IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/agrerw/v35y2006i01p21-28_01.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Introductions of Invasive Species: Failure of the Weaker Link

Author

Listed:
  • Burnett, Kimberly M.

Abstract

The prevention of invasive species is modeled as a “weaker link†public good. Under the weaker link aggregation technology, individual contributions beyond the lowest level will provide benefits, but these benefits progressively decline as contributions exceed the minimum. A two-region model is constructed, assuming incomplete information concerning costs of provision. This framework allows us to explain why we observe underinvestment in prevention, how information facilitates efficiency, and under what conditions information is most relevant. Specific implications regarding improved invasive species prevention policy are extracted and discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Burnett, Kimberly M., 2006. "Introductions of Invasive Species: Failure of the Weaker Link," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 35(1), pages 21-28, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:agrerw:v:35:y:2006:i:01:p:21-28_01
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1068280500010029/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Chamberlin, John, 1974. "Provision of Collective Goods As a Function of Group Size," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 68(2), pages 707-716, June.
    2. Conybeare, John A C & Murdoch, James C & Sandler, Todd, 1994. "Alternative Collective-Goods Models of Military Alliances: Theory and Empirics," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 32(4), pages 525-542, October.
    3. Richard Cornes, 1993. "Dyke Maintenance and Other Stories: Some Neglected Types of Public Goods," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 108(1), pages 259-271.
    4. Bergstrom, Theodore & Blume, Lawrence & Varian, Hal, 1986. "On the private provision of public goods," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 25-49, February.
    5. Murdoch, James C., 1995. "Military alliances: Theory and empirics," Handbook of Defense Economics, in: Keith Hartley & Todd Sandler (ed.), Handbook of Defense Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 5, pages 89-108, Elsevier.
    6. Jack Hirshleifer, 1983. "From weakest-link to best-shot: The voluntary provision of public goods," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 41(3), pages 371-386, January.
    7. Cornes, Richard & Sandler, Todd, 1984. "Easy Riders, Joint Production, and Public Goods," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 94(375), pages 580-598, September.
    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. Costello, Christopher & Quérou, Nicolas & Tomini, Agnes, 2017. "Private eradication of mobile public bads," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 23-44.
    2. Atallah, Shadi S. & Huang, Ju-Chin & Leahy, Jessica & Bennett, Karen, 2020. "Preference Heterogeneity and Neighborhood Effect in Invasive Species Control: The Case of Glossy Buckthorn in New Hampshire and Maine Forests," 2020 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, Kansas City, Missouri 304623, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    3. Eli Fenichel & Timothy Richards & David Shanafelt, 2014. "The Control of Invasive Species on Private Property with Neighbor-to-Neighbor Spillovers," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 59(2), pages 231-255, October.
    4. Kobayashi, Mimako & Melkonyan, Tigran A., 2011. "Strategic Incentives in Biosecurity Actions: Theoretical and Empirical Analyses," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 36(2), pages 1-21, July.
    5. Lee, Donna J. & Adams, Damian C. & Kim, C.S., 2009. "Managing invasive plants on public conservation forestlands: Application of a bio-economic model," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 11(4), pages 237-243, July.
    6. Sean F. Ellis & Mark Masters & Kent D. Messer & Collin Weigel & Paul J. Ferraro, 2021. "The Problem of Feral Hogs and the Challenges of Providing a Weak‐Link Public Good," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 43(3), pages 985-1002, September.
    7. Bate, Andrew M. & Jones, Glyn & Kleczkowski, Adam & MacLeod, Alan & Naylor, Rebecca & Timmis, Jon & Touza, Julia & White, Piran C.L., 2016. "Modelling the impact and control of an infectious disease in a plant nursery with infected plant material inputs," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 334(C), pages 27-43.
    8. Richard Cornes, 2016. "Aggregative Environmental Games," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 63(2), pages 339-365, February.
    9. Heikkila, Jaakko, 2006. "Economics of invasive alien species: pre-emptive versus reactive control," Discussion Papers 11865, MTT Agrifood Research Finland.
    10. Florec, Veronique & Sadler, Rohan J. & White, Ben & Dominiak, Bernie C., 2013. "Choosing the battles: The economics of area wide pest management for Queensland fruit fly," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 203-213.

    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. Wang, Chengsi & Zudenkova, Galina, 2016. "Non-monotonic group-size effect in repeated provision of public goods," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 116-128.
    2. Todd Sandler, 2015. "Collective action: fifty years later," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 164(3), pages 195-216, September.
    3. Subhasish M. Chowdhury & Iryna Topolyan, 2013. "The Attack-and-Defence Group Contests," University of East Anglia Applied and Financial Economics Working Paper Series 049, School of Economics, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK..
    4. TOSHIHIRO IHORI & MARTIN C. McGUIRE, 2007. "Collective Risk Control and Group Security: The Unexpected Consequences of Differential Risk Aversion," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 9(2), pages 231-263, April.
    5. Subhasish M. Chowdhury & Iryna Topolyan, 2016. "Best-shot versus weakest-link in political lobbying: an application of group all-pay auction," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 47(4), pages 959-971, December.
    6. Ghislain Dutheil de la Rochère & Jean-Michel Josselin & Yvon Rocaboy, 2011. "The role of aggregation technologies in the provision of supranational public goods: A reconsideration of NATO’s strategies," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 6(1), pages 85-103, March.
    7. Paul Pecorino, 2015. "Olson’s Logic of Collective Action at fifty," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 162(3), pages 243-262, March.
    8. Chowdhury, Subhasish M. & Lee, Dongryul & Sheremeta, Roman M., 2013. "Top guns may not fire: Best-shot group contests with group-specific public good prizes," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 94-103.
    9. Subhasish M. Chowdhury & Iryna Topolyan, 2016. "The Attack-And-Defense Group Contests: Best Shot Versus Weakest Link," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 54(1), pages 548-557, January.
    10. Subhasish M. Chowdhury & Iryna Topolyan, 2015. "The Group All-Pay Auction with Heterogeneous Impact Functions," University of East Anglia Applied and Financial Economics Working Paper Series 069, School of Economics, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK..
    11. Stefano Barbieri & David Malueg, 2014. "Group efforts when performance is determined by the “best shot”," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 56(2), pages 333-373, June.
    12. Diana Sonntag, 2014. "FUNDING HIV‐VACCINE RESEARCH IN DEVELOPING COUNTRIES—WHAT IS WRONG WITH IAVI's RECOMMENDATION?," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 23(2), pages 141-158, February.
    13. Richard Cornes, 2016. "Aggregative Environmental Games," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 63(2), pages 339-365, February.
    14. Alejandro Caparrós & Michael Finus, 2020. "Public good agreements under the weakest‐link technology," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 22(3), pages 555-582, June.
    15. Brunner, Eric & Sonstelie, Jon, 2003. "School finance reform and voluntary fiscal federalism," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(9-10), pages 2157-2185, September.
    16. Guillaume Cheikbossian, 2016. "The political economy of (De)centralization with complementary public goods," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 47(2), pages 315-348, August.
    17. Kai Konrad & Wolfgang Leininger, 2011. "Self-enforcing norms and efficient non-cooperative collective action in the provision of public goods," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 146(3), pages 501-520, March.
    18. Cornes, Richard & Hartley, Roger, 2007. "Weak links, good shots and other public good games: Building on BBV," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(9), pages 1684-1707, September.
    19. Bayramoglu, Basak & Finus, Michael & Jacques, Jean-François, 2018. "Climate agreements in a mitigation-adaptation game," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 101-113.
    20. Daniel G. Arce M., 2004. "Asymmetric Leadership and International Public Goods," Public Finance Review, , vol. 32(5), pages 528-558, September.

    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:cup:agrerw:v:35:y:2006:i:01:p:21-28_01. 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/age .

    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.