IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecmode/v61y2017icp312-320.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

International environmental agreements with ancillary benefits: Repeated games analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Takashima, Nobuyuki

Abstract

Both ancillary and primary benefits, generated by climate change mitigation, are indispensable key factors to implement the full participation in international environmental agreement (IEA). This paper presents a new IEA model with ancillary benefits, using a repeated game with the linear and quadratic emission abatement cost functions of each country. This study also investigates the effect of ancillary benefits on the condition for full participation in IEA. Ancillary benefits function as a complementary device of punishment scheme for IEA. Our main results show that ancillary benefits can facilitate full participation in IEA, thus suggesting that they should be considered in climate change negotiations.

Suggested Citation

  • Takashima, Nobuyuki, 2017. "International environmental agreements with ancillary benefits: Repeated games analysis," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 312-320.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecmode:v:61:y:2017:i:c:p:312-320
    DOI: 10.1016/j.econmod.2016.10.011
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264999316306010
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    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. Scott Barrett, 2002. "Consensus Treaties," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 158(4), pages 529-529, December.
    2. Asheim, Geir B. & Froyn, Camilla Bretteville & Hovi, Jon & Menz, Fredric C., 2006. "Regional versus global cooperation for climate control," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 51(1), pages 93-109, January.
    3. Ekin, Paul, 1996. "The secondary benefits of CO2 abatement: How much emission reduction do they justify?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(1), pages 13-24, January.
    4. Geir Asheim & Bjart Holtsmark, 2009. "Renegotiation-Proof Climate Agreements with Full Participation: Conditions for Pareto-Efficiency," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 43(4), pages 519-533, August.
    5. Matthew McGinty, 2007. "International environmental agreements among asymmetric nations," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 59(1), pages 45-62, January.
    6. Cai, Yuezhou & Riezman, Raymond & Whalley, John, 2013. "International trade and the negotiability of global climate change agreements," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 421-427.
    7. Froyn, Camilla Bretteville & Hovi, Jon, 2008. "A climate agreement with full participation," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 99(2), pages 317-319, May.
    8. Carraro, Carlo & Siniscalco, Domenico, 1993. "Strategies for the international protection of the environment," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(3), pages 309-328, October.
    9. Evans, Robert & Maskin, Eric, 1989. "Efficient renegotiation--proof equilibria in repeated games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 1(4), pages 361-369, December.
    10. Ouchida, Yasunori & Goto, Daisaku, 2016. "Environmental research joint ventures and time-consistent emission tax: Endogenous choice of R&D formation," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 179-188.
    11. Farrell, Joseph & Maskin, Eric, 1989. "Renegotiation in repeated games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 1(4), pages 327-360, December.
    12. Abreu, Dilip, 1988. "On the Theory of Infinitely Repeated Games with Discounting," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 56(2), pages 383-396, March.
    13. Barrett, Scott, 1994. "Self-Enforcing International Environmental Agreements," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 46(0), pages 878-894, Supplemen.
    14. Rive, Nathan, 2010. "Climate policy in Western Europe and avoided costs of air pollution control," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 103-115, January.
    15. 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.
    16. van der Pol, Thomas & Weikard, Hans-Peter & van Ierland, Ekko, 2012. "Can altruism stabilise international climate agreements?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 112-120.
    17. Ouchida, Yasunori & Goto, Daisaku, 2014. "Do emission subsidies reduce emission? In the context of environmental R&D organization," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 511-516.
    18. Matthew McGinty, 2010. "International Environmental Agreements as Evolutionary Games," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 45(2), pages 251-269, February.
    19. Michael Finus & Dirk Rübbelke, 2013. "Public Good Provision and Ancillary Benefits: The Case of Climate Agreements," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 56(2), pages 211-226, October.
    20. Ekins, Paul, 1996. "How large a carbon tax is justified by the secondary benefits of CO2 abatement?," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 161-187, June.
    21. Aunan, Kristin & Berntsen, Terje & O'Connor, David & Persson, Therese Hindman & Vennemo, Haakon & Zhai, Fan, 2007. "Benefits and costs to China of a climate policy," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 12(03), pages 471-497, June.
    22. Barrett, Scott, 2001. "International cooperation for sale," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 45(10), pages 1835-1850, December.
    23. Scott Barrett, 1999. "A Theory of Full International Cooperation," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 11(4), pages 519-541, October.
    24. Dritan Osmani & Richard Tol, 2010. "The Case of two Self-Enforcing International Agreements for Environmental Protection with Asymmetric Countries," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 36(2), pages 93-119, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    international environmental agreements; subgame perfect equilibrium; renegotiation-proof; repeated game; ancillary benefits;

    JEL classification:

    • F53 - International Economics - - International Relations, National Security, and International Political Economy - - - International Agreements and Observance; International Organizations
    • H87 - Public Economics - - Miscellaneous Issues - - - International Fiscal Issues; International Public Goods
    • Q52 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Pollution Control Adoption and Costs; Distributional Effects; Employment Effects
    • Q54 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Climate; Natural Disasters and their Management; Global Warming

    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:ecmode:v:61:y:2017:i:c:p:312-320. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/30411 .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.