IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/col/000090/004550.html

Comercio de fauna en Colombia e información oculta: nuevos retos en la regulación para su uso sostenible

Author

Listed:
  • Rivera Virguez Liliana

Abstract

Este trabajo describe y analiza el problema de riesgo moral causado por la asimetría de información que existe entre la autoridad ambiental y los productores de fauna (zoocriaderos) que posiblemente incurren en explotación y comercialización ilícita. Usando un modelo principal-agente, se examinan los esquemas de transferencia que la autoridad ambiental podría utilizar para incentivar la preservación y el manejo de fauna, teniendo en cuenta tanto el estado de conservación del ecosistema observado por el principal (gobierno) como la función de utilidad del agente (zoocriaderos). Resultados de simulaciones del modelo analítico sugieren que el valor óptimo del beneficio por flexibilización de regulación es constante e independiente del impacto que tienen las acciones (lícitas e ilícitas) del agente sobre el ecosistema cuando hay información perfecta. Por su parte, cuando existe información asimétrica, los resultados sugieren que el nivel óptimo del beneficio por flexibilización de regulación depende del estado de la conservación del recurso que se observaría dada la acción lícita o ilícita asociada a la comercialización de la fauna.

Suggested Citation

  • Rivera Virguez Liliana, 2007. "Comercio de fauna en Colombia e información oculta: nuevos retos en la regulación para su uso sostenible," Revista Desarrollo y Sociedad, Universidad de los Andes,Facultad de Economía, CEDE.
    • Handle: RePEc:col:000090:004550
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://economia.uniandes.edu.co/revistadys/Articulo60_3.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nick Hanley & Henk Folmer (ed.), 1998. "Game Theory and the Environment," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 1083, August.
    2. Rollins, Kimberly & Briggs, Hugh III, 1996. "Moral Hazard, Externalities, and Compensation for Crop Damages from Wildlife," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 368-386, November.
    3. Moyle, Brendan, 1998. "Species conservation and the principal-agent problem," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 313-320, September.
    4. Theodore Panayotou, 1994. "Conservation of biodiversity and economic development: The concept of transferable development rights," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 4(1), pages 91-110, February.
    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. Signe Anthon & Serge Garcia & Anne Stenger, 2010. "Incentive Contracts for Natura 2000 Implementation in Forest Areas," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 46(3), pages 281-302, July.
    2. von Mouche, Pierre & Folmer, Henk, 2007. "Linking of Repeated Games. When Does It Lead to More Cooperation and Pareto Improvements?," Economic Theory and Applications Working Papers 9557, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    3. Bandara, Ranjith & Tisdell, Clement A., 2002. "Willingness to Pay for Conservation of the Asian Elephant in Sri Lanka: A Contingent Valuation Study," Economics, Ecology and Environment Working Papers 48738, University of Queensland, School of Economics.
    4. Huennemeyer, Anne-Juliane & McKitrick, Ross & Rollins, Kimberly S., 1999. "Optimal Compensation For Endangered Species Protection Under Asymmetric Information," 1999 Annual meeting, August 8-11, Nashville, TN 21693, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    5. Effrosyni Diamantoudi & Eftichios S. Sartzetakis, 2006. "Stable International Environmental Agreements: An Analytical Approach," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 8(2), pages 247-263, May.
    6. Carraro, Carlo & Bosello, Francesco & Buchner, Barbara & Raggi, Davide, 2003. "Can Equity Enhance Efficiency? Some Lessons from Climate Negotiations," CEPR Discussion Papers 3606, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    7. Johan Eyckmans & Michael Finus, 2007. "Measures to enhance the success of global climate treaties," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 7(1), pages 73-97, March.
    8. Finus, Michael & Pintassilgo, Pedro, 2013. "The role of uncertainty and learning for the success of international climate agreements," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 29-43.
    9. Effrosyni Diamantoudi & Eftichios S. Sartzetakis, 2018. "International Environmental Agreements—The Role of Foresight," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 71(1), pages 241-257, September.
    10. Dellink, Rob & Finus, Michael, 2012. "Uncertainty and climate treaties: Does ignorance pay?," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(4), pages 565-584.
    11. Gunatilake, H.M & Wickramasinghe, W.A.R & Abeygunawardena, P., 2009. "Time Preference and Natural Resource Use by Local Communities: The Case of Sinharaja Forest in Sri Lanka," Sri Lankan Journal of Agricultural Economics, Sri Lanka Agricultural Economics Association (SAEA), vol. 10, pages 1-31.
    12. Drechsler, Martin, 2021. "On the cost-effective temporal allocation of credits in conservation offsets when habitat restoration takes takes time and is uncertain," MPRA Paper 108209, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Eichner, Thomas & Pethig, Rüdiger, 2016. "Coaseian biodiversity conservation. Who benefits?," VfS Annual Conference 2016 (Augsburg): Demographic Change 145745, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    14. Álvarez, Xana & Gómez-Rúa, María & Vidal-Puga, Juan, 2019. "Risk prevention of land flood: A cooperative game theory approach," MPRA Paper 91515, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    15. Areti Kontogianni & Michalis Skourtos & Andreas Papandreou, 2006. "Shared Waters—shared Responsibility. Application of the Principles of Fairness for Burden Sharing in the Mediterranean," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 6(2), pages 209-230, June.
    16. Charles Figuières & Frédéric Rychen, 2011. "Heterogeneity in a Class of Two-Player Games," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 31(1), pages 426-435.
    17. Michael Finus & Pedro Pintassilgo, 2012. "International environmental agreements under uncertainty: does the 'veil of uncertainty' help?," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 64(4), pages 736-764, October.
    18. Harry Clarke, 2002. "Institutional Design for Biodiversity Conservation," Agenda - A Journal of Policy Analysis and Reform, Australian National University, College of Business and Economics, School of Economics, vol. 9(4), pages 305-320.
    19. Yoder, Jonathan K., 2000. "Contracting Over Common Property: Cost-Share Contracts For Predator Control," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 25(2), pages 1-16, December.
    20. Linda Fernandez, 2007. "Maritime trade and migratory species management to protect biodiversity," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 38(2), pages 165-188, October.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • C70 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - General
    • D82 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Asymmetric and Private Information; Mechanism Design
    • F18 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Trade and Environment
    • K32 - Law and Economics - - Other Substantive Areas of Law - - - Energy, Environmental, Health, and Safety Law
    • Q22 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Fishery
    • Q28 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - 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:col:000090:004550. 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: Universidad De Los Andes-Cede (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ceandco.html .

    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.