博弈论视角下的气候变化策略

需积分: 9 139 浏览量更新于2024-07-18 收藏 2.16MB PDF 举报

身份认证购VIP最低享 7 折!

领优惠券(最高得80元）

《博弈论与气候变化》（Game Theory and Climate Change）是作者Parkash Chander的一部著作，由哥伦比亚大学出版社于2011年出版。该书将博弈论这一理论工具应用于探讨全球环境问题，特别是气候变化的经济和政策层面。博弈论是一种分析决策者之间互动的数学模型，它在社会科学，特别是经济学和政治科学中广泛应用，因为它能够揭示在不确定性和竞争中的理性行为。书中，Chander可能探讨了以下关键主题： 1. 气候变化的复杂性：作为全球性问题，气候变化涉及众多国家、组织和个人，每个行为者都在寻求自身利益最大化，同时影响他人的选择。博弈论可以帮助理解这些个体和集体如何通过合作、竞争或混合策略来应对共同挑战。 2. 排放权交易：博弈论可能会分析排放权交易市场，这种市场允许各国或企业通过购买和出售碳排放额度来平衡减排目标。作者可能会研究这种市场设计如何影响效率和公平性，以及潜在的策略性行为。 3. 国际合作与谈判：气候变化需要国际间的合作，博弈论可以用来分析国与国之间的谈判过程，包括讨价还价、联盟形成和信任博弈等，以预测各国在减排协议中的行为。 4. 激励机制：作者可能会讨论如何设计有效的激励机制，促使个人和企业采取更环保的行为，这可能涉及到激励的强度、形式和公平性。 5. 风险与不确定性：在应对气候变化时，未来不确定性是显著的，博弈论可以提供分析决策者在面对不确定性时如何评估风险和制定策略的方法。 6. 案例研究与实证分析：书中可能包含对历史案例和实证研究的分析，展示博弈论如何在实际气候政策制定中提供洞察力。 7. 政策建议与展望：基于博弈论的分析，作者可能会提出针对气候变化的政策建议，以及对未来研究方向的预测。《博弈论与气候变化》是一本深入探讨环境问题解决策略的重要著作，它结合了严谨的理论分析与现实世界的政策考量，对于理解全球环境治理和可持续发展具有重要的理论价值和实践指导意义。

资源详情

资源推荐

erious problems require serious policy responses, and no problem is

more threatening to the human future than climate change, or global

warming, caused by emissions of greenhouse gases (GHGs). Our

understanding of the physical science of climate change has been growing

steadily,



but there has been no meaningful progress toward xing the

economic and strategic forces that are causing it, except perhaps the Paris

Agreement adopted by  countries in  at Paris, France. is is oen

attributed to a failure of political will, but, as will be made clear in this

book, it is the result of a particularly challenging economic and strategic

setup. Accordingly, the book proposes game-theoretic solutions to the

problem (which are ecient and immune to strategic behavior by sover-

eign nations) in the hope that it will lead to a better understanding of the

economic and strategic forces behind climate change in general and of the

Paris Agreement and its predecessor—the Kyoto Protocol—in particular.



It discusses why and how the Paris Agreement may succeed in controlling

climate change whereas the Kyoto Protocol failed. However, applications

of the theory developed in this book are not restricted to climate change

PURPOSE AND SCOPE

. For a thorough account of the scientic evidence on the state of the problem, the reader

is referred to the assessment reports issued by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate

Change (referenced in the bibliography as IPCC , , , , ). e nego-

tiations themselves have been taking place under a body that was created by the General

Assembly of the United Nations in  and established in Geneva as the United Nations

Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).

. See Barrett () for a comprehensive study of a variety of actual international agreements.

PURPOSE AND SCOPE 3

chapter . In the rest of the book, only a simple linear form of the transfer

function is used so that the complexity in this respect does not divert our

attention away from the more important complexity of strategic interac-

tions among the agents, which is the main focus.

Another idea that is borrowed from ecological science is the notion of

a stock externality as distinct from a ow externality. Economics started to

take note of this distinction only in the late s when it could no longer

ignore the ecological phenomena such as buildup of acidic depositions in

soil due to acid rains or of accumulation of GHGs in the atmosphere due

to their continual emissions on Earth. Before that time, externalities were

treated just in terms of more or less bucolic examples of externalities, such

as the celebrated bees and orchard fable and the locomotives that emit

sparks and set re to farmers’ elds.

e treatment of GHGs as a stock externality in the economic analy-

sis forces introduction of time in the formulation of the climate change

problem. One implication of this is the emitters and recipients of the

externality may be separated in time in such a way that they cannot meet

or interact (e.g., they may belong to dierent non-overlapping genera-

tions),



making it impossible for them to engage in Coasian bargaining.

Involvement of the government of each country, which can act on behalf

of its future generations, is thus essential if climate change is indeed to be

treated as a stock externality. Furthermore, ecological science also teaches

us that phenomena such as climate change extend over a very long period.

is has deep consequences for the choice of a discount rate that is appro-

priate for payos occurring only in a very distant future. Keeping these

facts in view, chapters  and  treat climate change as a stock externality

in contrast to its treatment as a ow externality in chapters  and .

At a more general level, introduction of economic reasoning in envi-

ronmental matters denitely gives ecological science an anthropocen-

tric perspective. at is so when economic analysis, whether positive or

normative, is introduced in models in which human behavior aects a

natural phenomenon. Indeed, a central concept in positive economics is

that of an equilibrium, which is typically the outcome of utility or payo

. If elapse of time is substituted for river ow and distance, this is analogous to upstream pol-

lution that aects people downstream.

4 PURPOSE AND SCOPE

maximization by agents representing the humans. is puts the natural

phenomenon described by ecology as an object that is subject to human

behavior and gives it essentially a human perspective. is is a fortiori

so with normative economics, in which human behavior with respect to

nature is advocated on the basis of criteria chosen and formulated by

humans or agents representing them.

Moving one step higher in this philosophical discussion makes one

realize that the anthropocentric view is the source, and the only source, of

attributing value to environment.



Indeed, the notion of value itself is void

if not supported by humans. As a natural corollary, the notion of pollution

rights may be interpreted as an export from economics to ecological sci-

ence. Because natural resources have value, they must have prices that are

meaningful in a market economy. Moreover, prices mean exchange, and

exchange presupposes property rights. In this way, the notion of pollu-

tion rights appears to be an export from economics to ecological science.

e theory developed in this book eventually leads to a fairly funda-

mental rethinking of the notion of value of environment, which is a matter

of debate between “environmental economics” and “ecological econom-

ics.”



Chapter  revisits this issue. It proposes a value that is free from the

typical notion of scarcity in economics and from the exclusively physi-

cal thermodynamic theory of energy relied on in ecological economics.

It is derived from a dynamic model in which each country is assumed to

have developed so much that the capacity to produce consumption goods,

whose production results in GHGs emissions and climate change, is no

longer a binding constraint. Instead, the environment is the only limiting

factor, and all countries have equal opportunity to exploit it. e countries

dier, if at all, only in terms of how they are aected by their own emissions

. is fact has been also recognized in the famous Brundtland Report (UN ). To quote,

“e environment does not exist as a sphere separate from human actions, ambitions, and

needs, and attempts to defend it in isolation from human concerns have given the very

word ‘environment’ a connotation of naivety in some political circles.” Similarly, Karp

() argues that an anthropocentric view, putting humans at the center of the narrative,

can lead to more eective remedies, though the environment may have intrinsic value apart

from any eect, however indirect, it has on current or future welfare.

. For a summary presentation, see, for example, Kolstad (), especially chapters  and .

Common and Stagl () oer a comprehensive exposition.

PURPOSE AND SCOPE 5

and climate change. Consideration and analysis of such an idealized world

model leads to a reconciliation of the two dierent views regarding the

value of environment, as then it is optimal to minimize the polluting

energy content of delivered goods and services. e analysis also leads

to a proposal that can serve as a reference in the negotiations on climate

change. Roughly speaking, the proposal means that a country aected rela-

tively more by its own emissions and climate change should have fewer

rights to emit GHGs that cause local pollution and climate change.



Such

a proposal is free from any normative considerations such as equal per

capita emission rights or grandfathering of current national emissions, but,

as discussed in chapter , it may be considered unfair by some countries,

especially by the low-lying island states and least developed small coun-

tries, which are aected by climate change but contribute little to it.

Economics

As to economics, known to be the science of resource allocation, the rst

extensions and novelties, introduced in chapter , are at the basic level

of making precise whether and how the environment can be treated as

an economic good. Connections are established between the standard

notions of externalities, private goods, and public goods. In fact, all three

are involved, and disentangling their respective roles in the climate change

problem is a necessary starting point.

With this in mind, the basic framework for this work is presented in

chapter  in terms of the two main classical strands of economic theory;

namely, general equilibrium, a positive one, and welfare economics, a nor-

mative one. In both cases, the fact that the agents are sovereign nation-

states is kept in mind, as this is the single most important fact underlying

the climate change problem that distinguishes it from a standard external-

ity problem. e proposed framework is also in the spirit of public eco-

nomics, which recognizes the role of government in a market economy

when widespread externalities are involved.

. Combustion of fossil fuels oen causes local pollution (e.g., smog) as well as climate change.

A country is said to be more seriously aected by its own emissions and climate change if

marginal damages from its own emissions and climate change are uniformly higher.

剩余343页未读，继续阅读

yinkaisheng-nj

粉丝: 762
资源: 6231

博弈论视角下的气候变化策略

Carbonomics-The future of energy in the age of climate change.pdf

level climate change

climate change.xlsx

climate change earth surface temperature data

极端天气数据统计分析的外文参考文献有哪些

关于正确认识全球能源安全形式的文献格式复制

What role does renewable energy play sustainable development mentioned in Reading 4?

Give me a sample IELTS essay with Advanced vocabulary and complex phrases

What is the significance of developing renewable energy in the light of different kinds of pollution mentioned in Reading 3?

please help me to write a passage "my view about feture technology " almost 300 words

Write an essay about 150 words. Statec learly what you stand for. Give convincing reasons for your arguments.

你能以 The Food Crisis为题写一篇150字左右的英语作文吗

world state

climate indices库怎么安装

zotero mdpi格式

ESA CCI LC下载

安装process_climate_indices

写一篇题目为“胸怀世界、勇于担当”的英语演讲

最新资源