IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i7p2808-d340279.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Experimental Study Based on Game Theory on the Private, Voluntary Supply Mechanisms of Goods for Forestry Infrastructure from the Perspective of Quasi-Public Goods

Author

Listed:
  • Liying Zhang

    (School of Economics and Management, Beijing Forestry University, Beijing 100083, China)

  • Chengliang Wu

    (School of Economics and Management, Beijing Forestry University, Beijing 100083, China)

  • Yang Zhang

    (School of Economics and Management, Beijing Forestry University, Beijing 100083, China)

Abstract

The existing research on forestry infrastructure has focused on suggestions from other areas of forestry research: that forestry infrastructure should be completed and improved. However, research on forestry infrastructure is relatively rare. In the real world, there are various problems with creating forestry infrastructure, such as complex approval procedures for facility construction, irrational facility layout, insufficient funding for facility construction, and conflicts between the nature of land used for facility construction and the nature of forest land. This paper uses game theory to analyze the behavior of forest infrastructure goods suppliers. Relevant parameters related to forest area infrastructure were designed, including communication, environmental certainty, information feedback, and reward and punishment mechanisms, and experimental economics methods were used to simulate accurate behavior regarding the supply of goods. Then, the key factors that affect the provision of quasi-public goods for forestry infrastructure were studied. At the end of the paper, some targeted suggestions that distinguish rural infrastructure from general infrastructure are given.

Suggested Citation

  • Liying Zhang & Chengliang Wu & Yang Zhang, 2020. "Experimental Study Based on Game Theory on the Private, Voluntary Supply Mechanisms of Goods for Forestry Infrastructure from the Perspective of Quasi-Public Goods," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-28, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:7:p:2808-:d:340279
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/7/2808/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/7/2808/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Faillo, Marco & Grieco, Daniela & Zarri, Luca, 2013. "Legitimate punishment, feedback, and the enforcement of cooperation," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 77(1), pages 271-283.
    2. Choi, Jung-Kyoo & Ahn, T.K., 2013. "Strategic reward and altruistic punishment support cooperation in a public goods game experiment," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 17-30.
    3. Hagadone, Todd A. & Grala, Robert K., 2012. "Business clusters in Mississippi's forest products industry," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(C), pages 16-24.
    4. Bigoni, Maria & Suetens, Sigrid, 2012. "Feedback and dynamics in public good experiments," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 82(1), pages 86-95.
    5. Flatberg, Truls & Nørstebø, Vibeke S. & Bjørkelo, Knut & Astrup, Rasmus & Søvde, Nils Egil, 2018. "A mathematical model for infrastructure investments in the forest sector of coastal Norway," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 202-209.
    6. Irlenbusch, Bernd & Ter Meer, Janna, 2013. "Fooling the Nice Guys: Explaining receiver credulity in a public good game with lying and punishment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 321-327.
    7. Weimann, Joachim, 1994. "Individual behaviour in a free riding experiment," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(2), pages 185-200, June.
    8. Czajkowski, Mikołaj & Bartczak, Anna & Giergiczny, Marek & Navrud, Stale & Żylicz, Tomasz, 2014. "Providing preference-based support for forest ecosystem service management," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 1-12.
    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. Wenjie Yu & Hongfan Ma, 2022. "Expenditure Responsibility Assignment and High-Quality Equity of Compulsory Education—Empirical Analysis Based on OECD Countries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(17), pages 1-12, August.

    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. Christoph Engel, 2019. "When Does Transparency Backfire? Putting Jeremy Bentham's Theory of General Prevention to the Experimental Test," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(4), pages 881-908, December.
    2. Bernd Irlenbusch & Rainer Michael Rilke, 2013. "(Public) Good Examples - On the Role of Limited Feedback in Voluntary Contribution Games," Cologne Graduate School Working Paper Series 04-04, Cologne Graduate School in Management, Economics and Social Sciences.
    3. Liu, Jia & Sonntag, Axel & Zizzo, Daniel John, 2022. "Information defaults in repeated public good provision," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 197(C), pages 356-369.
    4. Nisvan Erkal & Boon Han Koh & Nguyen Lam, 2023. "Using Milestones as a Source of Feedback in Teamwork: Insights from a Dynamic Voluntary Contribution Mechanism," Discussion Papers 2310, University of Exeter, Department of Economics.
    5. Kandul, Serhiy & Lanz, Bruno, 2021. "Public good provision, in-group cooperation and out-group descriptive norms: A lab experiment," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    6. Faillo, Marco & Grieco, Daniela & Zarri, Luca, 2012. "Cultural Diversity, Cooperation,and Anti-social Punishment," AICCON Working Papers 102-2012, Associazione Italiana per la Cultura della Cooperazione e del Non Profit.
    7. Caleb A. Cox & Brock Stoddard, 2015. "Framing and Feedback in Social Dilemmas with Partners and Strangers," Games, MDPI, vol. 6(4), pages 1-19, September.
    8. Bernd Irlenbusch & Rainer Michael Rilke & Gari Walkowitz, 2019. "Designing feedback in voluntary contribution games: the role of transparency," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 22(2), pages 552-576, June.
    9. Kamijo, Y. & Nihonsugi, T. & Takeuchi, A. & Funaki, Y., 2014. "Sustaining cooperation in social dilemmas: Comparison of centralized punishment institutions," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 180-195.
    10. Venn, Tyron J. & Dorries, Jack W. & McGavin, Robert L., 2021. "A mathematical model to support investment in veneer and LVL manufacturing in subtropical eastern Australia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 128(C).
    11. Fangfang Tan, 2008. "Punishment in a Linear Public Good Game with Productivity Heterogeneity," De Economist, Springer, vol. 156(3), pages 269-293, September.
    12. Celse, Jeremy & Karakostas, Alexandros & Zizzo, Daniel John, 2023. "Relative risk taking and social curiosity," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 210(C), pages 243-264.
    13. Bruno S. Frey & Stephan Meier, "undated". "Pro-Social Behavior, Reciprocity or Both?," IEW - Working Papers 107, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.
    14. Sabrina Teyssier, 2012. "Inequity and risk aversion in sequential public good games," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 151(1), pages 91-119, April.
    15. Pierre-Olivier Pineau, 2022. "Choosing to Pay More for Electricity: an experiment on the level of residential consumer cooperation," CIRANO Working Papers 2022s-18, CIRANO.
    16. Urs Fischbacher & Simon Gaechter, 2008. "Heterogeneous Social Preferences And The Dynamics Of Free Riding In Public Good Experiments," Discussion Papers 2008-07, The Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of Nottingham.
    17. Urs Fischbacher & Simon Gachter, 2010. "Social Preferences, Beliefs, and the Dynamics of Free Riding in Public Goods Experiments," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(1), pages 541-556, March.
    18. Qinghu Liao & Wenwen Dong & Boxin Zhao, 2023. "A New Strategy to Solve “the Tragedy of the Commons” in Sustainable Grassland Ecological Compensation: Experience from Inner Mongolia, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(12), pages 1-24, June.
    19. Hermes, Johannes & von Haaren, Christina & Schmücker, Dirk & Albert, Christian, 2021. "Nature-based recreation in Germany: Insights into volume and economic significance," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).
    20. John, Katrin & Thomsen, Stephan L., 2015. "School-track environment or endowment: What determines different other-regarding behavior across peer groups?," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 122-141.

    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:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:7:p:2808-:d:340279. 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.