Modelling of Environmental Risk Management under Information Asymmetry

Conference paper
Part of the IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology book series (IFIPAICT, volume 413)


The Environmental risk management is an important component of governmental environmental policies. Alternative mechanisms for achieving cost-effective environmental risk reduction have been discussed in environmental economics. The paper presents a relatively new approach to environmental risk management – a model of negotiation between polluters and authorities under information asymmetry when also economic instruments are applied. A combinatory model that serves computing the first best solution was developed. The CRAB software (CombinatoRial Auction Body Software System) was used for this model. The computed first best solution was compared to the results of small economic laboratory experiments. Students played the role of the subjects in the experiments. The research concluded that under economic pressure in the form of known limitation of financial resources, the experiment results are closer to minimal financial supports. Even in a one-round game, a more cost-effective solution is achieved compared to experiments where such limitation was not introduced.


environmental risk management pollution combinatorial auctions environmental subsidy economic laboratory experiments 


  1. 1.
    Davis, D.D., Holt, C.A.: Experimental Economics. Princeton University Press, Princeton (1993)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Smith, V.L.: Experimental Economics: Induced Value Theory. The American Economic Review 66(2), 274–279 (1976)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Walker, J.: Economic Instruction: Experimental Economics in the Classroom. Journal of Economic Education 18(1), 51–56 (1987)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Roth, A.E.: Introduction to Experimental Economics. In: Kagel, J.H., Roth, A.E. (eds.) The Handbook of Experimental Economics, pp. 3–109. Princeton University Press, New Jersey (1995)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Sauer, P., Dvorak, A., Lisa, A., Fiala, P.: A Procedure for Negotiating Pollution Reduction under Information Asymmetry. Environmental and Resource Economics 24, 103–119 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Levitt, S.D., List, J.A.: What Do Laboratory Experiments Measuring Social Preferences Reveal about the Real World? The Journal of Economic Perspectives 21(2), 153–174 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Falk, A., Heckman, J.: Lab Experiments are a Major Source of Knowledge in the Social Sciences. CESifo Working Paper Series, No. 2894. Available at SSRN on-line (2009), (assessed March 20, 2013)
  8. 8.
    Cramton, P., Shoham, Y., Steinberg, R. (eds.): Combinatorial Auctions. MIT Press, Cambridge (2006)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    de Vries, S., Vohra, R.V.: Combinatorial auctions: A survey. INFORMS Journal of Computing 15(1), 284–309 (2003)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Fiala, P., Kalčevová, J., Vraný, J.: CRAB—CombinatoRial Auction Body Software System. Journal of Software Engineering and Applications 3(7), 718–722 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Šauer, P., Dvořák, A., Fiala, P.: Negotiation between authority and polluters: A model for the support of decision-making in ecological policy (in Czech). Politická Ekonomie, XLVI/6, 772–787 (1998)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Fiala, P., Šauer, P.: Application of Combinatorial Auctions on Allocation of Public Financial Support in the Area of Environmental Protection: Economic Laboratory Experiment (in Czech). Politická Ekonomie, 59(3), 379–392 (2011)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of EconomicsPrague 3Czech Republic

Personalised recommendations