Are Uniform Solutions Focal? – The Case of International Environmental Agreements
AbstractThe application of uniform solutions has several drawbacks, notably their lack of cost efficiency and their inability to guarantee individual rationality. A ‘proper’ specification of uniform solutions, however, reveals that uniform solutions that satisfy individual rationality always exist. When all countries hold private information about their own reduction costs, there only exists one solution that always satisfies individually rationality without use of side payments and the requirement of dominant strategy implementation: The solution that selects the smallest individually preferred uniform reduction which also give a theoretical explanation of the ‘lowest common denominator effect’. Copyright Kluwer Academic Publishers 2003
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists in its journal Environmental and Resource Economics.
Volume (Year): 25 (2003)
Issue (Month): 3 (July)
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.springerlink.com/link.asp?id=100263
feasibility constraints; focal solutions; international environmental agreements; uniform solutions;
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Eyckmans, Johan, 1997. "Nash Implementation of a Proportional Solution to International Pollution Control Problems," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 314-330, July.
- Hoel, Michael, 1991. "Global environmental problems: The effects of unilateral actions taken by one country," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 20(1), pages 55-70, January.
- Urs Steiner Brandt, 2002. "Actions Prior to Entering an International Environmental Agreement," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 158(4), pages 695-, December.
- H. Moulin, 1980. "On strategy-proofness and single peakedness," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 35(4), pages 437-455, January.
- Johan Eyckmans, 1999. "Strategy Proof Uniform Effort Sharing Schemes For Transfrontier Pollution Problems," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 14(2), pages 165-189, September.
- Moulin, Herve & Shenker, Scott, 1992. "Serial Cost Sharing," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 60(5), pages 1009-37, September.
- Young, Oran R., 1989. "The politics of international regime formation: managing natural resources and the environment," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 43(03), pages 349-375, June.
- Hoel, Michael, 1997. "Coordination of environmental policy for transboundary environmental problems?," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(2), pages 199-224, November.
- Barrett, Scott, 1994. "Self-Enforcing International Environmental Agreements," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 46(0), pages 878-94, Supplemen.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Guenther Eichhorn) or (Christopher F. Baum).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.