IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v18y2025i8p2041-d1635924.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An Evolutionary Game Analysis of Decision-Making and Interaction Mechanisms of Chinese Energy Enterprises, the Public, and the Government in Low-Carbon Development Based on Prospect Theory

Author

Listed:
  • Xiao Liu

    (School of Business, Qingdao University, Qingdao 266071, China)

  • Qingjin Wang

    (School of Business, Qingdao University, Qingdao 266071, China)

  • Zhengrui Li

    (School of Business, Qingdao University, Qingdao 266071, China)

  • Shan Jiang

    (School of Foreign Language, Qingdao University, Qingdao 266071, China)

Abstract

The low-carbon development (LCD) of energy markets not only serves as a critical enabler in combating global climate change and advancing the green economy but also enhances global industrial competitiveness. Grounded in prospect theory, this study develops a tripartite evolutionary game model involving three core energy market stakeholders, i.e., energy enterprises, the public, and the government, to investigate the determinant factors and decision-making mechanisms underlying the LCD of energy enterprises, with subsequent simulation analyses conducted through MATLAB R2024a. The research findings indicate that loss aversion serves as the primary driver for energy enterprises’ adoption of LCD strategies. Public supervision demonstrates optimal effectiveness only under conditions of low risk and low loss, while risk sensitivity remains the dominant factor influencing the government’s strategic choices. Notably, government incentives combined with public supervision demonstrate significant synergistic effects in accelerating the corporate transition toward LCD. Accordingly, the government should actively promote LCD strategies to mitigate transformation risks for energy enterprises while concurrently optimizing regulatory frameworks to reduce public supervision costs and amplify incentive benefits, thereby fostering active public participation in LCD.

Suggested Citation

  • Xiao Liu & Qingjin Wang & Zhengrui Li & Shan Jiang, 2025. "An Evolutionary Game Analysis of Decision-Making and Interaction Mechanisms of Chinese Energy Enterprises, the Public, and the Government in Low-Carbon Development Based on Prospect Theory," Energies, MDPI, vol. 18(8), pages 1-20, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:18:y:2025:i:8:p:2041-:d:1635924
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/18/8/2041/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/18/8/2041/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Du, Kerui & Cheng, Yuanyuan & Yao, Xin, 2021. "Environmental regulation, green technology innovation, and industrial structure upgrading: The road to the green transformation of Chinese cities," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 98(C).
    2. Yayun Yang & Lingying Pan, 2024. "An Evolutionary Game Model of Market Participants and Government in Carbon Trading Markets with Virtual Power Plant Strategies," Energies, MDPI, vol. 17(17), pages 1-20, September.
    3. Ritzberger, Klaus & Weibull, Jorgen W, 1995. "Evolutionary Selection in Normal-Form Games," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 63(6), pages 1371-1399, November.
    4. Tversky, Amos & Kahneman, Daniel, 1992. "Advances in Prospect Theory: Cumulative Representation of Uncertainty," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 5(4), pages 297-323, October.
    5. Wang, Yan & Shen, Neng, 2016. "Environmental regulation and environmental productivity: The case of China," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 758-766.
    6. Bo Fan & Tingting Guo & Ruzhi Xu & Wenquan Dong, 2021. "Evolutionary Game Research on the Impact of Environmental Regulation on Overcapacity in Coal Industry," Mathematical Problems in Engineering, Hindawi, vol. 2021, pages 1-19, March.
    7. Elahi, Ehsan & Khalid, Zainab & Zhang, Zhixin, 2022. "Understanding farmers’ intention and willingness to install renewable energy technology: A solution to reduce the environmental emissions of agriculture," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 309(C).
    8. Alexis H. Villacis & Jeffrey R. Alwang & Victor Barrera, 2021. "Linking risk preferences and risk perceptions of climate change: A prospect theory approach," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 52(5), pages 863-877, September.
    9. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    10. Yan Li & Yi Shi, 2022. "Dynamic Game Analysis of Enterprise Green Technology Innovation Ecosystem under Double Environmental Regulation," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(17), pages 1-33, September.
    11. Zhou, Wenwen & shi, Yu & Zhao, Tian & Cao, Ximeng & Li, Jialin, 2024. "Government regulation, horizontal coopetition, and low-carbon technology innovation: A tripartite evolutionary game analysis of government and homogeneous energy enterprises," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    12. Wurlod, Jules-Daniel & Noailly, Joëlle, 2018. "The impact of green innovation on energy intensity: An empirical analysis for 14 industrial sectors in OECD countries," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 47-61.
    13. Guancen Wu & Luqi Deng & Xing Niu & Mijanur Rahaman Seikh, 2022. "Evolutionary Game Analysis of Green Technology Innovation Behaviour for Enterprises from the Perspective of Prospect Theory," Discrete Dynamics in Nature and Society, Hindawi, vol. 2022, pages 1-20, September.
    14. Yu Liu & Dong Cai & Chunxiang Guo & Haizhen Huang, 2020. "Evolutionary Game of Government Subsidy Strategy for Prefabricated Buildings Based on Prospect Theory," Mathematical Problems in Engineering, Hindawi, vol. 2020, pages 1-10, November.
    15. Yingxin Chen & Jing Zhang & Pandu R. Tadikamalla & Xutong Gao, 2019. "The Relationship among Government, Enterprise, and Public in Environmental Governance from the Perspective of Multi-Player Evolutionary Game," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(18), pages 1-17, September.
    16. Cunfang Li & Tao Song & Wenfu Wang & Xinyi Gu & Zhan Li & Yongzeng Lai, 2022. "Analysis and Measurement of Barriers to Green Transformation Behavior of Resource Industries," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(21), pages 1-22, October.
    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. Robert Finger & Viviana Garcia & Chloe McCallum & Jens Rommel, 2024. "A note on European farmers' preferences under cumulative prospect theory," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 75(1), pages 465-472, February.
    2. Villacis, Alexis H. & Bloem, Jeffrey R. & Mishra, Ashok K., 2023. "Aspirations, risk preferences, and investments in agricultural technologies," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    3. Villacis, Alexis H., 2023. "Inconsistent choices over prospect theory lottery games: Evidence from field experiments," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 103(C).
    4. Feng Li & Xuewan Du & Pengchao Zhang & Huimin Li & Xiaoxia Fei, 2023. "Co-Evolutionary Mechanism of Stakeholders’ Strategies in Comprehensive Agricultural Water Price Reform: The View of Evolutionary Game Based on Prospect Theory," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(15), pages 1-31, August.
    5. Christoph Duden & Oliver Mußhoff & Frank Offermann, 2023. "Dealing with low‐probability shocks: The role of selected heuristics in farmers’ risk management decisions," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 54(3), pages 382-399, May.
    6. Feyisa, Ashenafi Duguma & Maertens, Miet & de Mey, Yann, 2023. "Relating risk preferences and risk perceptions over different agricultural risk domains: Insights from Ethiopia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 162(C).
    7. van den Bergh, J.C.J.M. & Botzen, W.J.W., 2015. "Monetary valuation of the social cost of CO2 emissions: A critical survey," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 33-46.
    8. Xu, Ru-Yu & Wang, Ke-Liang & Miao, Zhuang, 2024. "The impact of digital technology innovation on green total-factor energy efficiency in China: Does economic development matter?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 194(C).
    9. Liurong Zhao & Xiaoxi Yu & Xinyu Zhou, 2024. "Regulatory mechanism of vulnerability disclosure behavior considering security crowd-testing: An evolutionary game analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 19(6), pages 1-31, June.
    10. Shoji, Isao & Kanehiro, Sumei, 2016. "Disposition effect as a behavioral trading activity elicited by investors' different risk preferences," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 104-112.
    11. Jonathan Meng & Feng Fu, 2020. "Understanding Gambling Behavior and Risk Attitudes Using Cryptocurrency-based Casino Blockchain Data," Papers 2008.05653, arXiv.org, revised Aug 2020.
    12. Daniel Fonseca Costa & Francisval Carvalho & Bruno César Moreira & José Willer Prado, 2017. "Bibliometric analysis on the association between behavioral finance and decision making with cognitive biases such as overconfidence, anchoring effect and confirmation bias," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 111(3), pages 1775-1799, June.
    13. Boone, Jan & Sadrieh, Abdolkarim & van Ours, Jan C., 2009. "Experiments on unemployment benefit sanctions and job search behavior," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 53(8), pages 937-951, November.
    14. Castro, Luciano de & Galvao, Antonio F. & Kim, Jeong Yeol & Montes-Rojas, Gabriel & Olmo, Jose, 2022. "Experiments on portfolio selection: A comparison between quantile preferences and expected utility decision models," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    15. Jos'e Cl'audio do Nascimento, 2019. "Behavioral Biases and Nonadditive Dynamics in Risk Taking: An Experimental Investigation," Papers 1908.01709, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2023.
    16. Francesco GUALA, 2017. "Preferences: Neither Behavioural nor Mental," Departmental Working Papers 2017-05, Department of Economics, Management and Quantitative Methods at Università degli Studi di Milano.
    17. Bin Zou, 2017. "Optimal Investment In Hedge Funds Under Loss Aversion," International Journal of Theoretical and Applied Finance (IJTAF), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 20(03), pages 1-32, May.
    18. Itzhak Gilboa & Andrew Postlewaite & Larry Samuelson & David Schmeidler, 2019. "What are axiomatizations good for?," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 86(3), pages 339-359, May.
    19. Wiafe, Osei K. & Basu, Anup K. & Chen, En Te, 2020. "Portfolio choice after retirement: Should self-annuitisation strategies hold more equities?," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 241-255.
    20. Nicholas Barberis, 2012. "A Model of Casino Gambling," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 58(1), pages 35-51, January.

    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:jeners:v:18:y:2025:i:8:p:2041-:d:1635924. 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.