期刊文献+

感潮河网区环境合作博弈模型及实证 被引量:7

The cooperative environmental game model in the Tidal River Network Regions and its empirical research
下载PDF
导出
摘要 区域决策者往往要选择合适的排污策略,使自己的经济和环境收益最大。当多个决策者进行策略选择时,就形成了区域环境博弈格局。针对感潮河网区排污行为与环境质量具有互相影响的特点,考虑了税收收益、治理成本和环境损失等因素,建立了河网区环境非合作博弈模型和合作博弈模型。非合作博弈的Nash均衡表明,在非合作局面下,区域决策者仅仅考虑最大化自己的收益,选择的排污策略与其他参与者无关。在合作博弈分析中,对大联盟、子联盟博弈进行了分析求解。通过计算所有可能联盟博弈的特征函数,使用常用的Shapley值法进行合作收益公平分配。研究表明,在大联盟合作局面下,区域决策者的策略选择考虑了全局收益的最大化,选择的排污策略与所有参与者的环境损失参数、环境影响参数有关。结合感潮河网区案例对模型进行了验证,研究了3个区域非合作博弈状态和合作博弈状态下的排放量和收益,并使用Shapley值法对合作收益进行分配。对比非合作博弈与合作博弈,合作后3个区域排污量分别比合作前减少了17.98%、15.36%、5.55%。合作收益分别增加了2.17%、3.21%、1.25%。环境质量分别提高了14.24%、13.33%、10.52%。这说明合作局面有利于降低污染排放,分配后的环境合作收益大于非合作收益,河网区环境合作是多赢的。 Decision-makers always have incentives to choose proper emission strategies to maximize their individual economic and environmental benefits and the regional environmental game thus occurs when multiple decision-makers are involved in selecting the emission strategies.In this paper,environmental non-cooperative game model and cooperative game model were established for tidal network regions based on(1) sewage emission and its impact on environmental quality and(2) economic considerations,including tax benefits,pollution abatement costs and environmental losses.The Nash equilibrium of non-cooperative game indicated that,in the case of non-cooperation,no relations existed among the pollutant emission strategies chosen as each regional decision maker made its selection independently of others.On the other hand,in the presence of decision maker cooperation,the model was further divided into grand coalition game and sub-coalition game and the solutions to them were obtained.The characteristic function values were computed for all possible coalitions and the Shapley values were used to allocate the total payoff among all the participants with consideration of fairness.The results showed that,in the grand coalition game,the selection of the emission strategies was made by considering maximal global gains and the thus-selected emission strategies were well related with both the environmental loss coefficient and the environmental impact coefficient of all the participants.A case study of three tidal river network regions was conducted to verify the models,with the emissions and payoff being investigated under non-cooperative game and cooperative game situations.Compared with the non-cooperative game,in the cooperative game,the pollutant emissions were reduced by 17.98%,15.36% and 5.55%,the payoff was increased by 2.17%,3.21% and 1.25%,and the environment quality was increased by 14.24%,13.33% and 10.52%,for three regions respectively.These results showed that a win-win outcome can be obtained in the tidal river network regions in cooperative game.
出处 《生态学报》 CAS CSCD 北大核心 2012年第11期3586-3594,共9页 Acta Ecologica Sinica
基金 国家水体污染控制与治理科技重大专项(2008ZX07211-003)
关键词 环境博弈模型 联盟博弈 SHAPLEY值 感潮河网区 environmental game model coalition game Shapley value tidal river network
  • 相关文献

参考文献5

二级参考文献45

  • 1徐华君,徐百福.污染物允许排放总量分配的公平协调思路与方法[J].新疆大学学报(自然科学版),1996,13(3):86-89. 被引量:10
  • 2林巍,傅国伟,刘春华.基于公理体系的排污总量公平分配模型[J].环境科学,1996,17(3):35-37. 被引量:50
  • 3林高松,李适宇,江峰.河流允许排污量公平分配的多准则决策方法[J].环境科学学报,2007,27(3):494-500. 被引量:8
  • 4陈文颖.大气污染总量控制规划方法与智能决策技术系统[博士学位论文].北京:清华大学,1996..
  • 5陈秉正.费用分摊问题与群决策方法[J].系统工程理论与实践,1990,10(5):30-36.
  • 6沈国舫 王礼先.中国生态环境建设与水资源保护利用[M].北京:中国水利水电出版社,2000.20-24.
  • 7施熙灿 蒋水心 赵宝璋.水利工程经济[M].北京:中国水利水电出版社,2002..
  • 8傅国伟.水污染物排放总量的分配方法与原则[A].见:国家环保局.环境背景值及环境容量研究[C].北京:科学出版社,1993.444-455.
  • 9Akaah I P. 1997. Influence of deontologlcal and teleological factors on research ethics evaluations[J]. Journal of Business Research, 39 : 71-80.
  • 10Bennett L L. 2000. The integration of water quality into transboundary allocation agreements Lessons from the southwestern United States [ J ]. Agricultural Economics, 24 : 113-125.

共引文献77

同被引文献108

引证文献7

二级引证文献29

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部