Evaluating Cross-Border Pollution Agreements
From an economic perspective, evaluate the two proposed frameworks below for addressing a cross-border pollution problem. Which framework is more likely to lead to a significant and lasting reduction in pollution? Justify your reasoning by analyzing the incentives and potential enforcement issues for each country under both frameworks.
0
1
Tags
Social Science
Empirical Science
Science
CORE Econ
Economy
Economics
Introduction to Microeconomics Course
The Economy 2.0 Microeconomics @ CORE Econ
Related
History of Climate Change Negotiations (Last 30 Years)
The Montreal Protocol
Challenges in Forging International Environmental Agreements
A nation's industrial sector produces a pollutant that disperses into the global atmosphere. The cost to eliminate this pollution is very high for the nation, but the environmental benefit of its elimination would be shared by all countries worldwide. From an economic standpoint, why is this nation's government likely to be reluctant to implement the costly elimination measures on its own?
Evaluating the Difficulty of International Environmental Cooperation
Consider two different global environmental problems:
-
Problem A: A pollutant is emitted by thousands of companies across nearly every country. The damage from this pollutant is widespread, long-term, and its effects are not immediately obvious. The cost to reduce emissions is extremely high.
-
Problem B: A different pollutant is emitted by a small number of large firms in only five countries. A cost-effective technological substitute for the process causing the pollution has recently been developed. The damage from this pollutant is severe and concentrated in specific, highly visible ecosystems.
Based on the principles of international cooperation, which problem is more likely to be successfully addressed by an international agreement and why?
-
Match each scenario describing a global environmental issue with the most likely outcome for reaching an effective international agreement.
A politician from a single, large industrial country proposes a new national law that would impose significant costs on its domestic industries to completely halt their emission of a specific global pollutant. The politician claims this unilateral action will be sufficient to solve the environmental problem. From an economic perspective, which statement best evaluates this claim?
For a global environmental problem, a non-binding agreement where only the few wealthiest nations voluntarily commit to pollution reduction is typically sufficient to achieve a lasting and comprehensive solution.
Insufficiency of Unilateral Environmental Action
Evaluating Cross-Border Pollution Agreements
Evaluating a Proposed International Environmental Treaty
European Union's Total Allowable Catches Policy