IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/sie/siegen/155-12.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Stable climate coalitions (Nash) and international trade

Author

Abstract

The basic model of the literature on self-enforcing international environmental agreements is a model of autarkic countries. We extend that model by international trade and investigate its impact on the performance of ’Nash’ coalitions and on their stability, in particular, in a general equilibrium framework. First we characterize the performance of coalitions and non-coalition countries with regard to emissions and welfare and compare business as usual with the coalition-fringe scenario. In qualitative terms, the results in our free-trade model turn out to be the same as in the basic model for quadratic functional forms. In our model with international trade countries influence the terms of trade with their choice of policy and they make strategic use of that terms-of-trade effect. We find, however, that in the quadratic version of our model - as in the basic model - stable coalitions consist of no more than two countries. Finally, we explore the outcome of trade liberalization by moving from autarky to free trade. Although the coalition steps up its mitigation effort, world emissions rise which may be referred to as a ’green paradox of trade liberalization’. Trade liberalization turns out to be bad for the environment as well as for the coalition countries’ welfare and the aggregate welfare of all countries; it reduces the range of profitable coalitions, and it even tends to hamper the formation of stable coalitions.

Suggested Citation

  • Thomas Eichner & Rüdiger Pethig, 2012. "Stable climate coalitions (Nash) and international trade," Volkswirtschaftliche Diskussionsbeiträge 155-12, Universität Siegen, Fakultät Wirtschaftswissenschaften, Wirtschaftsinformatik und Wirtschaftsrecht.
  • Handle: RePEc:sie:siegen:155-12
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.wiwi.uni-siegen.de/vwl/repec/sie/papers/155-12.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Amitrajeet A. Batabyal, 2011. "The Economics of Hate," Review of Social Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 69(4), pages 534-537, December.
    2. Eichner, Thomas & Pethig, Rüdiger, 2013. "Self-enforcing environmental agreements and international trade," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 37-50.
    3. 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.
    4. Michael Finus & Alejandro Caparrós (ed.), 2015. "Game Theory and International Environmental Cooperation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 15345.
    5. Barrett, Scott, 1994. "Self-Enforcing International Environmental Agreements," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 46(0), pages 878-894, Supplemen.
    6. Rodney D. Ludema & Ian Wooton, 1994. "Cross-Border Externalities and Trade Liberalization: The Strategic Control of Pollution," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 27(4), pages 950-966, November.
    7. Michael Hoel & Kerstin Schneider, 1997. "Incentives to participate in an international environmental agreement," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 9(2), pages 153-170, March.
    8. Santiago J. Rubio, 2001. "International Cooperation In Pollution Control," Working Papers. Serie AD 2001-21, Instituto Valenciano de Investigaciones Económicas, S.A. (Ivie).
    9. 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.
    10. Matthew McGinty, 2007. "International environmental agreements among asymmetric nations," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 59(1), pages 45-62, January.
    11. Panos Hatzipanayotou & Sajal Lahiri & Michael S. Michael, 2005. "Globalization, Cross-Border Pollution and Welfare," CESifo Working Paper Series 1479, CESifo.
    12. James R. MARKUSEN, 2021. "International Externalities And Optimal Tax Structures," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: BROADENING TRADE THEORY Incorporating Market Realities into Traditional Models, chapter 16, pages 341-355, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    13. Harvey E. Lapan & Shiva Sikdar, 2011. "Strategic Environmental Policy under Free Trade with Transboundary Pollution," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(1), pages 1-18, February.
    14. Copeland, Brian R & Taylor, M Scott, 1995. "Trade and Transboundary Pollution," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 85(4), pages 716-737, September.
    15. Fuentes-Albero, Cristina & Rubio, Santiago J., 2010. "Can international environmental cooperation be bought?," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 202(1), pages 255-264, April.
    16. Rauscher, Michael, 1997. "International Trade, Factor Movements, and the Environment," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198290506.
    17. 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.
    18. Barrett, Scott, 1997. "The strategy of trade sanctions in international environmental agreements," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(4), pages 345-361, November.
    19. 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.
    20. Rauscher, Michael, 1994. "On Ecological Dumping," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 46(0), pages 822-840, Supplemen.
    21. Barrett, Scott, 2001. "International cooperation for sale," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 45(10), pages 1835-1850, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. By Thomas Eichner & Rüdiger Pethig, 2015. "Self-enforcing international environmental agreements and trade: taxes versus caps," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 67(4), pages 897-917.
    2. Eichner, Thomas & Pethig, Rüdiger, 2014. "Self-enforcing environmental agreements and capital mobility," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 120-132.
    3. Thomas Kuhn & Radomir Pestow & Anja Zenker, 2019. "Building Climate Coalitions on Preferential Free Trade Agreements," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 74(2), pages 539-569, October.

    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. Thomas Eichner & Rüdiger Pethig, 2015. "Is trade liberalization conducive to the formation of climate coalitions?," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 22(6), pages 932-955, December.
    2. Thomas Eichner & Rüdiger Pethig, 2013. "Trade tariffs and self-enforcing environmental agreements," Volkswirtschaftliche Diskussionsbeiträge 161-13, Universität Siegen, Fakultät Wirtschaftswissenschaften, Wirtschaftsinformatik und Wirtschaftsrecht.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. Hagen, Achim & Schneider, Jan, 2021. "Trade sanctions and the stability of climate coalitions," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    6. Biancardi, Marta & Villani, Giovanni, 2015. "The effects of R&D investments in international environmental agreements with asymmetric countries," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 30-39.
    7. Erik Ansink & Cees A. Withagen, 2016. "Members, Joiners, Free-Riders, Supporters," CESifo Working Paper Series 5802, CESifo.
    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. Effrosyni Diamantoudi & Eftichios Sartzetakis & Stefania Strantza, 2018. "International Environmental Agreements - Stability with Transfers among Countries," Working Papers 2018.20, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    10. Effrosyni Diamantoudi & Eftichios Sartzetakis & Stefania Strantza, 2018. "International Environmental Agreements - Stability with Transfers among Countries," Working Papers 2018.20, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    11. Al Khourdajie, Alaa & Finus, Michael, 2020. "Measures to enhance the effectiveness of international climate agreements: The case of border carbon adjustments," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 124(C).
    12. Finus, Michael & Pintassilgo, Pedro, 2013. "The role of uncertainty and learning for the success of international climate agreements," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 29-43.
    13. Bakalova, Irina & Eyckmans, Johan, 2019. "Simulating the impact of heterogeneity on stability and effectiveness of international environmental agreements," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 277(3), pages 1151-1162.
    14. 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.
    15. Michael Finus & Stefan Maus, 2008. "Modesty May Pay!," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 10(5), pages 801-826, October.
    16. Lassi Ahlvik & Yulia Pavlova, 2013. "A Strategic Analysis of Eutrophication Abatement in the Baltic Sea," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 56(3), pages 353-378, November.
    17. Thomas Eichner & Rüdiger Pethig, 2014. "Forging a global environmental agreement through trade sanctions on free riders?," Volkswirtschaftliche Diskussionsbeiträge 171-14, Universität Siegen, Fakultät Wirtschaftswissenschaften, Wirtschaftsinformatik und Wirtschaftsrecht.
    18. Eichner, Thomas & Pethig, Rudiger, 2018. "Global Environmental Agreements and International Trade: Asymmetry of Countries Matters," Strategic Behavior and the Environment, now publishers, vol. 7(3-4), pages 281-316, February.
    19. 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.
    20. Emilson C. D. Silva, 2017. "Self-enforcing agreements under unequal nationally determined contributions," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 24(4), pages 705-729, August.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    sub-global climate coalition; international trade; trade liberalization; self-enforcing IEA;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C72 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Noncooperative Games
    • F50 - International Economics - - International Relations, National Security, and International Political Economy - - - General
    • Q50 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - General
    • Q58 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environmental Economics: Government Policy

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:sie:siegen:155-12. 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: . General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/fwsiede.html .

    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: Michael Gail (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/fwsiede.html .

    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.