IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolet/v234y2024ics0165176523005074.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Stackelberg vs. Nash-Cournot Folk-theorem in international environmental agreements

Author

Listed:
  • Finus, Michael
  • Furini, Francesco
  • Rohrer, Anna Viktoria

Abstract

A commonly reported result in the literature on international environmental agreements (IEAs) is that if coalition members act as Stackelberg leaders (Stackelberg scenario) this leads to larger stable coalitions than if signatories act simultaneously with non-signatories (Nash-Cournot scenario). This result has been taken for granted, a kind of Folk-theorem, even though it has been proven at best for specific payoff functions, and very often the conclusion is only based on simulations. We prove the Stackelberg vs. Nash-Cournot Folk-theorem based on a generic payoff function for a public good provision game.

Suggested Citation

  • Finus, Michael & Furini, Francesco & Rohrer, Anna Viktoria, 2024. "The Stackelberg vs. Nash-Cournot Folk-theorem in international environmental agreements," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 234(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolet:v:234:y:2024:i:c:s0165176523005074
    DOI: 10.1016/j.econlet.2023.111481
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0165176523005074
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.econlet.2023.111481?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Effrosyni Diamantoudi & Eftichios S. Sartzetakis, 2006. "Stable International Environmental Agreements: An Analytical Approach," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 8(2), pages 247-263, May.
    2. Karp, Larry & Simon, Leo, 2013. "Participation games and international environmental agreements: A non-parametric model," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 65(2), pages 326-344.
    3. Barrett, Scott, 1994. "Self-Enforcing International Environmental Agreements," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 46(0), pages 878-894, Supplemen.
    4. Richard Cornes & Roger Hartley, 2007. "Aggregative Public Good Games," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 9(2), pages 201-219, April.
    5. Santiago J. Rubio & Alistair Ulph, 2006. "Self-enforcing international environmental agreements revisited," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 58(2), pages 233-263, April.
    6. Marrouch, Walid & Ray Chaudhuri, Amrita, 2016. "International Environmental Agreements: Doomed to Fail or Destined to Succeed? A Review of the Literature," International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics, now publishers, vol. 9(3-4), pages 245-319, September.
    7. Jon Hovi & Hugh Ward & Frank Grundig, 2015. "Hope or Despair? Formal Models of Climate Cooperation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 62(4), pages 665-688, December.
    8. Matthew McGinty, 2020. "Leadership and Free-Riding: Decomposing and Explaining the Paradox of Cooperation in International Environmental Agreements," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 77(2), pages 449-474, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Michael Finus & Francesco Furini & Anna Viktoria Rohrer, 2021. "International Environmental Agreements and the Paradox of Cooperation: Revisiting and Generalizing Some Previous Results," Graz Economics Papers 2021-05, University of Graz, Department of Economics.
    2. Achim Hagen & Jan Schneider, 2017. "Boon or Bane? Trade Sanctions and the Stability of International Environmental Agreements," Working Papers V-403-17, University of Oldenburg, Department of Economics, revised Sep 2017.
    3. Finus, Michael & Furini, Francesco & Rohrer, Anna Viktoria, 2021. "The efficacy of international environmental agreements when adaptation matters: Nash-Cournot vs Stackelberg leadership," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    4. Achim Hagen & Klaus Eisenack, 2019. "Climate Clubs Versus Single Coalitions: The Ambition Of International Environmental Agreements," Climate Change Economics (CCE), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 10(03), pages 1-19, August.
    5. Finus, Michael & McGinty, Matthew, 2019. "The anti-paradox of cooperation: Diversity may pay!," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 541-559.
    6. Nkuiya, Bruno, 2020. "Stability of international environmental agreements under isoelastic utility," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).
    7. Hagen, Achim & Schneider, Jan, 2021. "Trade sanctions and the stability of climate coalitions," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    8. Effrosyni Diamantoudi & Eftichios Sartzetakis & Stefania Strantza, 2018. "International Environmental Agreements and Trading Blocks - Can issue linkage enhance cooperation?," Discussion Paper Series 2018_07, Department of Economics, University of Macedonia, revised Jun 2018.
    9. Michèle Breton & Lucia Sbragia & Georges Zaccour, 2010. "A Dynamic Model for International Environmental Agreements," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 45(1), pages 25-48, January.
    10. Alejandro Caparrós & Michael Finus, 2020. "Public good agreements under the weakest‐link technology," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 22(3), pages 555-582, June.
    11. Marta Biancardi & Giovanni Villani, 2011. "Largest Consistent Set in International Environmental Agreements," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 38(3), pages 407-423, October.
    12. Yu-Hsuan Lin, 2018. "How social preferences influence the stability of a climate coalition," ECONOMICS AND POLICY OF ENERGY AND THE ENVIRONMENT, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 0(2), pages 151-166.
    13. Colombo, Luca & Labrecciosa, Paola & Van Long, Ngo, 2022. "A dynamic analysis of international environmental agreements under partial cooperation," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 143(C).
    14. Bayramoglu, Basak & Finus, Michael & Jacques, Jean-François, 2018. "Climate agreements in a mitigation-adaptation game," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 101-113.
    15. Hassan Benchekroun & Amrita Ray Chaudhuri, 2015. "Cleaner Technologies and the Stability of International Environmental Agreements," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 17(6), pages 887-915, December.
    16. Effrosyni Diamantoudi & Eftichios Sartzetakis & Stefania Strantza, 2018. "International Environmental Agreements - The Impact of Heterogeneity among Countries on Stability," Discussion Paper Series 2018_08, Department of Economics, University of Macedonia, revised Jun 2018.
    17. Karp, Larry & Simon, Leo, 2013. "Participation games and international environmental agreements: A non-parametric model," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 65(2), pages 326-344.
    18. Finus, Michael & Rubbelke, Dirk T G, 2008. "Coalition Formation and the Ancillary Benefits of Climate Policy," Stirling Economics Discussion Papers 2008-13, University of Stirling, Division of Economics.
    19. Marta Biancardi & Giovanni Villani, 2009. "International Environmental Agreements with Asymmetric Countries," Quaderni DSEMS 09-2009, Dipartimento di Scienze Economiche, Matematiche e Statistiche, Universita' di Foggia.
    20. Thomas Eichner & Rüdiger Pethig, 2012. "Stable Climate Coalitions (Nash) and International Trade," CESifo Working Paper Series 3915, CESifo.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    International environmental agreements; Stability; Stackelberg vs. Nash-Cournot Folk-theorem;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C72 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Noncooperative Games
    • D62 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Externalities
    • H41 - Public Economics - - Publicly Provided Goods - - - Public Goods

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecolet:v:234:y:2024:i:c:s0165176523005074. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolet .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.