IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jmathe/v11y2023i23p4750-d1286927.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Three-Party Decision Evolution Game Analysis of Coal Companies and Miners under China’s Government Safety Special Rectification Action

Author

Listed:
  • Can Xie

    (School of Management, Xi’an University of Science and Technology, Xi’an 710054, China)

  • Hongxia Li

    (School of Management, Xi’an University of Science and Technology, Xi’an 710054, China
    College of Safety Science and Engineering, Xi’an University of Science and Technology, Xi’an 710054, China)

  • Lei Chen

    (College of Safety Science and Engineering, Xi’an University of Science and Technology, Xi’an 710054, China)

Abstract

Research on the behavior of coal companies and miners under the government’s safety special rectification action is significant for maintaining social stability. In this paper, we constructed a dynamic evolutionary game model involving the government, coal companies, and miners. We analyzed the asymptotic stability conditions of the behavioral strategies of the participants in the game through phase diagrams and conducted a simulation analysis using Matlab R2021b to explore the impact of the key parameters in the model on the strategic choices of the game participants. The research findings indicated: (1) intricate interactive dynamics exist among the three stakeholders in safety rectification endeavors, with diverse intervention strategies manifesting varying impacts on participants’ conduct and outcomes; (2) setting reasonable reward and punishment mechanisms for safety behaviors by the government toward coal companies and miners helps to increase the probability of both choosing proactive safety behaviors. Coal companies that set reasonable reward and punishment mechanisms for the safety behaviors of miners can promote miners’ willingness to cooperate. Additionally, reducing safety rectification costs and enhancing the social reputation benefits of safety rectification can facilitate the optimal strategic choices of the three parties; and (3) the simulation analysis results corroborate the conclusions on the stability of strategies across all stakeholders, affirming the validity of the research outcomes and furnishing pertinent recommendations for enhancing the safety rectification framework.

Suggested Citation

  • Can Xie & Hongxia Li & Lei Chen, 2023. "A Three-Party Decision Evolution Game Analysis of Coal Companies and Miners under China’s Government Safety Special Rectification Action," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(23), pages 1-23, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:11:y:2023:i:23:p:4750-:d:1286927
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/11/23/4750/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/11/23/4750/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Daniel Friedman, 1998. "On economic applications of evolutionary game theory," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 8(1), pages 15-43.
    2. Kui Zhou & Qi Wang & Junnan Tang & Xinyu Wang, 2021. "Tripartite Evolutionary Game and Simulation Analysis of Coal Mining Safe Production Supervision under the Chinese Central Government’s Reward and Punishment Mechanism," Mathematical Problems in Engineering, Hindawi, vol. 2021, pages 1-17, November.
    3. Liu, Quanlong & Li, Xinchun & Hassall, Maureen, 2021. "Regulatory regime on coal Mine Safety in China and Australia: Comparative analysis and overall findings," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    4. Reniers, Genserik & Soudan, Karel, 2010. "A game-theoretical approach for reciprocal security-related prevention investment decisions," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 95(1), pages 1-9.
    5. Klanac, Alan & Varsta, Petri, 2011. "Design of marine structures with improved safety for environment," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 96(1), pages 75-90.
    6. Palmini, Dennis, 1999. "Uncertainty, risk aversion, and the game theoretic foundations of the safe minimum standard: a reassessment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 463-472, June.
    7. Liu, Quanlong & Wang, Jingzhi & Qiu, Zunxiang, 2023. "Data as evidence: Research on the influencing factors and mechanisms of coal mine safety supervision effect in China," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    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. Dehai Liu & Hongyi Li & Weiguo Wang & Chuang Zhou, 2015. "Scenario forecast model of long term trends in rural labor transfer based on evolutionary games," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 25(3), pages 649-670, July.
    2. Liang Liu & Cong Feng & Hongwei Zhang & Xuehua Zhang, 2015. "Game Analysis and Simulation of the River Basin Sustainable Development Strategy Integrating Water Emission Trading," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(5), pages 1-21, April.
    3. Liu, Jicheng & Sun, Jiakang & Yuan, Hanying & Su, Yihan & Feng, Shuxian & Lu, Chaoran, 2022. "Behavior analysis of photovoltaic-storage-use value chain game evolution in blockchain environment," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 260(C).
    4. Jin, Tao & Jiang, Yulian & Liu, Xingwen, 2023. "Evolutionary game analysis of the impact of dynamic dual credit policy on new energy vehicles after subsidy cancellation," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 440(C).
    5. Xiongwei Quan & Gaoshan Zuo & Helin Sun, 2022. "Risk Perception Thresholds and Their Impact on the Behavior of Nearby Residents in Waste to Energy Project Conflict: An Evolutionary Game Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-20, May.
    6. Wenke Wang & Xiaoqiong You & Kebei Liu & Yenchun Jim Wu & Daming You, 2020. "Implementation of a Multi-Agent Carbon Emission Reduction Strategy under the Chinese Dual Governance System: An Evolutionary Game Theoretical Approach," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(22), pages 1-21, November.
    7. Wang, Lei & Liu, Qing & Dong, Shiyu & Guedes Soares, C., 2022. "Selection of countermeasure portfolio for shipping safety with consideration of investment risk aversion," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 219(C).
    8. Zhuozhuo Gou & Yansong Deng, 2021. "Dynamic Model of Collaboration in Multi-Agent System Based on Evolutionary Game Theory," Games, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-19, October.
    9. Yi Shi & Yan Li, 2022. "An Evolutionary Game Analysis on Green Technological Innovation of New Energy Enterprises under the Heterogeneous Environmental Regulation Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(10), pages 1-26, May.
    10. Fisher, Eric ON. & Kakkar, Vikas, 2004. "On the evolution of comparative advantage in matching models," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(1), pages 169-193, October.
    11. Faggini, Marisa & Parziale, Anna, 2011. "Fitness landscape and tax planning: NK model for fiscal federalism," MPRA Paper 33770, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. Sebastian Krapohl & Václav Ocelík & Dawid M. Walentek, 2021. "The instability of globalization: applying evolutionary game theory to global trade cooperation," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 188(1), pages 31-51, July.
    13. Manh Hong Duong & Hoang Minh Tran & The Anh Han, 2019. "On the Expected Number of Internal Equilibria in Random Evolutionary Games with Correlated Payoff Matrix," Dynamic Games and Applications, Springer, vol. 9(2), pages 458-485, June.
    14. Lei Wang & Qing Liu & Tongle Yin, 2018. "Decision-making of investment in navigation safety improving schemes with application of cumulative prospect theory," Journal of Risk and Reliability, , vol. 232(6), pages 710-724, December.
    15. Yaling Deng & Daming You & Yang Zhang, 2021. "Can the Behavioural Spillover Effect Affect the Environmental Regulations Strategy Choice of Local Governments?," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(9), pages 1-24, May.
    16. Yang Tang & Kairong Hong & Yucheng Zou & Yanwei Zhang, 2021. "Equilibrium Resolution Mechanism for Multidimensional Conflicts in Farmland Expropriation Based on a Multistage Van Damme’s Model," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(11), pages 1-25, May.
    17. Matthew McGinty, 2010. "International Environmental Agreements as Evolutionary Games," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 45(2), pages 251-269, February.
    18. Dijkstra, Bouwe R. & de Vries, Frans P., 2006. "Location choice by households and polluting firms: An evolutionary approach," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 425-446, February.
    19. Berrens, Robert P. & McKee, Michael & Farmer, Michael C., 1999. "Incorporating distributional considerations in the safe minimum standard approach: endangered species and local impacts," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 461-474, September.
    20. Lorenzo Cerda Planas, 2015. "The Evolution of "Kantian Trait": Inferring from the Dictator Game," Post-Print halshs-01163937, HAL.

    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:jmathe:v:11:y:2023:i:23:p:4750-:d:1286927. 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.