Hostname: page-component-f554764f5-rvxtl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-09T09:25:04.647Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Asymmetries in international environmental agreements

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 July 2012

Yulia Pavlova  and
Aart de Zeeuw
Yulia Pavlova
Affiliation:
MTT Agrifood Research, Helsinki, Finland. Email: [email protected]
Aart de Zeeuw
Affiliation:
Department of Economics, CentER and TSC, Tilburg University, P.O. Box 90153, Tilburg, The Netherlands. Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper considers self-enforcing international environmental agreements when countries are asymmetric with respect to emission-related benefits and environmental damage. Considering these asymmetries simultaneously yields large stable coalitions, also without the option of transfers between signatories. However, these large stable coalitions are only possible if they include countries that have relatively high marginal benefits and a relatively low marginal environmental damage. This type of countries hardly contributes to the common good and the gains of cooperation from including this type of countries in the stable coalition are small. This confirms a persistent result in this literature that large stable coalitions usually go hand in hand with low gains of cooperation. Without the option of transfers it is always better to have a small stable coalition with countries that matter than a large stable coalition with countries that do not matter. Only with transfers might a large stable coalition be able to perform better.

Type
Research Article
Information
Environment and Development Economics , Volume 18 , Special Issue 1: Strategic behaviour and environmental commons , February 2013 , pp. 51 - 68
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Barrett, S. (1994), ‘Self-enforcing international environmental agreements’, Oxford Economic Papers 46: 878–894.Google Scholar
Barrett, S. (2001), ‘International cooperation for sale’, European Economic Review 45: 1835–1850.Google Scholar
Biancardi, M. and Villani, G. (2010), ‘International environmental agreements with asymmetric countries’, Computational Economics 36: 69–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Botteon, M. and Carraro, C. (1997), ‘Burden sharing and coalition stability in environmental negotiations with asymmetric countries’, in Carraro, C. (ed.), International Environmental Negotiations, Strategic Policy Issues, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, pp. 26–55.Google Scholar
d'Aspremont, C., Jacquemin, A., Gabszewicz, J. and Weymark, J. (1983), ‘On the stability of collusive price leadership’, Canadian Journal of Economics 16: 17–25.Google Scholar
de Zeeuw, A. (2008), ‘Dynamic effects on the stability of international environmental agreements’, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 55: 163–174.Google Scholar
Eyckmans, J. and Finus, M. (2004), ‘An almost ideal sharing scheme for coalition games with externalities’, Working Paper Series 2004–14, Center for Economic Studies, K.U. Leuven.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Finus, M. (2003), ‘Stability and design of international environmental agreements: the case of transboundary pollution’, in Folmer, H. and Tietenberg, T. (eds), International Yearbook of Environmental and Resource Economics, 2003/4, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, pp. 199–243.Google Scholar
Fuentes-Albero, C. and Rubio, S.J. (2010), ‘Can international environmental cooperation be bought?’, European Journal of Operational Research 202(1): 255–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glanemann, N. (2012), ‘Can international environmental cooperation be bought: Comment’, European Journal of Operational Research 216(3): 697–699.Google Scholar
McGinty, M. (2007), ‘International environmental agreements among asymmetric nations’, Oxford Economic Papers 59(1): 45–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Osmani, D. and Tol, R.S.J. (2010), ‘The case of two self-enforcing international agreements for environmental protection with asymmetric countries’, Computational Economics 36: 93–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pintissalgo, P., Finus, M., Lindroos, M., and Munro, G. (2010), ‘Stability and success of regional fisheries management organizations’, Environmental and Resource Economics 46(3): 377–402.Google Scholar
Ruis, A. and de Zeeuw, A. (2010), ‘International cooperation to combat climate change’, Public Finance and Management 10(2): 379–404.Google Scholar
Weikard, H.-P. (2009), ‘Cartel stability under an optimal sharing rule’, The Manchester School 77: 599–616.Google Scholar