Solar Geoengineering Governance: A Dynamic Framework of Farsighted Coalition Formation

Daniel Heyen, Jere Lehtomaa
{"title":"Solar Geoengineering Governance: A Dynamic Framework of Farsighted Coalition Formation","authors":"Daniel Heyen, Jere Lehtomaa","doi":"10.1093/oxfclm/kgab010","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Climate interventions with solar geoengineering could reduce climate damages if deployed in a globally coordinated regime. In the absence of such a regime, however, strategic incentives of single actors might result in detrimental outcomes. A well-known concern is that a \"free-driver\" (Weitzman 2015), the country with the strongest preference for cooling, might unilaterally set the global thermostat to its preferred level, thus imposing damages on others. Governance structures, i.e. more or less formal institutional arrangements between countries, could steer the decentralized geoengineering deployment towards the preferable global outcome. In this paper, we show that the coalition formation literature (an excellent summary is Ray & Vohra 2015) can make a valuable contribution to assessing the relative merit of different governance schemes. An important feature of the coalition formation literature is the sophisticated dynamic structure. A country pondering whether to leave a coalition anticipates that its departure could spark another process of disintegration among the remaining members of that coalition, which in turn may affect the assessment of whether leaving the coalition is worthwhile in the first place. This dynamic structure thus enables a more realistic picture of what coalitions are likely to form and remain stable. A second important feature of coalition formation models is wide control over the \"rules of the game\", for instance, which agents need to consent to a transition from one coalitional arrangement to another. This control over the institutional setting allows consistently comparing and discussing various international governance arrangements.","PeriodicalId":225090,"journal":{"name":"Oxford Open Climate Change","volume":"87 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Oxford Open Climate Change","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfclm/kgab010","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

Climate interventions with solar geoengineering could reduce climate damages if deployed in a globally coordinated regime. In the absence of such a regime, however, strategic incentives of single actors might result in detrimental outcomes. A well-known concern is that a "free-driver" (Weitzman 2015), the country with the strongest preference for cooling, might unilaterally set the global thermostat to its preferred level, thus imposing damages on others. Governance structures, i.e. more or less formal institutional arrangements between countries, could steer the decentralized geoengineering deployment towards the preferable global outcome. In this paper, we show that the coalition formation literature (an excellent summary is Ray & Vohra 2015) can make a valuable contribution to assessing the relative merit of different governance schemes. An important feature of the coalition formation literature is the sophisticated dynamic structure. A country pondering whether to leave a coalition anticipates that its departure could spark another process of disintegration among the remaining members of that coalition, which in turn may affect the assessment of whether leaving the coalition is worthwhile in the first place. This dynamic structure thus enables a more realistic picture of what coalitions are likely to form and remain stable. A second important feature of coalition formation models is wide control over the "rules of the game", for instance, which agents need to consent to a transition from one coalitional arrangement to another. This control over the institutional setting allows consistently comparing and discussing various international governance arrangements.
太阳能地球工程治理:有远见的联盟形成的动态框架
如果在全球协调的机制中部署,利用太阳能地球工程进行气候干预可以减少气候损害。然而,在缺乏这种制度的情况下,单一行为者的战略激励可能导致有害的结果。一个众所周知的担忧是,一个“自由司机”(Weitzman 2015),即最倾向于降温的国家,可能单方面将全球恒温器设定为其偏好的水平,从而对其他国家造成损害。治理结构,即国家之间或多或少的正式制度安排,可以引导分散的地球工程部署朝着更可取的全球结果发展。在本文中,我们证明了联盟形成文献(Ray & Vohra 2015年的一个优秀总结)可以为评估不同治理方案的相对优点做出有价值的贡献。联盟形成文献的一个重要特征是复杂的动态结构。一个正在考虑是否退出联盟的国家预计,它的退出可能会引发该联盟剩余成员国之间的另一个解体进程,这反过来可能会影响对退出联盟是否值得的评估。因此,这种动态结构使人们能够更现实地了解可能形成并保持稳定的联盟。联盟形成模型的第二个重要特征是对“游戏规则”的广泛控制,例如,代理需要同意从一个联盟安排过渡到另一个联盟安排。这种对制度设置的控制允许对各种国际治理安排进行持续的比较和讨论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信