Game Theory of Pollution: National Policies and Their International Effects

In this paper we put forward a simple game-theoretical model of pollution control, where each country is in control of its own pollution, while the environmental effects of policies do not stop at country borders. In our noncooperative differential game, countries as players minimize the present value of their own costs defined as a linear combination of pollution costs and costs of environmentally friendly policies, where the state vector of the system consists of the pollution stock per country. A player’s time-varying decision is her investment into clean policies, while her expected costs include also pollution caused by her neighbors. We analyze three variants of this game: (1) a Nash game in which each player chooses her investment into clean policies such that her expected costs are minimal, (2) a game in which the players imitate the investments into clean policies of their neighbors without taking the neighbor’s success concerning their costs into account and (3) a game in which each player imitates her neighbors’ investments into clean policies if this behavior seems to bring a profit. In each of these scenarios, we show under which conditions the countries have incentives to act environmentally friendly. We argue that the different results of these games can be used to understand and design effective environmental policies.

[1]  Stephen Greaves,et al.  Five years of London’s low emission zone: Effects on vehicle fleet composition and air quality , 2013 .

[2]  Jens Borken-Kleefeld,et al.  Cost-effective control of air quality and greenhouse gases in Europe: Modeling and policy applications , 2011, Environ. Model. Softw..

[3]  A. Stohl,et al.  On the pathways and timescales of intercontinental air pollution transport , 2002 .

[4]  Zhang Kun,et al.  Overall review of pumped-hydro energy storage in China: Status quo, operation mechanism and policy barriers , 2013 .

[5]  I. G. Mason,et al.  Security of supply, energy spillage control and peaking options within a 100% renewable electricity system for New Zealand , 2013 .

[6]  S. Agrawala,et al.  Leaders, pushers and laggards in the making of the climate regime , 2002 .

[7]  J. Slootweg,et al.  Dual technology energy storage system applied to two complementary electricity markets using a weekly differentiated approach , 2017 .

[8]  Gregg Marland,et al.  Global, Regional, and National Fossil-Fuel CO2 Emissions, 1751 - 2006 (published 2009) , 2009 .

[9]  Robert W. Smith,et al.  International maritime boundaries , 1994 .

[10]  G. Janssens‑Maenhout,et al.  The impact of European legislative and technology measures to reduce air pollutants on air quality, human health and climate , 2016 .

[11]  Lucas W. Davis The Effect of Driving Restrictions on Air Quality in Mexico City , 2008, Journal of Political Economy.

[12]  Reza Olfati-Saber,et al.  Consensus and Cooperation in Networked Multi-Agent Systems , 2007, Proceedings of the IEEE.

[13]  Joana Portugal-Pereira,et al.  Post-disaster resilience of a 100% renewable energy system in Japan , 2014 .

[14]  Gerhard Weiss,et al.  Theory of Cooperation in Complex Social Networks , 2014, AAAI.

[15]  Gerhard Weiss,et al.  Evolution of cooperation in arbitrary complex networks , 2014, AAMAS.

[16]  M. Powell A Direct Search Optimization Method That Models the Objective and Constraint Functions by Linear Interpolation , 1994 .

[17]  H. Akimoto Global Air Quality and Pollution , 2003, Science.

[18]  Bert Brunekreef,et al.  Impact of low emission zones and local traffic policies on ambient air pollution concentrations. , 2012, The Science of the total environment.

[19]  E.M. Atkins,et al.  A survey of consensus problems in multi-agent coordination , 2005, Proceedings of the 2005, American Control Conference, 2005..

[20]  Martin Jänicke,et al.  Trend‐setters in environmental policy: the character and role of pioneer countries , 2005 .

[21]  Gregg Marland,et al.  Global, Regional, and National Fossil-Fuel CO2 Emissions (1751 - 2014) (V. 2017) , 1999 .

[22]  J. Harford,et al.  Firm behavior under imperfectly enforceable pollution standards and taxes , 1978 .

[23]  Dmitry Krass,et al.  Environmental Taxes and the Choice of Green Technology , 2013 .

[24]  E. Dockner,et al.  International Pollution Control: Cooperative versus Noncooperative Strategies , 1993 .

[25]  M. Miller Agency , 2010 .

[26]  S. Barrett Self-enforcing international environmental agreements , 1994 .

[27]  Jörg Oechssler,et al.  Imitation - Theory and Experimental Evidence , 2003, J. Econ. Theory.

[28]  Bora Alboyaci,et al.  The contribution of wind-hydro pumped storage systems in meeting Turkey's electric energy demand , 2010 .

[29]  Georges Zaccour,et al.  Incentive equilibrium strategies and welfare allocation in a dynamic game of pollution control , 1999, Autom..

[30]  H. Jacobsen,et al.  Are CO2 taxes regressive? Evidence from the Danish experience , 2005 .

[31]  J. Lelieveld,et al.  Global Air Pollution Crossroads over the Mediterranean , 2002, Science.

[32]  Ngo Van Long,et al.  Pollution control: A differential game approach , 1992, Ann. Oper. Res..

[33]  Bodil Merethe Larsen,et al.  Greenhouse gas emissions in Norway Do carbon taxes work , 2004 .

[34]  Georges Zaccour,et al.  A Dynamic Model for International Environmental Agreements , 2010 .

[35]  Manfred Lenzen,et al.  Decoupling global environmental pressure and economic growth: scenarios for energy use, materials use and carbon emissions , 2016 .

[36]  Duncan Liefferink,et al.  Strategies of the 'green' member states in EU environmental policy-making , 1998 .