IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v13y2024i7p914-d1420705.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Contractual Mechanisms in National Park Management: A Multi-Task Principal–Agent Model

Author

Listed:
  • Mingxin Lin

    (College of Economics and Management, Nanjing Forestry University, Nanjing 210037, China
    Committee of National Parks and Nature Reserves of China, Nanjing 210037, China)

  • Zuomin Wen

    (College of Economics and Management, Nanjing Forestry University, Nanjing 210037, China
    Committee of National Parks and Nature Reserves of China, Nanjing 210037, China)

Abstract

In the management of national parks, the principal–agent relationship is key to efficient and effective management. Based on multi-task principal–agent theory, this study examines the dual functions of central government incentives and guidance and the objectives of local National Park Administration offices in environmental conservation and reasonable resource utilization. First, this study constructs a multi-task principal–agent model for central and local governments within the national park management system and identifies effective contractual mechanisms. Second, this study examines the relationship between the intensity of central government incentives and the ecological conservation atmosphere coefficient. Third, by integrating the three stages of national park management system advancement, this study explores the central government’s incentive strategies at different stages. The findings indicate that local governments receive limited ecological conservation support, underscoring the need for long-term central government incentives. The findings also confirm that the effective management of national parks by local governments can only be achieved by eliminating external uncertainties, reducing the variable costs of innovative advancements, and controlling risk aversion in local National Park Administration processes. In addition, this study includes empirical data for sensitivity analyses to understand the robustness of the model under different scenarios. This study offers valuable insights and practical suggestions for enhancing national park management.

Suggested Citation

  • Mingxin Lin & Zuomin Wen, 2024. "Contractual Mechanisms in National Park Management: A Multi-Task Principal–Agent Model," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-28, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:13:y:2024:i:7:p:914-:d:1420705
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/13/7/914/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/13/7/914/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Stefan Heiland & Anja May & Volker Scherfose, 2020. "Evaluation of the Management Effectiveness of German National Parks—Experiences, Results, Lessons Learned and Future Prospects," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-18, September.
    2. Yaquan Dou & Changhao Wu & Youjun He, 2023. "Public Concern and Awareness of National Parks in China: Evidence from Social Media Big Data and Questionnaire Data," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-21, February.
    3. Holmstrom, Bengt & Milgrom, Paul, 1987. "Aggregation and Linearity in the Provision of Intertemporal Incentives," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 55(2), pages 303-328, March.
    4. Federico Etro & Michela Cella, 2013. "Equilibrium Principal‐Agent Contracts: Competition and R&D Incentives," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(3), pages 488-512, September.
    5. Mathias Dewatripont & Jean Tirole, 2005. "Modes of Communication," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 113(6), pages 1217-1238, December.
    6. Holmstrom, Bengt & Milgrom, Paul, 1991. "Multitask Principal-Agent Analyses: Incentive Contracts, Asset Ownership, and Job Design," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 7(0), pages 24-52, Special I.
    7. Dixit, Avinash & Grossman, Gene M & Helpman, Elhanan, 1997. "Common Agency and Coordination: General Theory and Application to Government Policy Making," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 105(4), pages 752-769, August.
    8. B. Douglas Bernheim & Michael D. Whinston, 1985. "Common Marketing Agency as a Device for Facilitating Collusion," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 16(2), pages 269-281, Summer.
    9. Mike Felgenhauer, 2007. "Policy Bias Equivalence under Common Agency," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 90(3), pages 295-312, April.
    10. Dixit, Avinash & Londregan, John, 2000. "Political Power and the Credibility of Government Debt," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 94(1), pages 80-105, September.
    11. Claudio Mezzetti, 1997. "Common Agency with Horizontally Differentiated Principals," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 28(2), pages 323-345, Summer.
    12. Tianjian Yang & Guangdong Liu & Yao Wei & Xuemei Zhang & Xinglin Dong, 2019. "The Impact of Dual-Fairness Concerns Under Different Power: Structures on Green-Supply-Chain Decisions," International Journal of Enterprise Information Systems (IJEIS), IGI Global, vol. 15(3), pages 1-26, July.
    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. Nicola Lacetera, 2003. "Incentives and spillovers in R&D activities: an agency-theoretic analysis of industry-university relations," Microeconomics 0312004, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Siqueira, Kevin Jay, 1998. "Issues of collective action: common agency, partial cooperation, and clubs," ISU General Staff Papers 1998010108000013526, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    3. Graham Mallard, 2014. "Static Common Agency And Political Influence: An Evaluative Survey," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(1), pages 17-35, February.
    4. Keler Marku & Sergio Ocampo & Jean‐Baptiste Tondji, 2024. "Robust contracts in common agency," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 55(2), pages 199-229, June.
    5. Lee, Frances (Zhiyun Xu), 2013. "Trading between agents for a better match," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 31(5), pages 501-515.
    6. Thibaut Mastrolia & Zhenjie Ren, 2018. "Principal-Agent Problem with Common Agency without Communication," Working Papers hal-01534611, HAL.
    7. Thibaut Mastrolia & Zhenjie Ren, 2017. "Principal-Agent Problem with Common Agency without Communication," Papers 1706.02936, arXiv.org, revised Jan 2018.
    8. Mariano Tommasi & Federico Weinschelbaum, 1999. "A Principal-Agent Building Block for the Study of Decentralization and Integration," Working Papers 20, Universidad de San Andres, Departamento de Economia, revised Nov 1999.
    9. David Martimort & Flavio Menezes & Myrna Wooders & ELISABETTA IOSSA & DAVID MARTIMORT, 2015. "The Simple Microeconomics of Public-Private Partnerships," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 17(1), pages 4-48, February.
    10. Dietrichson, Jens, 2013. "Coordination Incentives, Performance Measurement and Resource Allocation in Public Sector Organizations," Working Papers 2013:26, Lund University, Department of Economics.
    11. Elisabetta Iossa & David Martimort, 2012. "Risk allocation and the costs and benefits of public--private partnerships," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 43(3), pages 442-474, September.
    12. Oyer, Paul & Schaefer, Scott, 2011. "Personnel Economics: Hiring and Incentives," Handbook of Labor Economics, in: O. Ashenfelter & D. Card (ed.), Handbook of Labor Economics, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 20, pages 1769-1823, Elsevier.
    13. Nadide Banu OLCAY, 2016. "A common agency within bureaucracy," Theoretical and Applied Economics, Asociatia Generala a Economistilor din Romania / Editura Economica, vol. 0(2(607), S), pages 73-102, Summer.
    14. Antonio Sánchez Soliño, 2019. "Sustainability of Public Services: Is Outsourcing the Answer?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(24), pages 1-12, December.
    15. Inés Macho-Stadler & David Pérez-Castrillo, 2018. "Moral hazard: Base models and two extensions," Chapters, in: Luis C. Corchón & Marco A. Marini (ed.), Handbook of Game Theory and Industrial Organization, Volume I, chapter 16, pages 453-485, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    16. Michael T. Rauh & Giulio Seccia, 2010. "Agency and Anxiety," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 19(1), pages 87-116, March.
      • Michael T. Rauh & Giulio Seccia, 2006. "Agency and Anxiety," Working Papers 2006-02, Indiana University, Kelley School of Business, Department of Business Economics and Public Policy.
    17. Fuhai Hong & Dong Zhang, 2023. "Bureaucratic beliefs and law enforcement," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 196(3), pages 357-379, September.
    18. Stole, Lars A., 2007. "Price Discrimination and Competition," Handbook of Industrial Organization, in: Mark Armstrong & Robert Porter (ed.), Handbook of Industrial Organization, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 34, pages 2221-2299, Elsevier.
    19. Jorge Aseff & Manuel Santos, 2005. "Stock options and managerial optimal contracts," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 26(4), pages 813-837, November.
    20. Araujo, Aloisio & Moreira, Humberto & Tsuchida, Marcos, 2007. "The Trade-Off Between Incentives and Endogenous Risk," Brazilian Review of Econometrics, Sociedade Brasileira de Econometria - SBE, vol. 27(2), November.

    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:jlands:v:13:y:2024:i:7:p:914-:d:1420705. 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.