Rewards and penalties in an evolutionary game theoretic model of international environmental agreements

References

• Ahmad, N., & Du, L. (2017). Effects of energy production and CO2 emissions on economic growth in Iran: ARDL approach. Energy, 123, 521–537. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2017.01.144
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ahmad, N., Du, L. S., Lu, J., Wang, J. L., Li, H., & Zaffar, M. (2017). Modelling the CO2 emissions and economic growth in Croatia: Is there any environmental Kuznets curve? Energy, 123, 164–172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2016.12.106
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ahmad, N., Du, L., Tian, X.-L., & Wang, J. (2019). Chinese growth and dilemmas: Modelling energy consumption, CO2 emissions and growth in China. Quality & Quantity, 53(1), 315–338. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-018-0755-0
   Google Scholar
• Aldy, J. E., Barrett, S., & Stavins, R. N. (2003). Thirteen plus one: A comparison of global climate policy architectures. Climate Policy, 3(4), 373–397. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clipol.2003.09.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aldy, J. E., Krupnick, A. J., Newell, R. G., Parry, I. W. H., & Pizer, W. A. (2010). Designing climate mitigation policy. Journal of Economic Literature, 48(4), 903–934. https://doi.org/10.1257/jel.48.4.903
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arguedas, C. (2008). To comply or not to comply? Pollution standard setting under costly monitoring and sanctioning. Environmental and Resource Economics, 41(2), 155–168. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10640-007-9185-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Asheim, G. B., & Holtsmark, B. (2009). Renegotiation-proof climate agreements with full participation: Conditions for Pareto-efficiency. Environmental and Resource Economics, 43(4), 519–533. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10640-008-9247-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aslam, M. A. (2002). Equal per capita entitlements: A key to global participation on climate change?. In K. Baumert (Ed.), Building on the Kyoto protocol options for protecting the climate. World Resources Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Barrett, S. (1994). Self-enforcing international environmental agreements. Oxford Economic Papers, 46(Suppl_1), 878–894. https://doi.org/10.1093/oep/46.Supplement_1.878
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barrett, S. (1997). Heterogeneous international environmental agreements.
   Google Scholar
• Barrett, S. (1999). International cooperation and the global environment. Global public goods.
   Google Scholar
• Barrett, S. (2001). International cooperation for sale. European Economic Review, 45(10), 1835–1850. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0014-2921(01)00082-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barrett, S. (2003). Environment and statecraft: The strategy of environmental treaty-making. Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Barrett, S., & Stavins, R. (2003). Increasing participation and compliance in international climate change agreements. International Environmental Agreements, 3(4), 349–376. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:INEA.0000005767.67689.28
   Google Scholar
• Benchekroun, H., & Long, N. (2012). Collaborative environmental management: A review of the literature. International Game Theory Review, 14(04), 1240002. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0219198912400026
   Google Scholar
• Benedick, R. E. (1998). Ozone diplomacy: New directions in safeguarding the planet. Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bernauer, T., Kalbhenn, A., Koubi, V., & Spilker, G. (2010). A comparison of international and domestic sources of global governance dynamics. British Journal of Political Science, 40(3), 509–538. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007123410000098
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bernauer, T., Kalbhenn, A., Koubi, V., & Spilker, G. (2013). Is there a “depth versus participation” dilemma in international cooperation? The Review of International Organizations, 8(4), 477–497. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11558-013-9165-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bodansky, D. (2004). International climate efforts beyond 2012: A survey of approaches.
   Google Scholar
• Bollen, J., van der Zwaan, B., Brink, C., & Eerens, H. (2009). Local air pollution and global climate change: A combined cost-benefit analysis. Resource and Energy Economics, 31(3), 161–181. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.reseneeco.2009.03.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brack, D., Grubb, M., & Windram, C. (2000). International trade and climate change policies. Earthscan.
   Google Scholar
• Bradford, D. F. (2004). Improving on Kyoto: Greenhouse gas control as the purchase of a global public good. Center for Economic Policy Studies, Princeton University.
   Google Scholar
• Breton, M., Sbragia, L., & Zaccour, G. (2010). A dynamic model for international environmental agreements. Environmental and Resource Economics, 45(1), 25–48. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10640-009-9304-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Calvo, E., & Rubio, S. J. (2013). Dynamic models of international environmental agreements: A differential game approach. International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics, 6(4), 289–339. https://doi.org/10.1561/101.00000053
   Google Scholar
• Carraro, C., & Moriconi, F. (1997). International games on climate change control. Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei Working Paper (22.98).
   Google Scholar
• Carraro, C., & Siniscalco, D. (1993). Strategies for the international protection of the environment. Journal of Public Economics, 52(3), 309–328. https://doi.org/10.1016/0047-2727(93)90037-T
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carraro, C., & Siniscalco, D. (1998). International environmental agreements: Incentives and political economy. European Economic Review, 42(3–5), 561–572. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0014-2921(97)00118-9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carraro, C., Marchiori, C., & Oreffice, S. (2009). Endogenous minimum participation in international environmental treaties. Environmental and Resource Economics, 42(3), 411–425. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10640-009-9264-x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Charnovitz, S. (2003). Trade and climate: potential conflicts and synergies. In Aldy, J.E., Ashton, J., Baron, R., Bodansky, R., Charnovitz, S., Diringer, E., Heller T. C., Pershing, J., Shukla P.R., Tubiana, L., Tudela, F., Wang, X., & Beyond Kyoto (eds.), Advancing the international effort against climate change, Pew Centre of Global Climate Change, 141–170. Arlington, VA.
   Google Scholar
• D’Aspremont, C., Jacquemin, A., Gabszewicz, J. J., & Weymark, J. A. (1983). On the stability of collusive price leadership. The Canadian Journal of Economics, 16(1), 17–25. https://doi.org/10.2307/134972
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• den Elzen, M. G. J., & Meinshausen, M. (2006). Multi-gas emission pathways for meeting the EU 2_C climate target. In H. J. Schellnhuber, W. Cramer, N. Nakicenovic, T. Wigley, & G. Yohe (Eds.), Avoiding dangerous climate change. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• den Elzen, M. G. J., Höhne, N., Brouns, B., Winkler, H., & Ott, H. E. (2007). Differentiation of countries’ future commitments in a post-2012 climate regime: An assessment of the “South–North Dialogue”. Environmental Science & Policy, 10(3), 185–203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2006.10.009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Depledge, J. (2000). Tracing the origins of the Kyoto protocol: An article-by-article textual history. Technical paper, UNFCCC. http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/tp/tp0200.pdf. Accessed 24 November 2017.
   Google Scholar
• Downs, G. W., Rocke, D. M., & Barsoom, P. N. (1996). Is the good news about compliance good news about cooperation? International Organization, 50(3), 379–406. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818300033427
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ellingsen, T., & Östling, R. (2011). Strategic risk and coordination failure in blame games. Economics Letters, 110(2), 90–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econlet.2010.10.018
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Farrell, J., & Maskin, E. (1989). Renegotiation in repeated games. Games and Economic Behavior, 1(4), 327–360. https://doi.org/10.1016/0899-8256(89)90021-3
   Google Scholar
• Froyn, C. B., & Hovi, J. (2008). A climate agreement with full participation. Economics Letters, 99(2), 317–319. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econlet.2007.07.013
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Günther, M., & Hellmann, T. (2017). International environmental agreements for local and global pollution. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 81, 38–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeem.2016.09.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hathaway, O. A. (2003). The cost of commitment. Stanford Law Review, 55(5), 1821–1862.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heister, J., Mohr, E., Stähler, F., Stoll, T., & Wolfrum, R. (1997). Strategies to enforce compliance with an international CO2-treaty. International Environmental Affairs, 1, 22–53.
   Google Scholar
• Heitzig, J., Lessmann, K., & Zou, Y. (2011). Self-enforcing strategies to deter free-riding in the climate change mitigation game and other repeated public good games. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 108(38), 15739–15744. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1106265108
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hoel, M. (1992). International environment conventions: The case of uniform reductions of emissions. Environmental and Resource Economics, 2(2), 141–159.
   Google Scholar
• Hovi, J., Ward, H., & Grundig, F. (2015). Hope or despair? Formal models of climate cooperation. Environmental and Resource Economics, 62(4), 665–688. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10640-014-9799-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ivanova, A., Zia, A., Ahmad, P., & Bastos-Lima, M. (2020). Climate mitigation policies and actions: Access and allocation issues. International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, 20(2), 287–301. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10784-020-09483-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jacoby, H. D., Schmalensee, R., & Wing, I. S. (1999). Toward a useful architecture for climate change negotiations. Report No 49.
   Google Scholar
• Kanie, N., Nishimoto, H., Hijioka, Y., & Kameyama, Y. (2010). Allocation and architecture in climate governance beyond Kyoto: Lessons from interdisciplinary research on target setting. International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, 10(4), 299–315. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10784-010-9143-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koo, C., & Hong, T. (2017). Development of a dynamic incentive and penalty program for improving the energy performance of existing buildings. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 24(2), 295–317. https://doi.org/10.3846/20294913.2016.1212741
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kratzsch, U., Sieg, G., & Stegemann, U. (2012). An international agreement with full participation to tackle the stock of greenhouse gases. Economics Letters, 115(3), 473–476. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econlet.2011.12.107
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• La Rovere, E. L., de Macedo, L. V., & Baumert, K. A. (2002). The Brazilian proposal on relative responsibility for global warming. In A. Baumert (Ed.), Building on the Kyoto protocol options for protecting the climate (pp. 157–173). World Resources Institute.
   Google Scholar
• McGinty, M. (2006). International environmental agreements among asymmetric nations. Oxford Economic Papers, 59(1), 45–62. https://doi.org/10.1093/oep/gpl028
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McGinty, M. (2010). International environmental agreements as evolutionary games. Environmental and Resource Economics, 45(2), 251–269. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10640-009-9314-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miao, D. Y., Huang, W. W., Li, Y. P., & Yang, Z. F. (2014). Planning water resources systems under uncertainty using an interval-fuzzy De Novo programming method. Journal of Environmental Informatics, 24(1), 11–23. https://doi.org/10.3808/jei.201400277
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mohr, E. (1995). International environmental permit trade and debt: The consequences of country sovereignty and cross-default policies. Review of International Economics, 3(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9396.1995.tb00048.x
   Google Scholar
• Mohr, E., & Thomas, J. P. (1998). Pooling sovereign risks: The case of environmental treaties and international debt. Journal of Development Economics, 55(1), 173–190. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-3878(97)00061-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ott, H. E., Winkler, H., Brouns, B., Kartha, S., Mace, M. J., Huq, S., Kameyama, Y., Sari, A. P., Pan, J., Sokona, Y., Bhandari, P. M., Kassenberg, A., La Rovere, E. L., & Rahman, A. A. (2004). South-north dialogue on equity in the greenhouse: A proposal for an adequate and equitable global climate agreement.
   Google Scholar
• Pavone, I. R. (2018). The Paris Agreement and the Trump administration: Road to nowhere? Journal of International Studies, 11(1), 34–49. https://doi.org/10.14254/2071-8330.2018/11-1/3
   Google Scholar
• Ringius, L., Torvanger, A., & Underdal, A. (2002). Burden sharing and fairness principles in international climate policy. International Environmental Agreements, 2(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1015041613785
   Google Scholar
• Roberts, J. T., Parks, B. C., & Vásquez, A. A. (2004). Who ratifies environmental treaties and why? Institutionalism, structuralism and participation by 192 nations in 22 treaties. Global Environmental Politics, 4(3), 22–64. https://doi.org/10.1162/1526380041748029
   Google Scholar
• Rose, A., Stevens, B., Edmonds, J., & Wise, M. (1998). International equity and differentiation in global warming policy. Environmental and Resource Economics, 12(1), 25–51. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008262407777
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rubio, S. J., & Casino, B. (2005). Self-enforcing international environmental agreements with a stock pollutant. Spanish Economic Review, 7(2), 89–109. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10108-005-0098-6
   Google Scholar
• Rubio, S. J., & Ulph, A. (2007). An infinite-horizon model of dynamic membership of international environmental agreements. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 54(3), 296–310. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeem.2007.02.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schlag, K. H. (1998). Why imitate, and if so, how? Journal of Economic Theory, 78(1), 130–156. https://doi.org/10.1006/jeth.1997.2347
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schram Stokke, O. (2004). Trade measures and climate compliance: Institutional interplay between WTO and the Marrakesh accords. International Environmental Agreements, 4(4), 339–357. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10784-004-2471-6
   Google Scholar
• Spilker, G., & Koubi, V. (2016). The effects of treaty legality and domestic institutional hurdles on environmental treaty ratification. International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, 16(2), 223–238. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10784-014-9255-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stranlund, J. K. (2007). The regulatory choice of noncompliance in emissions trading programs. Environmental and Resource Economics, 38(1), 99–117. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10640-006-9058-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Suo, M. Q., Li, Y. P., Huang, G. H., Deng, D. L., & Li, Y. F. (2013). Electric power system planning under uncertainty using inexact inventory nonlinear programming method. Journal of Environmental Informatics, 22(1), 49–67. https://doi.org/10.3808/jei.201300245
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Taylor, P. D., & Jonker, L. B. (1978). Evolutionary stable strategies and game dynamics. Mathematical Biosciences, 40(1-2), 145–156. https://doi.org/10.1016/0025-5564(78)90077-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tramel, S. (2016). The road through Paris: Climate change, carbon, and the political dynamics of convergence. Globalizations, 13(6), 960–969. https://doi.org/10.1080/14747731.2016.1173376
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Victor, D. G. (2004). The collapse of the Kyoto Protocol and the struggle to slow global warming. Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Zhang, N., Li, Y. P., Huang, W. W., & Liu, J. (2014). An inexact two-stage water quality management model for supporting sustainable development in a rural system. Journal of Environmental Informatics, 24(1), 52–64. https://doi.org/10.3808/jei.201400274
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar