong, 2022. "Linking institutional function with form: Distributional dynamics, disequilibrium, and rural land shareholding in China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    11. Wang, Weiye & Liu, Jinlong, 2022. "Lessons of government centralization and credibility: A qualitative case-study of administrative change in Jiuzhaigou Nature Reserve, China (1982–2018)," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
    12. Shengyue Fan & Xijing Luo & Peitao Han, 2023. "Conflict Resolution between Multi-Level Government and Farmers in Land Expropriation Based on Institutional Credibility Theory: Empirical Evidence from Shandong Province, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-22, April.

    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. Shahab, Sina & Clinch, J. Peter & O’Neill, Eoin, 2018. "Accounting for transaction costs in planning policy evaluation," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 263-272.
    2. Nantongo, Mary & Vatn, Arild, 2019. "Estimating Transaction Costs of REDD+," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 1-11.
    3. Coggan, Anthea & Buitelaar, Edwin & Whitten, Stuart & Bennett, Jeff, 2013. "Factors that influence transaction costs in development offsets: Who bears what and why?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 222-231.
    4. Shahab, Sina & Clinch, J. Peter & O'Neill, Eoin, 2019. "An Analysis of the Factors Influencing Transaction Costs in Transferable Development Rights Programmes," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 409-419.
    5. McCann, Laura, 2013. "Transaction costs and environmental policy design," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 253-262.
    6. Thiel, Andreas & Schleyer, Christian & Hinkel, Jochen & Schlüter, Maja & Hagedorn, Konrad & Bisaro, Sandy & Bobojonov, Ihtiyor & Hamidov, Ahmad, 2016. "Transferring Williamson's discriminating alignment to the analysis of environmental governance of social-ecological interdependence," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 159-168.
    7. Phan, Thu-Ha Dang & Brouwer, Roy & Hoang, Long Phi & Davidson, Marc David, 2017. "A comparative study of transaction costs of payments for forest ecosystem services in Vietnam," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 141-149.
    8. DeBoe, Gwendolen & Stephenson, Kurt, 2016. "Transactions costs of expanding nutrient trading to agricultural working lands: A Virginia case study," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 176-185.
    9. Garrick, Dustin & Whitten, Stuart M. & Coggan, Anthea, 2013. "Understanding the evolution and performance of water markets and allocation policy: A transaction costs analysis framework," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 195-205.
    10. Georgina W. Njiraini & Djiby Racine Thiam & Anthea Coggan, 2017. "The Analysis of Transaction Costs in Water Policy Implementation in South Africa: Trends, Determinants and Economic Implications," Water Economics and Policy (WEP), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 3(01), pages 1-30, January.
    11. Bellanger, Manuel & Fonner, Robert & Holland, Daniel S. & Libecap, Gary D. & Lipton, Douglas W. & Scemama, Pierre & Speir, Cameron & Thébaud, Olivier, 2021. "Cross-sectoral externalities related to natural resources and ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    12. Carlos Mario Gómez Gómez & C. D. Pérez-Blanco & David Adamson & Adam Loch, 2018. "Managing Water Scarcity at a River Basin Scale with Economic Instruments," Water Economics and Policy (WEP), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 4(01), pages 1-31, January.
    13. Pannell, David J. & Roberts, Anna M. & Park, Geoff & Alexander, Jennifer, 2013. "Improving environmental decisions: A transaction-costs story," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 244-252.
    14. Lundmark, Robert, 2022. "Time-adjusted transaction costs for energy renovations for single-family house-owners," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    15. Graham R. Marshall, 2020. "Evaluating Adaptive Efficiency in Environmental Water Recovery: Application of a Framework for Institutional Cost-Effectiveness Analysis," Water Economics and Policy (WEP), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 6(02), pages 1-28, April.
    16. Salomon Espinosa Diaz & Francesco Riccioli & Francesco Di Iacovo & Roberta Moruzzo, 2023. "Transaction Costs in Agri-Environment-Climate Measures: A Review of the Literature," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(9), pages 1-18, May.
    17. Valentová, Michaela & Horák, Martin & Dvořáček, Lukáš, 2020. "Why transaction costs do not decrease over time? A case study of energy efficiency programmes in Czechia," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    18. Crase, Lin & O'Keefe, Sue & Dollery, Brian, 2013. "Talk is cheap, or is it? The cost of consulting about uncertain reallocation of water in the Murray–Darling Basin, Australia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 206-213.
    19. Phan, Thu-Ha Dang & Brouwer, Roy & Davidson, Marc David, 2017. "A Global Survey and Review of the Determinants of Transaction Costs of Forestry Carbon Projects," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 1-10.
    20. Valentová, Michaela & Lízal, Lubomír & Knápek, Jaroslav, 2018. "Designing energy efficiency subsidy programmes: The factors of transaction costs," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 382-391.

    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:eee:ecolec:v:159:y:2019:i:c:p:212-225. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolecon .

    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.