IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v10y2018i5p1494-d145347.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Supervision after Certification: An Evolutionary Game Analysis for Chinese Environmental Labeled Enterprises

Author

Listed:
  • Jie Jin

    (School of Economics and Management, Beihang University, Beijing 100191, China
    Beijing Key Laboratory of Emergency Support Simulation Technologies for City Operations, Beijing 100091, China
    Department of Industrial and System Engineering, University at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY 14260, USA)

  • Jun Zhuang

    (Department of Industrial and System Engineering, University at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY 14260, USA)

  • Qiuhong Zhao

    (School of Economics and Management, Beihang University, Beijing 100191, China
    Beijing International Science and Technology Cooperation Base for City Safety Operation and Emergency Support, Beijing 100091, China)

Abstract

An eco-labeling scheme is a method of environmental performance certification that is beneficial for reducing negative environmental impacts and promoting green consumption. Many types of research studies have shown its effectiveness. However, to the best of our knowledge, fewer studies have considered how to supervise and regulate the enterprises after getting certificated. An enterprise may have obtained certification that its product meets the corresponding environmental standards, but without effective supervisions and regulations, it may not continue to implement the standards after being certified. Such behaviors are not only unfavorable to environmental protection, they also harm the eco-labeling scheme. With the consideration that different eco-labeling schemes and standards would result in different interaction relationships among stakeholders, we focus on Chinese Environmental Labeling (CEL), which is a government-sponsored scheme. By utilizing the approach of evolutionary game theory, we built a model including the government agency and enterprise and their strategic interactions. Numerical analyses are applied to verify the modeling analyses and demonstrate the influences of game parameters. Our results indicate that supervisions from the government side are necessary in order for the enterprises to implement the standards, but high supervision costs and low efficiency are the main factors that prevent the government agency from getting more involved. Reducing the executing costs of the enterprises would prompt them to participate more. Additionally, if the government agencies and customers could have a bigger, more positive influence on the enterprises, then the enterprises would likely choose to implement the standards. Our results provide references for the better development of an eco-labeling scheme as well as government environmental policy-making.

Suggested Citation

  • Jie Jin & Jun Zhuang & Qiuhong Zhao, 2018. "Supervision after Certification: An Evolutionary Game Analysis for Chinese Environmental Labeled Enterprises," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-22, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:5:p:1494-:d:145347
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/5/1494/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/5/1494/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lozano, Javier & Blanco, Ester & Rey-Maquieira, Javier, 2010. "Can ecolabels survive in the long run?: The role of initial conditions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(12), pages 2525-2534, October.
    2. Brécard, Dorothée, 2014. "Consumer confusion over the profusion of eco-labels: Lessons from a double differentiation model," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 64-84.
    3. Houe, Raymond & Grabot, Bernard, 2009. "Assessing the compliance of a product with an eco-label: From standards to constraints," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 121(1), pages 21-38, September.
    4. Daniel Friedman, 1998. "On economic applications of evolutionary game theory," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 8(1), pages 15-43.
    5. Seo-Hyeon Min & Seul-Ye Lim & Seung-Hoon Yoo, 2017. "Consumers’ Willingness to Pay a Premium for Eco-Labeled LED TVs in Korea: A Contingent Valuation Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-12, May.
    6. Sandholm, William H. & DokumacI, Emin & Lahkar, Ratul, 2008. "The projection dynamic and the replicator dynamic," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 64(2), pages 666-683, November.
    7. Amacher, Gregory S. & Koskela, Erkki & Ollikainen, Markku, 2004. "Environmental quality competition and eco-labeling," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 284-306, March.
    8. Friedman, Daniel, 1991. "Evolutionary Games in Economics," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 59(3), pages 637-666, May.
    9. Cai, Zhen & Xie, Yi & Aguilar, Francisco X., 2017. "Eco-label credibility and retailer effects on green product purchasing intentions," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 200-208.
    10. Rick Harbaugh & John W. Maxwell & Beatrice Roussillon, 2011. "Label Confusion: The Groucho Effect of Uncertain Standards," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(9), pages 1512-1527, February.
    11. Thomas P. Lyon & John W. Maxwell, 2011. "Greenwash: Corporate Environmental Disclosure under Threat of Audit," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(1), pages 3-41, March.
    12. Qing Liu & Zhen Yan & Jiehong Zhou, 2017. "Consumer Choices and Motives for Eco-Labeled Products in China: An Empirical Analysis Based on the Choice Experiment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(3), pages 1-12, February.
    13. Raymond Houé Ngouna & Bernard Grabot, 2009. "Assessing the compliance of a product with an eco-label: from standards to constraints," Post-Print hal-00965906, HAL.
    14. John M. Crespi & St)phan Marette, 2001. "How Should Food Safety Certification be Financed?," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 83(4), pages 852-861.
    15. Xingqiang Du, 2015. "How the Market Values Greenwashing? Evidence from China," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 128(3), pages 547-574, May.
    16. Cressman, Ross, 2005. "Stability of the replicator equation with continuous strategy space," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 127-147, September.
    17. Steiner, B.E. & Peschel, A.O. & Grebitus, C., 2017. "Multi-Product Category Choices Labeled for Ecological Footprints: Exploring Psychographics and Evolved Psychological Biases for Characterizing Latent Consumer Classes," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 251-264.
    18. Hamilton, Stephen F. & Zilberman, David, 2006. "Green markets, eco-certification, and equilibrium fraud," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 52(3), pages 627-644, November.
    19. Brian Roe & Ian Sheldon, 2007. "Credence Good Labeling: The Efficiency and Distributional Implications of Several Policy Approaches," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 89(4), pages 1020-1033.
    20. Schumacher, Ingmar, 2010. "Ecolabeling, consumers' preferences and taxation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(11), pages 2202-2212, 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. Bartłomiej Kabaja & Magdalena Wojnarowska & Maria Chiara Cesarani & Erica Varese, 2022. "Recognizability of Ecolabels on E-Commerce Websites: The Case for Younger Consumers in Poland," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-19, April.
    2. Iris Gavish & Abraham Haim & Doron Kliger, 2021. "‘To LED or Not to LED?’: Using Color Priming for Influencing Consumers’ Preferences of Light Bulbs," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-12, January.
    3. Yunpeng Yang & Weixin Yang, 2019. "Does Whistleblowing Work for Air Pollution Control in China? A Study Based on Three-party Evolutionary Game Model under Incomplete Information," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-20, January.
    4. Juan Wang & Xin Wan & Ruide Tu, 2022. "Game Analysis of the Evolution of Local Government’s River Chief System Implementation Strategy," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(4), pages 1-13, February.
    5. Jichao Geng & Meiyu Ji & Li Yang, 2022. "Role of Enterprise Alliance in Carbon Emission Reduction Mechanism: An Evolutionary Game Analysis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(18), pages 1-17, September.
    6. Bartłomiej Kabaja & Magdalena Wojnarowska & Marek Ćwiklicki & Stefania Claudia Buffagni & Erica Varese, 2023. "Does Environmental Labelling Still Matter? Generation Z’s Purchasing Decisions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(18), pages 1-19, September.
    7. Jie Jin & Qiuhong Zhao & Ernesto DR Santibanez-Gonzalez, 2019. "How Chinese Consumers’ Intentions for Purchasing Eco-Labeled Products Are Influenced by Psychological Factors," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(1), pages 1-17, December.
    8. Zhicheng Weng & Pinliang Luo, 2021. "Supervision of the Default Risk of Online Car-Hailing Platform from an Evolutionary Game Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-19, January.
    9. Olimpia Martucci & Gabriella Arcese & Chiara Montauti & Alessia Acampora, 2019. "Social Aspects in the Wine Sector: Comparison between Social Life Cycle Assessment and VIVA Sustainable Wine Project Indicators," Resources, MDPI, vol. 8(2), pages 1-14, April.

    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. Yenipazarli, Arda, 2015. "The economics of eco-labeling: Standards, costs and prices," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 170(PA), pages 275-286.
    2. Yokessa, Maïmouna & Marette, Stéphan, 2019. "A Review of Eco-labels and their Economic Impact," International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics, now publishers, vol. 13(1-2), pages 119-163, April.
    3. Li, Yi, 2020. "Competing eco-labels and product market competition," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    4. Jie Jin & Qiuhong Zhao & Ernesto DR Santibanez-Gonzalez, 2019. "How Chinese Consumers’ Intentions for Purchasing Eco-Labeled Products Are Influenced by Psychological Factors," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(1), pages 1-17, December.
    5. Fabrice Etilé & Sabrina Teyssier, 2012. "Signaling Corporate Social Responsibility: Third-Party Certification vs. Brands," PSE Working Papers halshs-00736551, HAL.
    6. Brécard, Dorothée, 2014. "Consumer confusion over the profusion of eco-labels: Lessons from a double differentiation model," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 64-84.
    7. Etilé, Fabrice & Teyssier, Sabrina, 2013. "Corporate social responsibility and the economics of consumer social responsibility," Review of Agricultural and Environmental Studies - Revue d'Etudes en Agriculture et Environnement (RAEStud), Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA), vol. 94(2).
    8. Olivier Bonroy & Christos Constantatos, 2015. "On the Economics of Labels: How Their Introduction Affects the Functioning of Markets and the Welfare of All Participants," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 97(1), pages 239-259.
    9. repec:hal:pseose:halshs-00736551 is not listed on IDEAS
    10. repec:gbl:wpaper:2013-01 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Bartłomiej Kabaja & Magdalena Wojnarowska & Maria Chiara Cesarani & Erica Varese, 2022. "Recognizability of Ecolabels on E-Commerce Websites: The Case for Younger Consumers in Poland," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-19, April.
    12. Dolores Garrido & Ana Espínola‐Arredondo & Felix Munoz‐Garcia, 2020. "Can mandatory certification promote greenwashing? A signaling approach," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 22(6), pages 1801-1851, December.
    13. Hend Ghazzai & R Lahmandi-Ayed, 2018. "Ecolabels: Is More Information Better?," Working Papers hal-01877934, HAL.
    14. Anthony Heyes & Sandeep Kapur & Peter W. Kennedy & Steve Martin & John W. Maxwell, 2020. "But What Does It Mean? Competition between Products Carrying Alternative Green Labels When Consumers Are Active Acquirers of Information," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 7(2), pages 243-277.
    15. Eijaz Ahmed Khan & Pradip Royhan & M. Ashiqur Rahman & Mohammed Mizanur Rahman & Ahmed Mostafa, 2019. "The Impact of Enviropreneurial Orientation on Small Firms’ Business Performance: The Mediation of Green Marketing Mix and Eco-Labeling Strategies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-17, December.
    16. Poret, Sylvaine, 2019. "Label wars: Competition among NGOs as sustainability standard setters," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 1-18.
    17. Schumacher, Ingmar, 2010. "Ecolabeling, consumers' preferences and taxation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(11), pages 2202-2212, September.
    18. Dorothée Brécard, 2017. "Consumer misperception of eco-labels, green market structure and welfare," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 51(3), pages 340-364, June.
    19. Philippe Mahenc, 2017. "Honest versus Misleading Certification," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(2), pages 454-483, June.
    20. Frank Wijen & Mireille Chiroleu-Assouline, 2019. "Controversy Over Voluntary Environmental Standards: A Socioeconomic Analysis of the Marine Stewardship Council," PSE-Ecole d'économie de Paris (Postprint) halshs-02071504, HAL.
    21. Blanco, Ester & Lozano, Javier & Rey-Maquieira, Javier, 2009. "A dynamic approach to voluntary environmental contributions in tourism," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(1), pages 104-114, November.
    22. Kyriakos Riskos & Paraskevi (Evi) Dekoulou & Naoum Mylonas & George Tsourvakas, 2021. "Ecolabels and the Attitude–Behavior Relationship towards Green Product Purchase: A Multiple Mediation Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-22, June.

    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:10:y:2018:i:5:p:1494-:d:145347. 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.