IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolec/v134y2017icp123-129.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Competitive Lobbying over Common Pool Resource Regulations

Author

Listed:
  • Freeman, Matthew A.
  • Anderson, Christopher M.

Abstract

Common-pool resource regulations are developed through a combination of resource assessment, economic analysis, and politics. We investigate a management institution wherein users can influence a proposed common extraction cap through costly effort, or lobbying. Our model incorporates two user types: a few harvesters who efficiently handle extraction externalities, and a larger number who do not. Without regulation, we observe the efficient harvesters extracting more than the social optimum, consistent with Nash equilibrium. Given the opportunity to lobby, we observe harvesters contributing to move inefficient proposed caps toward more efficient levels. However, lobbying is a public good and, consistent with Nash equilibrium, the user type with weaker preference free rides on the type with stronger preferences leading to insufficient lobbying and inefficient regulations, especially when the cap must be lowered. This highlights an important limitation to participatory governance mechanisms when participation is costly.

Suggested Citation

  • Freeman, Matthew A. & Anderson, Christopher M., 2017. "Competitive Lobbying over Common Pool Resource Regulations," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 123-129.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:134:y:2017:i:c:p:123-129
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2016.12.031
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800915304158
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2016.12.031?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Walker, James M, et al, 2000. "Collective Choice in the Commons: Experimental Results on Proposed Allocation Rules and Votes," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 110(460), pages 212-234, January.
    2. Matthew Turner & Quinn Weninger, 2005. "Meetings with Costly Participation: An Empirical Analysis," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 72(1), pages 247-268.
    3. Jan T.R. Stoop & Daan P. van Soest & Jana Vyrastekova, 2013. "A tale of two carrots: the effectiveness of multiple reward stages in a common pool resource game," Chapters, in: John A. List & Michael K. Price (ed.), Handbook on Experimental Economics and the Environment, chapter 10, pages 291-318, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    4. Myagkov, Mikhail & Plott, Charles R, 1997. "Exchange Economies and Loss Exposure: Experiments Exploring Prospect Theory and Competitive Equilibria in Market Environments," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 87(5), pages 801-828, December.
    5. Anderson, Christopher M. & Putterman, Louis, 2006. "Do non-strategic sanctions obey the law of demand? The demand for punishment in the voluntary contribution mechanism," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 54(1), pages 1-24, January.
    6. Johnson, Ronald N & Libecap, Gary D, 1982. "Contracting Problems and Regulation: The Case of the Fishery," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 72(5), pages 1005-1022, December.
    7. Pomeroy, Robert S & Berkes, Fikret, 1997. "Two to tango: The role of government in fisheries co-management," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 21(5), pages 465-480, September.
    8. Apesteguia, Jose, 2006. "Does information matter in the commons?: Experimental evidence," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 60(1), pages 55-69, May.
    9. Okey, Thomas A., 2003. "Membership of the eight Regional Fishery Management Councils in the United States: are special interests over-represented?," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 193-206, May.
    10. Jeff Dayton-Johnson & Pranab Bardhan, 2002. "Inequality And Conservation On The Local Commons: A Theoretical Exercise," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 112(481), pages 577-602, July.
    11. Magdalena Margreiter & Matthias Sutter & Dennis Dittrich, 2005. "Individual and Collective Choice and Voting in Common Pool Resource Problem with Heterogeneous Actors," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 32(2), pages 241-271, October.
    12. Matthew Freeman & Christopher Anderson, 2013. "Modeling Effort and Lobbying in a Heterogeneous Common Pool Resource Setting," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 56(3), pages 399-414, November.
    13. Ostrom, Elinor, 2006. "The value-added of laboratory experiments for the study of institutions and common-pool resources," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 61(2), pages 149-163, October.
    14. Urs Fischbacher, 2007. "z-Tree: Zurich toolbox for ready-made economic experiments," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 10(2), pages 171-178, June.
    15. Dichmont, Catherine Mary & Pascoe, Sean & Jebreen, Edward & Pears, Rachel & Brooks, Kate & Perez, Pascal, 2013. "Choosing a fishery’s governance structure using data poor methods," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 123-131.
    16. Martin J. Osborne & Jeffrey S. Rosenthal & Matthew A. Turner, 2005. "Meetings with Costly Participation: Reply," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(4), pages 1351-1354, September.
    17. Cherry, Todd L. & Cotten, Stephen J. & Jones, Luke R., 2013. "The appropriation of endogenously provided common-pool resources," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 329-341.
    18. Walker, James M. & Gardner, Roy & Ostrom, Elinor, 1990. "Rent dissipation in a limited-access common-pool resource: Experimental evidence," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 203-211, November.
    19. Barley Kincaid, Kate & Rose, George A., 2014. "Why fishers want a closed area in their fishing grounds: Exploring perceptions and attitudes to sustainable fisheries and conservation 10 years post closure in Labrador, Canada," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 84-90.
    20. Tracy Yandle, 2006. "Sharing natural resource management responsibility: Examining the New Zealand rock lobster co-management experience," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 39(3), pages 249-278, 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. Bogliacino, Francesco & Mantilla, César & Niño, Daniel, 2023. "Economic incentives and political inequality in the management of environmental public goods," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    2. Abbas Khandan, 2022. "Externalities in the rent-seeking strategies of lobbying and bribery," Public Sector Economics, Institute of Public Finance, vol. 46(3), pages 421-450.

    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. Christian Ewerhart, 2015. "Contest success functions: the common-pool perspective," ECON - Working Papers 195, Department of Economics - University of Zurich.
    2. Matthew Freeman & Christopher Anderson, 2013. "Modeling Effort and Lobbying in a Heterogeneous Common Pool Resource Setting," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 56(3), pages 399-414, November.
    3. Yao, Koffi Serge William & Lavaine, Emmanuelle & Willinger, Marc, 2024. "Effectiveness of the approval mechanism in a three-player common pool resource dilemma," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    4. Fijnanda van Klingeren, 2020. "Playing nice in the sandbox: On the role of heterogeneity, trust and cooperation in common-pool resources," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(8), pages 1-36, August.
    5. Villena, Mauricio G. & Zecchetto, Franco, 2011. "Subject-specific performance information can worsen the tragedy of the commons: Experimental evidence," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 330-347, June.
    6. Andreas Nicklisch & Irenaeus Wolff, 2011. "Cooperation Norms in Multiple‐Stage Punishment," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 13(5), pages 791-827, October.
    7. Nicolas Querou, 2018. "Interacting collective action problems in the commons," Working Papers hal-02790606, HAL.
    8. Andrey Zaikin & Ana Espinola-Arredondo, 2012. "The Carrot or the Stick: Water Allocation Strategies for Uzbekistan," Working Papers 2012-2, School of Economic Sciences, Washington State University.
    9. Frank P. Maier-Rigaud & Jose Apesteguia, 2004. "The Role of Rivalry. Public Goods versus Common-Pool Resources," Discussion Paper Series of the Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods 2004_2, Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods.
    10. Cherry, Todd L. & Cotten, Stephen J. & Jones, Luke R., 2013. "The appropriation of endogenously provided common-pool resources," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 329-341.
    11. Jose Apesteguia & Frank P. Maier-Rigaud, 2006. "The Role of Rivalry," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 50(5), pages 646-663, October.
    12. Giangiacomo Bravo & Flaminio Squazzoni, 2013. "Exit, Punishment and Rewards in Commons Dilemmas: An Experimental Study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(8), pages 1-9, August.
    13. Benjamin Ouvrard & Stefan Ambec & Arnaud Reynaud & Stéphane Cezera & Murudaiah Shivamurthy, 2022. "Sharing rules for a common-pool resource in a lab experiment," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 59(3), pages 605-635, October.
    14. Dickinson, David L. & Masclet, David & Villeval, Marie Claire, 2015. "Norm enforcement in social dilemmas: An experiment with police commissioners," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 74-85.
    15. Koffi Serge William Yao & Emmanuelle Lavaine & Marc Willinger, 2021. "Effectiveness of the approval mechanism for CPR dilemmas: unanimity versus majority rule," CEE-M Working Papers hal-03234786, CEE-M, Universtiy of Montpellier, CNRS, INRA, Montpellier SupAgro.
    16. Velez, Maria Alejandra & Stranlund, John K. & Murphy, James J., 2012. "Preferences for government enforcement of a common pool harvest quota: Theory and experimental evidence from fishing communities in Colombia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 185-192.
    17. Wojtek Przepiorka & Andreas Diekmann, 2020. "Binding Contracts, Non-Binding Promises and Social Feedback in the Intertemporal Common-Pool Resource Game," Games, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-21, January.
    18. Huber, Juergen & Shubik, Martin & Sunder, Shyam, 2018. "Financing of public goods through taxation in a general equilibrium economy: Experimental evidence," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 171-188.
    19. Stefan Ambec & Alexis Garapin & Laurent Muller & Arnaud Reynaud & Carine Sebi, 2014. "Comparing Regulations to Protect the Commons: An Experimental Investigation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 58(2), pages 219-244, June.
    20. Ernesto Dal Bó & Pedro Dal Bó & Erik Eyster, 2018. "The Demand for Bad Policy when Voters Underappreciate Equilibrium Effects," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 85(2), pages 964-998.

    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:eee:ecolec:v:134:y:2017:i:c:p:123-129. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolecon .

    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.