IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jgames/v7y2016i4p31-d81269.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evolutionary Inspection and Corruption Games

Author

Listed:
  • Stamatios Katsikas

    (Centre for Complexity Science, University of Warwick, Coventry CV4 7AL, UK)

  • Vassili Kolokoltsov

    (Department of Statistics, University of Warwick, Coventry CV4 7AL, UK
    Institute of Informatics Problems of the Russian Academy of Sciences (IPI RAN), Vavilova, Moscow 119333, Russia)

  • Wei Yang

    (Risk Methodology, Santander UK plc, London NW1 3AN, UK)

Abstract

We extend a standard two-person, non-cooperative, non-zero sum, imperfect inspection game, considering a large population of interacting inspectees and a single inspector. Each inspectee adopts one strategy, within a finite/infinite bounded set of strategies returning increasingly illegal profits, including compliance. The inspectees may periodically update their strategies after randomly inter-comparing the obtained payoffs, setting their collective behaviour subject to evolutionary pressure. The inspector decides, at each update period, the optimum fraction of his/her renewable budget to invest on his/her interference with the inspectees’ collective effect. To deter the inspectees from violating, he/she assigns a fine to each illegal strategy. We formulate the game mathematically, study its dynamics and predict its evolution subject to two key controls, the inspection budget and the punishment fine. Introducing a simple linguistic twist, we also capture the corresponding version of a corruption game.

Suggested Citation

  • Stamatios Katsikas & Vassili Kolokoltsov & Wei Yang, 2016. "Evolutionary Inspection and Corruption Games," Games, MDPI, vol. 7(4), pages 1-25, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jgames:v:7:y:2016:i:4:p:31-:d:81269
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4336/7/4/31/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4336/7/4/31/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bernhard von Stengel, 2016. "Recursive Inspection Games," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 41(3), pages 935-952, August.
    2. Daniel Rothenstein & Shmuel Zamir, 2002. "Imperfect Inspection Games Over Time," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 109(1), pages 175-192, January.
    3. Ariane Lambert‐Mogiliansky & Mukul Majumdar & Roy Radner, 2008. "Petty corruption: A game‐theoretic approach," International Journal of Economic Theory, The International Society for Economic Theory, vol. 4(2), pages 273-297, June.
    4. Francesco Giovannoni & Daniel Seidmann, 2014. "Corruption and power in democracies," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 42(3), pages 707-734, March.
    5. John Canty, Morton & Rothenstein, Daniel & Avenhaus, Rudolf, 2001. "Timely inspection and deterrence," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 131(1), pages 208-223, May.
    6. Avenhaus, Rudolf & Von Stengel, Bernhard & Zamir, Shmuel, 2002. "Inspection games," Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications, in: R.J. Aumann & S. Hart (ed.), Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 51, pages 1947-1987, Elsevier.
    7. Avenhaus, Rudolf & Canty, Morton & Marc Kilgour, D. & von Stengel, Bernhard & Zamir, Shmuel, 1996. "Inspection games in arms control," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 90(3), pages 383-394, May.
    8. Hohzaki, Ryusuke, 2007. "An inspection game with multiple inspectees," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 178(3), pages 894-906, May.
    9. Toke S. Aidt, 2003. "Economic analysis of corruption: a survey," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 113(491), pages 632-652, November.
    10. Arvind K. Jain, 2001. "Corruption: A Review," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(1), pages 71-121, February.
    11. Vassili N Kolokoltsov & Oleg A Malafeyev, 2010. "Understanding Game Theory:Introduction to the Analysis of Many Agent Systems with Competition and Cooperation," World Scientific Books, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., number 7564, February.
    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. Gianfranco Gambarelli & Daniele Gervasio & Francesca Maggioni & Daniel Faccini, 2022. "A Stackelberg game for the Italian tax evasion problem," Computational Management Science, Springer, vol. 19(2), pages 295-307, June.
    2. Lahiri, Bidisha & Ali, Haider, 2022. "Inspections, informal payments and tax payments by firms," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 46(PA).
    3. Guzmán, Cristóbal & Riffo, Javiera & Telha, Claudio & Van Vyve, Mathieu, 2022. "A sequential Stackelberg game for dynamic inspection problems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 302(2), pages 727-739.
    4. Guzman, Cristobal & Riffo, Javiera & Telha, Claudio & Van Vyve, Mathieu, 2021. "A Sequential Stackelberg Game for Dynamic Inspection Problems," LIDAM Discussion Papers CORE 2021036, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    5. Ederlina Ganatuin‐Nocon & Tyrone Ang, 2020. "Revisiting inspection game and inspector leadership through reaction networks," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 67(6), pages 438-452, September.
    6. Vassili N. Kolokoltsov, 2021. "Inspection—Corruption Game of Illegal Logging and Other Violations: Generalized Evolutionary Approach," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(14), pages 1-14, July.
    7. Deutsch, Yael, 2021. "A polynomial-time method to compute all Nash equilibria solutions of a general two-person inspection game," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 288(3), pages 1036-1052.
    8. V. N. Kolokoltsov & O. A. Malafeyev, 2018. "Corruption and botnet defense: a mean field game approach," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 47(3), pages 977-999, September.
    9. Giovanni Villani & Marta Biancardi, 2023. "An Evolutionary Game to Study Banks–Firms Relationship: Monitoring Intensity and Private Benefit," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 61(3), pages 1075-1093, March.

    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. Deutsch, Yael, 2021. "A polynomial-time method to compute all Nash equilibria solutions of a general two-person inspection game," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 288(3), pages 1036-1052.
    2. V. N. Kolokoltsov & O. A. Malafeyev, 2017. "Mean-Field-Game Model of Corruption," Dynamic Games and Applications, Springer, vol. 7(1), pages 34-47, March.
    3. Puneet Agarwal & Kyle Hunt & Shivasubramanian Srinivasan & Jun Zhuang, 2020. "Fire Code Inspection and Compliance: A Game-Theoretic Model Between Fire Inspection Agencies and Building Owners," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 17(3), pages 208-226, September.
    4. Yang, Zhisen & Yang, Zaili & Yin, Jingbo & Qu, Zhuohua, 2018. "A risk-based game model for rational inspections in port state control," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 477-495.
    5. Maria Kravtsova & Aleksey Oshchepkov, 2019. "Market And Network Corruption," HSE Working papers WP BRP 209/EC/2019, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    6. Ye-Feng Chen & Shu-Guang Jiang & Marie Claire Villeval, 2015. "The Tragedy of Corruption. Corruption as a social dilemma," Working Papers 1531, Groupe d'Analyse et de Théorie Economique Lyon St-Étienne (GATE Lyon St-Étienne), Université de Lyon.
    7. Arvind K. Jain, 2011. "Corruption: Theory, Evidence and Policy," ifo DICE Report, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 9(2), pages 3-9, 07.
    8. Graziella Bonanno & Lucia Errico & Nadia Fiorino & Roberto Ricciuti, 2024. "The Impact of Government Size on Corruption: A Meta-Regression Analysis," CESifo Working Paper Series 10956, CESifo.
    9. Keith Blackburn & Rashmi Sarmah, 2006. "Red Tape, Corruption and Finance," Economics Discussion Paper Series 0639, Economics, The University of Manchester.
    10. Goel, Rajeev K. & Nelson, Michael A., 2007. "Are corrupt acts contagious?: Evidence from the United States," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 29(6), pages 839-850.
    11. Ndiaye Cheikh Tidiane, 2019. "Corruption, Investment and Economic Growth in WAEMU Countries," International Journal of Economics and Finance, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 11(4), pages 30-39, April.
    12. Fang-Fang Tang & Yongsheng Xu, 2021. "Corruption in Organizations: Some General Formulations and (In-)Corruptibility Results," Homo Oeconomicus: Journal of Behavioral and Institutional Economics, Springer, vol. 38(1), pages 49-57, December.
    13. repec:hhs:bofitp:2009_005 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Rajeev Goel & Michael Nelson, 2011. "Measures of corruption and determinants of US corruption," Economics of Governance, Springer, vol. 12(2), pages 155-176, June.
    15. Axel Dreher & Christos Kotsogiannis & Steve McCorriston, 2009. "How do institutions affect corruption and the shadow economy?," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 16(6), pages 773-796, December.
    16. Amadou Amadou Boly & Kole Keita & Assi Okara & Guei Guei C. Okou, 2021. "Effect of corruption on educational quantity and quality : theory and evidence," CERDI Working papers hal-03194726, HAL.
    17. Neeman Zvika & Paserman M. Daniele & Simhon Avi, 2008. "Corruption and Openness," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 8(1), pages 1-40, December.
    18. John Bone & Dominic Spengler, 2014. "Does Reporting Decrease Corruption?," Journal of Interdisciplinary Economics, , vol. 26(1-2), pages 161-186, January.
    19. Dong, Bin & Dulleck, Uwe & Torgler, Benno, 2012. "Conditional corruption," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 609-627.
    20. Berggren, Niclas & Bjørnskov, Christian, 2020. "Corruption, judicial accountability and inequality: Unfair procedures may benefit the worst-off," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 170(C), pages 341-354.
    21. Gabriel Caldas Montes & Paulo Henrique Luna, 2021. "Fiscal transparency, legal system and perception of the control on corruption: empirical evidence from panel data," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 60(4), pages 2005-2037, April.

    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:gam:jgames:v:7:y:2016:i:4:p:31-:d:81269. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.