IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ids/ijsusd/v6y2003i3p378-392.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

International environmental cooperation with risk aversion

Author

Listed:
  • Alfred Endres
  • Cornelia Ohl

Abstract

This paper models global environmental policy in a stochastic setting: reducing pollution not only reduces expected environmental damage but also its spread. The national incentives to cooperate are analysed under adverse conditions: expected payoffs are taken to have the structure of a (static) prisoners' dilemma. It is shown that, even then, incentives to cooperate unilaterally or even bilaterally may exist. They actually do if countries are sufficiently risk averse. Following the traditional economic approach we take national risk preferences to be given. Still, the finding sketched above turns out to be relevant for the design of global environmental policy. We define critical thresholds that actual risk aversion must exceed to induce cooperation. It is shown that risk management may push these thresholds down. Thereby, appropriate policy design may improve the chances for stable and effective international environmental agreements.

Suggested Citation

  • Alfred Endres & Cornelia Ohl, 2003. "International environmental cooperation with risk aversion," International Journal of Sustainable Development, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 6(3), pages 378-392.
  • Handle: RePEc:ids:ijsusd:v:6:y:2003:i:3:p:378-392
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.inderscience.com/link.php?id=4229
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Karp, Larry & Simon, Leo, 2013. "Participation games and international environmental agreements: A non-parametric model," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 65(2), pages 326-344.
    2. Michael Finus & Pedro Pintassilgo & Alistair Ulph, 2014. "International Environmental Agreements with Uncertainty, Learning and Risk Aversion," Department of Economics Working Papers 19/14, University of Bath, Department of Economics.
    3. Fuhai Hong & Larry Karp, 2014. "International Environmental Agreements with Endogenous or Exogenous Risk," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 1(3), pages 365-394.
    4. Partha Dasgupta & Dale Southerton & Alistair Ulph & David Ulph, 2016. "Consumer Behaviour with Environmental and Social Externalities: Implications for Analysis and Policy," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 65(1), pages 191-226, September.
    5. Alistair Ulph & Pedro Pintassilgo & Michael Finus, 2019. "Uncertainty, Learning and International Environmental Agreements: The Role of Risk Aversion," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 73(4), pages 1165-1196, August.
    6. Rob Dellink & Michael Finus & Niels Olieman, 2008. "The stability likelihood of an international climate agreement," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 39(4), pages 357-377, April.
    7. Michael Finus & Bianca Rundshagen, 2015. "Game Theory and Environmental and Resource Economics–In Honour of Alfred Endres," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 62(4), pages 657-664, December.
    8. Alfred Endres, 2008. "Ein Unmöglichkeitstheorem für die Klimapolitik?," Perspektiven der Wirtschaftspolitik, Verein für Socialpolitik, vol. 9(3), pages 350-382, August.
    9. Michael FinusAlistair Ulph & Alistair Ulph, 2013. "International Environmental Agreements with Uncertainty, Learning and Risk Aversion," Economics Discussion Paper Series 1329, Economics, The University of Manchester.

    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:ids:ijsusd:v:6:y:2003:i:3:p:378-392. 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: Sarah Parker (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.inderscience.com/browse/index.php?journalID=25 .

    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.