Search

The present investigation elaborates on the level of game theory application for the applied and theoretical analyses of climate change and development studies. This editorial shows that the common good character of global climate alongside the increasing internalization of environmental externalities through national regulations and international environmental treaties jointly result in the increasing congruence between the context of climate change problems and the game theoretical method. Furthermore, the adoption of the Paris Accord by the overwhelming majority of developing countries as well as the disproportionate vulnerability of the Global South have led to an increasing shift in focus with regard to international development cooperation, from poverty alleviation and economic growth to green growth and circular economy solutions, within developing countries. The underutilization of game theory in the context of development studies is not satisfactory. This paper underlines the importance of implementing an impetus to researchers for scholarly discussions and applications of game theory in a discourse on the following topics: 1. economic growth; 2. climate change mitigation and adaptation; and 3. a broader socioeconomic development. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Due to the challenge of global warming, the European Union (EU) signed the Paris Agreement (2015) to diminish total Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions. This paper addresses the conflict that EU member states face when they want to follow the target of the Paris Agreement for the period 2021–2030 which is a 55% GHG emission reduction by 2030 (compared with GHG emission in 1990). EU member states have to emit at a level that is lower than their emission needs. To solve this problem, we implement the claims problems approach as a method for distributing insufficient resources among parties with greater demands. We use several well-known division rules to divide the emission budget among EU member states. We define a set of principles that should be satisfied by division rules to select the most optimal allocation method. To diminish the effect of countries' preferences on the allocation we use equity and stability criteria to examine the fairness of the rules. Moreover, we allocate the emission budget in two ways: First, we apply division rules to allocate the total emission budget for 2021–2030 among countries. Second, we allocate the emission budget annually from 2021 to 2030. We propose that Constrained Equal Awards (CEA) is an appropriate division rule to meet the target of 2030. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A standard result of coalition formation games is that stable coalitions are very small if the coalition plays Nash vis-à-vis the rest of the world and if abatement costs are quadratic. It has been shown that larger coalitions and even the grand coalition are possible if the marginal abatement cost is concave. The paper confirms this result, but shows that abatement activities by large coalitions smaller than the grand coalition can be very small. This can be 'repaired' only by assuming that the marginal abatement cost curve changes its curvature extremely once the stable coalition has been reached. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Free riding incentives make it difficult to control climate change. To improve the chances of the Paris Agreement's ambitious goal, many nations are forming scientific networks in carbon capture and storage (CCS). These networks take many forms (bilateral, hub-and-spoke, and multilateral). Studies of social interactions among scientists demonstrate that research networks are limited because of relational issues, such as lack of trust. This paper provides a rationale for the formation of various types of international CCS networks and examines their impacts on climate change. Our concept of stability focuses on Nash equilibria that are immune to coalitional deviations in overlapping networks. Players may belong to various research networks. A particular research network is a climate club. We show that in the absence of top-down coordination in clubs, the type of global network that forms depends on relational attrition. The complex task is to mitigate free riding while enhancing trust. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A recurring argument in the global debate is that climate deterioration is likely to make social conflicts over diminishing natural resources more common in the future. The exact mechanism behind such a development has so far not been successfully characterized in the literature. In this paper, we present a general model of a community populated by farmers and herders who can either divide up land in a market economy or in autarky. The key insight from our model is that decreasing resources can make trade between the two groups collapse, which in turn makes each group's welfare independent of that of the other. Predictions from the model are then applied to the conflict in Darfur. Our analysis suggests that three decades of drought in the area can at least partially explain the observed disintegration of markets and the subsequent rise of social tensions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This work aims to provide different perspectives on the relationships between cooperative game theory and the research field concerning climate change dynamics. New results are obtained in the framework of competitive bargaining solutions and related issues, moving from a cooperative approach to a competitive one. Furthermore, the dynamics of balanced and super-balanced games are exposed, with particular reference to coalitions. Some open problems are presented to aid future research in this area. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To avoid the dangerous consequences of climate change, humans need to overcome two intertwined conflicts. First, they must deal with an intra-generational conflict that emerges from the allocation of costs of climate change mitigation among different actors of the current generation. Second, they face an inter-generational conflict that stems from the higher costs for long-term mitigation measures, particularly helping future generations, compared to the short-term actions aimed at adapting to the immediate effects of climate change, benefiting mostly the current generation. We devise a novel game to study this multi-level conflict and investigate individuals' behavior in a lab experiment. We find that, although individuals reach sufficient cooperation levels to avoid adverse consequences for their own generation, they contribute more to cheaper short-term than to costlier long-term measures, to the detriment of future generations. Simple "nudge" interventions, however, may alter this pattern considerably. We find that changing the default contribution level to the inter-generational welfare optimum increases long-term contributions. Moreover, providing individuals with the possibility to commit themselves to inter-generational solidarity leads to an even stronger increase in long-term contributions. Nevertheless, the results also suggest that nudges alone may not be enough to induce inter-generationally optimal contributions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]