IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gok/ijdcv1/v1y2011i3p419-433.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A dynamic game of environmental exploitation between two countries with sequential maximin objectives

Author

Listed:
  • Van Long, Ngo

Abstract

This paper formulates a dynamic game between the governments of two countries that share a common stock of natural capital (such as environmental quality). The objective of each government is to find a sustainable utility path that satisfies the sequential maximin property. A utility path is a sequential maximin if it survives all successive rounds of eliminating Pareto inferior outcomes based on the maximin criterion. It is shown that, under the sequential maximin objective, there exists a Markov perfect Nash equilibrium in which utility is constant over time. This equilibrium turns out to be Pareto efficient, in sharp contrast to the typical inefficiency of Markov perfect Nash equilibria under the usual discounted utilitarian objective. We also find a Stackelberg equilibrium that results in sustainable development, in which the welfare of the leader is lower (and that of the passive follower is higher) than the symmetric welfare level in the Nash equilibrium.

Suggested Citation

  • Van Long, Ngo, 2011. "A dynamic game of environmental exploitation between two countries with sequential maximin objectives," International Journal of Development and Conflict, Gokhale Institute of Politics and Economics, vol. 1(3), pages 419-433.
    • Handle: RePEc:gok:ijdcv1:v:1:y:2011:i:3:p:419-433
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.worldscientific.com/doi/pdf/10.1142/S2010269011000257
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Ngo Long & Vincent Martinet, 2018. "Combining rights and welfarism: a new approach to intertemporal evaluation of social alternatives," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 50(1), pages 35-64, January.

    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:gok:ijdcv1:v:1:y:2011:i:3:p:419-433. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/gipepin.html .

    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.