Strategic incentives for climate geoengineering coalitions to exclude broad participation

被引:65
作者
Ricke, Katharine L. [1 ]
Moreno-Cruz, Juan B. [2 ]
Caldeira, Ken [1 ]
机构
[1] Carnegie Inst Sci, Dept Global Ecol, Stanford, CA 94305 USA
[2] Georgia Inst Technol, Sch Econ, Atlanta, GA 30332 USA
关键词
geoengineering; international environmental agreements; game theory; climate modeling; climate coalitions; GAME;
D O I
10.1088/1748-9326/8/1/014021
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
Solar geoengineering is the deliberate reduction in the absorption of incoming solar radiation by the Earth's climate system with the aim of reducing impacts of anthropogenic climate change. Climate model simulations project a diversity of regional outcomes that vary with the amount of solar geoengineering deployed. It is unlikely that a single small actor could implement and sustain global-scale geoengineering that harms much of the world without intervention from harmed world powers. However, a sufficiently powerful international coalition might be able to deploy solar geoengineering. Here, we show that regional differences in climate outcomes create strategic incentives to form coalitions that are as small as possible, while still powerful enough to deploy solar geoengineering. The characteristics of coalitions to geoengineer climate are modeled using a 'global thermostat setting game' based on climate model results. Coalition members have incentives to exclude non-members that would prevent implementation of solar geoengineering at a level that is optimal for the existing coalition. These incentives differ markedly from those that dominate international politics of greenhouse-gas emissions reduction, where the central challenge is to compel free riders to participate.
引用
收藏
页数:8
相关论文
共 19 条
[1]  
Axelrod R, 1970, CONFLICT INTEREST AT
[2]   International cooperation for sale [J].
Barrett, S .
EUROPEAN ECONOMIC REVIEW, 2001, 45 (10) :1835-1850
[3]   The incredible economics of geoengineering [J].
Barrett, Scott .
ENVIRONMENTAL & RESOURCE ECONOMICS, 2008, 39 (01) :45-54
[4]   Global and Arctic climate engineering: numerical model studies [J].
Caldeira, Ken ;
Wood, Lowell .
PHILOSOPHICAL TRANSACTIONS OF THE ROYAL SOCIETY A-MATHEMATICAL PHYSICAL AND ENGINEERING SCIENCES, 2008, 366 (1882) :4039-4056
[5]   STRATEGIES FOR THE INTERNATIONAL PROTECTION OF THE ENVIRONMENT [J].
CARRARO, C ;
SINISCALCO, D .
JOURNAL OF PUBLIC ECONOMICS, 1993, 52 (03) :309-328
[6]   Game Theoretic Research on the Design of International Environmental Agreements: Insights, Critical Remarks, and Future Challenges [J].
Finus, Michael .
INTERNATIONAL REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL AND RESOURCE ECONOMICS, 2008, 2 (01) :29-67
[7]   Evaluating uncertainties in the prediction of regional climate change [J].
Giorgi, F ;
Francisco, R .
GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH LETTERS, 2000, 27 (09) :1295-1298
[8]   A DYNAMIC-MODEL OF PROTOCOALITION FORMATION IN IDEOLOGICAL N-SPACE [J].
GROFMAN, B .
BEHAVIORAL SCIENCE, 1982, 27 (01) :77-90
[9]   Self-enforcing strategies to deter free-riding in the climate change mitigation game and other repeated public good games [J].
Heitzig, Jobst ;
Lessmann, Kai ;
Zou, Yong .
PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 2011, 108 (38) :15739-15744
[10]  
Jones A., 2010, Atmos. Chem. Phys. Discuss, V10, P7421