IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/riskan/v40y2020i10p1944-1966.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

China's Railway Transportation Safety Regulation System Based on Evolutionary Game Theory and System Dynamics

Author

Listed:
  • Fenling Feng
  • Chengguang Liu
  • Jiaqi Zhang

Abstract

China's railways were restructured in 2013. The number of regulatory practitioners has decreased significantly, making real‐time regulation more difficult. Regulatory transfers from inside to outside the railway industry increases information risks. A more reasonable regulation mechanism is needed. The article considers introducing a public supervision mechanism into the railway transportation safety regulation system, which includes two regulators and one regulatee. As the government regulator, the State Railway Administration (SRA) regulates the safety of China Railway Corporation (CR) and encourages the public to act as supervisors to expose the CR's unsafe production information. To analyze the risks and effectiveness of the system, a multiplayer evolutionary game and system dynamics‐based model for railway transportation safety regulation is established. The decision processes of players under different conditions are simulated. The results show that improving the public supervision ratio is conducive to improve the CR's safe production ratio. However, there is no evolutionarily stable strategy (ESS) in the system. Strategies and evolutionary processes have large fluctuations, which represent high risk. Excessive penalty and reward coefficients can aggravate the amplitude and frequency of fluctuations, causing uncertainty in regulation and making it more difficult to control the actual problems. A dynamic reward and punishment mechanism is proposed to control these fluctuations. The system finally achieves an ESS that results in the lowest regulation investment for the SRA, a safe production ratio for the CR of 95%, and a public supervision ratio of 95.2%. Introducing public supervision and dynamic reward and punishment mechanisms help to stabilize and improve the CR's safe production ratio and to decrease the SRA's regulatory investment.

Suggested Citation

  • Fenling Feng & Chengguang Liu & Jiaqi Zhang, 2020. "China's Railway Transportation Safety Regulation System Based on Evolutionary Game Theory and System Dynamics," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(10), pages 1944-1966, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:40:y:2020:i:10:p:1944-1966
    DOI: 10.1111/risa.13528
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.13528
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/risa.13528?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Fosco, Constanza & Mengel, Friederike, 2011. "Cooperation through imitation and exclusion in networks," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 641-658, May.
    2. Metzler, Richard & Horn, Christian, 2003. "Evolutionary minority games: the benefits of imitation," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 329(3), pages 484-498.
    3. Kjell Hausken, 1995. "Intra-Level and Inter-Level Interaction," Rationality and Society, , vol. 7(4), pages 465-488, October.
    4. Kjell Hausken & Ross Cressman, 2004. "Formalization Of Multi-Level Games," International Game Theory Review (IGTR), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 6(02), pages 195-221.
    5. Tammy O. Tengs & Miriam E. Adams & Joseph S. Pliskin & Dana Gelb Safran & Joanna E. Siegel & Milton C. Weinstein & John D. Graham, 1995. "Five‐Hundred Life‐Saving Interventions and Their Cost‐Effectiveness," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(3), pages 369-390, June.
    6. Tsebelis, George, 1989. "The Abuse of Probability in Political Analysis: The Robinson Crusoe Fallacy," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 83(1), pages 77-91, March.
    7. Hausken, Kjell, 1995. "The dynamics of within-group and between-group interaction," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(7), pages 655-687.
    8. Cropper, Maureen L & Portney, Paul R, 1990. "Discounting and the Evaluation of Lifesaving Programs," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 3(4), pages 369-379, December.
    9. Kuzmics, Christoph, 2004. "Stochastic evolutionary stability in extensive form games of perfect information," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 48(2), pages 321-336, August.
    10. Kehong Li & Wenke Wang & Yadong Zhang & Tao Zheng & Jin Guo, 2019. "Game Modelling and Strategy Research on the System Dynamics–Based Quadruplicate Evolution for High–Speed Railway Operational Safety Supervision System," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-17, March.
    11. Liu, Dehai & Xiao, Xingzhi & Li, Hongyi & Wang, Weiguo, 2015. "Historical evolution and benefit–cost explanation of periodical fluctuation in coal mine safety supervision: An evolutionary game analysis framework," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 243(3), pages 974-984.
    12. W. Kip Viscusi, 1979. "The Impact of Occupational Safety and Health Regulation," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 10(1), pages 117-140, Spring.
    13. Riechmann, Thomas, 2001. "Genetic algorithm learning and evolutionary games," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 25(6-7), pages 1019-1037, June.
    14. George Tsebelis, 1990. "Penalty has no Impact on Crime:," Rationality and Society, , vol. 2(3), pages 255-286, July.
    15. Karen R. Chinander & Paul R. Kleindorfer & Howard C. Kunreuther, 1998. "Compliance Strategies and Regulatory Effectiveness of Performance‐Based Regulation of Chemical Accident Risks," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(2), pages 135-143, April.
    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. Meng, Huixing & Liu, Xuan & Xing, Jinduo & Zio, Enrico, 2022. "A method for economic evaluation of predictive maintenance technologies by integrating system dynamics and evolutionary game modelling," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 222(C).
    2. Zhang, Yan & Wang, Si-Xia & Yao, Jian-Ting & Tong, Rui-Peng, 2023. "The impact of behavior safety management system on coal mine work safety: A system dynamics model of quadripartite evolutionary game," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C).
    3. Wenxiong Wang & Ziying Song & Wei Zhou & Yong Jiang & Yuan Sun, 2022. "Evolutionary Game Analysis of Government and Enterprise Behavior Strategies in Public-Private-Partnership Farmland Consolidation," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-25, November.

    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. Jack Hirshleifer & Eric Rasmusen, 1992. "Are Equilibrium Strategies Unaffected by Incentives?," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 4(3), pages 353-367, July.
    2. Hausken, Kjell, 2000. "Cooperation and between-group competition," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 417-425, July.
    3. Franz Weissing & Elinor Ostrom, 1991. "Crime and Punishment: Further Reflections on the Counterintuitive Results of Mixed Equilibria Games," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 3(3), pages 343-350, July.
    4. Christine Horne & Heiko Rauhut, 2013. "Using laboratory experiments to study law and crime," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 47(3), pages 1639-1655, April.
    5. Heiko Rauhut & Marcel Junker, 2009. "Punishment Deters Crime Because Humans Are Bounded in Their Strategic Decision-Making," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 12(3), pages 1-1.
    6. Andreas Ortmann & Ralph Hertwig, 2002. "The Costs of Deception: Evidence from Psychology," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 5(2), pages 111-131, October.
    7. Tibor Bosse & Charlotte Gerritsen, 2010. "Social Simulation and Analysis of the Dynamics of Criminal Hot Spots," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 13(2), pages 1-5.
    8. Hausken, Kjell, 2000. "Migration and intergroup conflict," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 69(3), pages 327-331, December.
    9. Christine Horne & Heiko Rauhut, "undated". "Using Laboratory Experiments to Study Law and Crime," Working Papers CCSS-10-010, ETH Zurich, Chair of Systems Design.
    10. Perry, Logan & Gavrilets, Sergey, 2019. "Foresight in a Game of Leadership," SocArXiv 84yxz, Center for Open Science.
    11. 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.
    12. Patrick Groeber & Heiko Rauhut, 2010. "Does ignorance promote norm compliance?," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 16(1), pages 1-28, March.
    13. George Tsebelis, 1995. "Another Response to Gordon Tullock," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 7(1), pages 97-99, January.
    14. George Tsebelis, 1993. "Penalty and Crime: Further Theoretical Considerations and Empirical Evidence," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 5(3), pages 349-374, July.
    15. Kjell Hausken, 2016. "Gordon Tullock: A Nobel Prize left unbestowed," Journal of Bioeconomics, Springer, vol. 18(2), pages 121-127, July.
    16. Rimawan Pradiptyo, 2015. "A Certain Uncertainty; Assessment of Court Decisions in Tackling Corruption in Indonesia," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: R N Ghosh & M A B Siddique (ed.), CORRUPTION, GOOD GOVERNANCE and ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Contemporary Analysis and Case Studies, chapter 10, pages 167-215, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    17. Heiko Rauhut, 2015. "Stronger inspection incentives, less crime? Further experimental evidence on inspection games," Rationality and Society, , vol. 27(4), pages 414-454, November.
    18. Ladley, Daniel & Wilkinson, Ian & Young, Louise, 2015. "The impact of individual versus group rewards on work group performance and cooperation: A computational social science approach," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(11), pages 2412-2425.
    19. Heiko Rauhut, 2009. "Higher Punishment, Less Control?," Rationality and Society, , vol. 21(3), pages 359-392, August.
    20. Daniel Ladley & Ian Wilkinson & Louise Young, 2013. "The Evolution Of Cooperation In Business: Individual Vs. Group Incentives," Discussion Papers in Economics 13/14, Division of Economics, School of Business, University of Leicester.

    More about this item

    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:wly:riskan:v:40:y:2020:i:10:p:1944-1966. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1539-6924 .

    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.