在静态和动态碳减排奖励与惩罚机制下，考虑碳排放约束的地方政府和企业群体行为的演化博弈，重点分析了碳配额、碳交易价格、政府监督成本和企业减排投资（减排效果参数）对演化稳定策略（ESS）的影响，最后进行了算例分析。研究结果表明：在动态奖励与惩罚机制下，地方政府和企业的演化轨迹围绕着唯一的演化稳定策略螺旋趋近。碳配额对地方政府监督策略的作用与企业单位减排量市场收益的大小有关，政府监督成本和减排效果参数对地方政府监督策略起负向作用；政府监督成本对企业诚实减排策略起负向作用。随着碳交易价格的不断上升，地方政府监督的积极性先增加后降低，企业碳交易行为由购入碳排放权转为出售碳排放权，但是地方政府监督行为的转变滞后于企业减排行为的转变。研究结果对碳交易体系下政府减排策略制定和企业减排投资具有较强启示。
In the process of carbon emission mitigation, as two major participants of emission mitigation, government and enterprise play crucial roles, and subsidy and punishment are two key methods of government. However, the objectives of government and enterprise are not consistent and there exists a game between these two participants in the implementation of carbon emission mitigation. It is critical to handle correctly the contradiction between the government and enterprises. Considering that evolutionary game theory is an effective method in the research of this contradiction, an evolutionary game model is constructed in this paper under the mechanism of static and dynamic subsidy or punishment by local government.Four Influencing paramenters, including carbon allowance, carbon trading price, goveornmental supervision fee and enterprice abatement invest (emission reduction effect paramenter), are compared for their contributions to the evolutionarily stable strategy. The results show that:(1)under the mechanism of dynmaic subsidy or punishment, the trajectory of evolutionary game, cycles around and approach spirally the only evolutionarily stable strategy, is less influenced by the original states of local governments and enterprises.(2)Both the governmental supervision fee and enterprice abatement investment have a negative effect on the action tactics of government supervision. (3)The the impact of carbon allowance on government is relate to the per unit of emission redcution market returns.(4)With the increase of governmental supervision fee, the level of honestly reducing emission will reduce.(5)As carbon trading prices rising, the positivity of government supervision increases initially and then decreases, the actions of enterprise carbon trading vary from buying to selling carbon emission rights, but the transition of the governmental supervision actions lag behind the change of enterprise carbon trading behavior. Furthermore, according to the request of model and the actual environment of carbon market in China, an analysis about all parameters' influence on evolutionarily stable strategy is made. The conclusions provide useful managerial implications for local governments to make policies, and enterprises to invest about reducing emission under the carbon trading mechanism.
[1] 张国兴,高秀林,汪应洛,等. 中国节能减排政策的测量、协同与演变——基于1978-2013年政策数据的研究[J]. 中国人口、资源与环境,2014, 24(12): 62-73.
[2] Tian Yihui, Govindan K, Zhu Qinghua. A system dynamics model based on evolutionary game theory for green supply Chain management diffusion among Chinese manufacturers[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2014, 80: 96-105.
[3] 王明喜,鲍勤,汤铃,等. 碳排放约束下的企业最优减排投资行为[J]. 管理科学学报. 2015,18(6): 41-57.
[4] Pigou A C. The economics of welfare[M]. London:Macmillan, 1920.
[5] 王维国,王霄凌. 基于演化博弈的我国高能耗企业节能减排政策分析[J]. 财经问题研究,2012,(4): 75-82.
[6] Choi J, Bakshi B R, Hubacek K, et al. A sequential input-output framework to analyze the economic and environmental implications of energy policies: Gas taxes and fuel subsidies[J]. Applied Energy, 2016,184:830-839.
[7] 李媛,赵道致,祝晓光. 基于碳税的政府与企业行为博弈模型研究[J]. 资源科学, 2013,(1): 125-131.
[8] 骆瑞玲,范体军,夏海洋. 碳排放交易政策下供应链碳减排技术投资的博弈分析[J]. 中国管理科学, 2014,22(11): 44-53.
[9] 张国兴,张绪涛,程素杰,等. 节能减排补贴政策下的企业与政府信号博弈模型[J]. 中国管理科学,2013, 21(4): 129-136.
[10] Cohen M C, Lobel R,Perakis G. The impact of demand uncertainty on consumer subsidies for green technology adoption[J]. Management Science,2016, 62(5): 1235-1258.
[11] 赵黎明,陈喆芝,刘嘉玥. 低碳经济下地方政府和旅游企业的演化博弈[J]. 旅游学刊,2015,(1): 72-82.
[12] Nelson R, Winter S. An evolutionary theory of economics change[M]. Cambridge: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1982.
[13] 王芹鹏,赵道致,何龙飞. 供应链企业碳减排投资策略选择与行为演化研究[J]. 管理工程学报, 2014,(3): 181-189.
[14] 郭本海,方志耕,刘卿. 基于演化博弈的区域高耗能产业退出机制研究[J]. 中国管理科学, 2012, 20(4): 79-85.
[15] 朱庆华,王一雷,田一辉. 基于系统动力学的地方政府与制造企业碳减排演化博弈分析[J]. 运筹与管理, 2014,(3): 71-82.
[16] Kennedy P W. Optimal early action on greenhouse gas emissions[J]. Canadian Journal of Economics, 2002, 35(1): 16-35.
[17] Jacquemina C D A. Cooperative and noncooperative R&D in duopoly with spillovers[J]. America Economic Review, 1998, 78(5): 1133-1137.
[18] 原毅军,耿殿贺. 环境政策传导机制与中国环保产业发展——基于政府、排污企业与环保企业的博弈研究[J]. 中国工业经济, 2010,(10): 65-74.
[19] Lacroix A. Environmental protection expenditure accounts in canada issues sources and methods[R]. Switzerland: Joint ECE/Eurostat Work Session on Methodological Issues of Environment Statistics, 1997.
[20] 汪秋明,韩庆潇,杨晨. 战略性新兴产业中的政府补贴与企业行为——基于政府规制下的动态博弈分析视角[J]. 财经研究, 2014,(7): 43-53.
[21] Friedman D. Evolutionary games in economics[J]. Source: Econometrica, 1991, 59(3): 637-666.
[22] Taylor P D,Jonker L B. Evolutionary stable strategies and game dynamics[J]. Mathematical Biosciences. 1978, 40: 145-156.
