IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ajk/ajkpbs/064.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Klimakonferenz in Baku: Mehr Reziprozität in der internationalen Klimapolitik

Author

Listed:
  • Carlo Gallier

    (Free University of Bozen-Bolzano & Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research (ZEW))

  • Axel Ockenfels

    (University of Cologne & Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods(MPI))

  • Bodo Sturm

    (Leipzig University of Applied Sciences & Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research (ZEW))

Abstract

Das Pariser Klimaabkommen sieht vor, die globale Erderwärmung auf unter 2°C gegenüber dem vorindustriellen Niveau zu begrenzen. Eine Herausforderung, deren Erfolg von der internationalen Kooperation der Mitgliedsstaaten abhängt und noch in weiter Ferne liegt. In diesem Policy Brief zeigen wir, warum die internationale Klimapolitik stärker auf das Prinzip der Reziprozität setzen sollte, um erfolgreich zu sein. Aktuelle Forschungsergebnisse legen nahe, dass es dabei hilfreich sein kann, wenn die Mitgliedsstaaten in kürzeren Abständen über ihre Klimaschutzmaßnahmen entscheiden. Die Ergebnisse basieren auf einer Studie, die zwei Verhandlungsdesigns zur Förderung der globalen Klimakooperation untersucht: Der Ratchet-Up-Mechanismus, der bereits Bestandteil des Pariser Abkommens ist und von den Staaten verlangt, ihre Klimaschutzmaßnahmen schrittweise zu erhöhen. Sowie einen aktuellen Politikvorschlag, der vorsieht, dass die Mitgliedsstaaten häufiger Beitragsentscheidungen treffen. Die Ergebnisse zeigen ein differenziertes Bild: Häufigere Interaktionen verbessern die Kooperation, aber der Ratchet-Up-Mechanismus hat keinen positiven Effekt. Während häufigere Beitragsentscheidungen ein Umfeld schaffen, in dem gegenseitiges Vertrauen und Kooperation sicherer aufgebaut werden können, erhöht der Ratchet-Up-Mechanismus sogar das Risiko, von Trittbrettfahrern übervorteilt zu werden. Die UN-Klimakonferenz in Baku sollte die Erkenntnisse der Kooperationsforschung stärker als bisher berücksichtigen und insbesondere das Verhandlungsdesign so verändern, dass Reziprozität erleichtert wird.

Suggested Citation

  • Carlo Gallier & Axel Ockenfels & Bodo Sturm, 2024. "Klimakonferenz in Baku: Mehr Reziprozität in der internationalen Klimapolitik," ECONtribute Policy Brief Series 064, University of Bonn and University of Cologne, Germany.
  • Handle: RePEc:ajk:ajkpbs:064
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econtribute.de/RePEc/ajk/ajkpbs/ECONtribute_PB_064_2024.pdf
    File Function: First version, 2024
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Leslie M. Marx & Steven A. Matthews, 2000. "Dynamic Voluntary Contribution to a Public Project," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 67(2), pages 327-358.
    2. Simon Gachter & Ernst Fehr, 2000. "Cooperation and Punishment in Public Goods Experiments," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 90(4), pages 980-994, September.
    3. Ben Lockwood & Jonathan P. Thomas, 2002. "Gradualism and Irreversibility," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 69(2), pages 339-356.
    4. Duffy, John & Ochs, Jack & Vesterlund, Lise, 2007. "Giving little by little: Dynamic voluntary contribution games," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(9), pages 1708-1730, September.
    5. Simon, Leo K & Stinchcombe, Maxwell B, 1989. "Extensive Form Games in Continuous Time: Pure Strategies," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(5), pages 1171-1214, September.
    6. Gale, Douglas, 2001. "Monotone Games with Positive Spillovers," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 295-320, November.
    7. Alt, Marius & Gallier, Carlo & Kesternich, Martin & Sturm, Bodo, 2023. "Collective minimum contributions to counteract the ratchet effect in the voluntary provision of public goods," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 122(C).
    8. Gallier, Carlo & Sturm, Bodo, 2021. "The ratchet effect in social dilemmas," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 186(C), pages 251-268.
    9. Dorsey, Robert E, 1992. "The Voluntary Contributions Mechanism with Real Time Revisions," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 73(3), pages 261-282, April.
    10. William Nordhaus, 2015. "Climate Clubs: Overcoming Free-Riding in International Climate Policy," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(4), pages 1339-1370, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Maoliang Ye & Jie Zheng & Plamen Nikolov & Sam Asher, 2020. "One Step at a Time: Does Gradualism Build Coordination?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(1), pages 113-129, January.
    2. Eungik Lee & Andrew Choi & Syngjoo Choi & Yves Guéron, 2023. "Irreversibility And Monitoring In Dynamic Games: Experimental Evidence," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 64(1), pages 387-412, February.
    3. Gallier, Carlo & Sturm, Bodo, 2021. "The ratchet effect in social dilemmas," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 186(C), pages 251-268.
    4. Nisvan Erkal & Boon Han Koh & Nguyen Lam, 2023. "Using Milestones as a Source of Feedback in Teamwork: Insights from a Dynamic Voluntary Contribution Mechanism," Discussion Papers 2310, University of Exeter, Department of Economics.
    5. Tan, Jonathan H.W. & Breitmoser, Yves & Bolle, Friedel, 2015. "Voluntary contributions by consent or dissent," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 106-121.
    6. Choi, Syngjoo & Gale, Douglas & Kariv, Shachar & Palfrey, Thomas, 2011. "Network architecture, salience and coordination," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 73(1), pages 76-90, September.
    7. He, Simin & Zhu, Xun, 2023. "Real-time monitoring in a public-goods game," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 454-479.
    8. Choi, Syngjoo & Gale, Douglas & Kariv, Shachar, 2008. "Sequential equilibrium in monotone games: A theory-based analysis of experimental data," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 143(1), pages 302-330, November.
    9. Oprea, Ryan & Charness, Gary & Friedman, Daniel, 2014. "Continuous time and communication in a public-goods experiment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 212-223.
    10. Cason, Timothy N. & Zubrickas, Robertas, 2019. "Donation-based crowdfunding with refund bonuses," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 452-471.
    11. Yeon-Koo Che & József Sákovics, 2004. "A Dynamic Theory of Holdup," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 72(4), pages 1063-1103, July.
    12. Steven A. Matthews, 2008. "Achievable Outcomes in Smooth Dynamic Contribution Games," PIER Working Paper Archive 08-028, Penn Institute for Economic Research, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania.
    13. Xu, Haibo, 2021. "A model of gradual information disclosure," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 238-269.
    14. Marco Battaglini & Salvatore Nunnari & Thomas R. Palfrey, 2016. "The Dynamic Free Rider Problem: A Laboratory Study," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 8(4), pages 268-308, November.
    15. Roi Zultan & Eva-Maria Steiger, 2011. "See No Evil: Information Chains and Reciprocity in Teams," Working Papers 1108, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Department of Economics.
    16. Guéron, Yves, 2015. "Failure of gradualism under imperfect monitoring," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 128-145.
    17. Caruana, Guillermo & Einav, Liran & Quint, Daniel, 2007. "Multilateral bargaining with concession costs," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 132(1), pages 147-166, January.
    18. Parimal Kanti Bag & Nona Pepito, 2012. "Peer Transparency In Teams: Does It Help Or Hinder Incentives?," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 53(4), pages 1257-1286, November.
    19. Steven A. Matthews, 2008. "Achievable Outcomes of Dynamic Contribution Games, Second Version," PIER Working Paper Archive 11-016, Penn Institute for Economic Research, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania, revised 20 Jun 2011.
    20. James Andreoni & Michael A. Kuhn & Larry Samuelson, 2016. "Starting Small: Endogenous Stakes and Rational Cooperation," NBER Working Papers 21934, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.

    More about this item

    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:ajk:ajkpbs:064. 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.

    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: ECONtribute Office (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.econtribute.de .

    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.