Stable International Environmental Agreements: An Analytical Approach

In this paper we examine the formation of international environmental agreements (IEAs). We show that the welfare of the signatories does not increase monotonically with respect to the number of signatories. We provide an analytical solution of the leadership model. In particular, we find that if the number of countries is greater than four then there exists a unique stable IEA with either two, three, or four signatories. Furthermore, we show that the welfare of the signatories is almost at its lowest level when the IEA is stable. While in our model each country's choice variable is emissions, we extend our results to the case where the choice variable is abatement efforts.     

Enforcement of Intellectual Property,Pollution Abatement,and Directed Technical Change

We theoretically investigate the interaction between endogenous enforcement of intellectual property rights (IPRs) and tax-financed pollution abatement measures. IPRs affect dirty and clean intermediates alike such that higher IPR enforcement may promote the transition to the clean technology, if this technology is productive enough. If the green technology is relatively unproductive, higher IPRs promote the dirty technology while pollution is increasing. As households are due to subsistence consumption subject to a hierarchy of needs, the level of IPR enforcement as well as the level of abatement measures depends on the state of technology and is increasing during economic development. Thus, if the incentive to enforce IPRs is low the level of abatement measures is also low. This argument provides a theoretical foundation for the observed clash of interests in international negotiation rounds regarding the harmonization of IPR protection and actions to combat climate change.     

The Oslo Protocol on sulfur reduction: the great leap forward?

The increasing number of international environmental agreements (IEAs), and the fact that under some agreements emissions have been reduced beyond agreed targets, are frequently viewed as success stories of international cooperation. We argue that success can only be measured if abatement targets under an IEA are compared with estimated abatement levels in the absence of a treaty, and are evaluated in terms of costs and benefits. We analyze the Oslo Protocol on sulfur reduction, showing that this IEA is not the great leap forward when compared with the calculated Nash equilibrium and the social optimum. However, we also demonstrate that under the Oslo Protocol, more ambitious targets could not have been realized due to strong free rider incentives.     

Trade‐related intellectual property rights: industry variation and technology diffusion

Abstract This paper assesses how a strengthening of intellectual property rights (IPRs) affects international technology diffusion by altering the volume of high‐tech exports into developing countries. A simple North‐South general equilibrium model in which industries differ in their imitation rates is developed. Stronger IPRs encourage Northern firms in a wider range of industries to start exporting. Exports in industries with the highest risk of imitation rise, while exports in other industries may fall. More technology diffuses to the South because new high‐tech products are introduced in the Southern market. This works against the reduction in technology diffusion caused by limited imitation.     

Intellectual property rights as development determinants

Abstract While intellectual property rights (IPRs) are the key drivers of economic performance in R&D based growth models, they have not been fully explored in empirical development studies. We introduce IPRs to this literature, using Two‐Stage Least Squares Bayesian Model Averaging to address endogeneity and model uncertainty at the instrument and income stages. We show that IPRs exert effects similar to ‘Rule of Law’ and therefore provide robust evidence that both physical and intellectual property rights are crucial development determinants. We document that unenforced IPRs exert no effect on development. Instead, it is the level of enforced IPRs that causes development.     

Designing international environmental agreements under participation uncertainty

Traditional international environmental agreement (IEA) models usually use some specific contribution rules, which either fail to provide sufficient incentives for cooperation, or ignore the loss from participation uncertainty. Can more general rules overcome these problems and improve the performance of IEAs? This paper analyzes the endogenous determination of contribution rules from a class of general rules through a three-stage coalition formation game under participation uncertainty. In stage one, a designer chooses a contribution rule, which, depending on the size of the signatories’ coalition formed in stage two, specifies the action each signatory should take in stage three. A contribution rule is said to be optimal when it maximizes the expected payoff of signatories. We provide an algorithm to determine an optimal rule. When uncertainty is either sufficiently large or equal to zero, the optimal rule coincides with some existing rules in the literature. However, when the uncertainty is neither large nor small, the optimal rule outperforms other rules in terms of signatories’ payoff.     

International Environmental Agreements as Evolutionary Games

This paper applies evolutionary game theory to international environmental agreements (IEAs). Contrary to stage game models (Barrett in J Theor Politics 11:519–541, 1999, Eur Econ Rev 45:1835–1850, 2001), in an evolutionary equilibrium (EE) no signatory prefers to be outside the IEA and the EE is robust to trembles. With two populations, there is a unique interior EE when there is decreasing returns to abatement and small asymmetry in the externality differences across populations. At the interior EE, transfers from the poor to the rich can increase payoffs for all nations, but come at the expense of greater payoff inequality. Transfers can also eliminate the basin of attraction for the payoff inferior EE with decreasing returns to abatement and large asymmetry. Thus IEAs, such as the Kyoto Treaty, predicated on the polluter-pays and ability-to-pay principles may result in Pareto inferior outcomes.     

Climate Policy,Learning, and Technology Adoption in Small Countries

A significant reduction in global greenhouse gas emissions requires international cooperation in emission abatement as well as individual countries’ investment in the adoption of abatement technology. The existing literature on climate policy pays insufficient attention to small countries, which account for a substantial proportion of global emission. In this study, we investigate how climate policy and learning about climate damage affect investment in abatement technology in small countries. We consider three alternative climate policy instruments: emission standards, harmonized taxes and auctioned permits. We say that learning is feasible if an international environmental agreement (IEA) is formed after the resolution of uncertainty about climate damage. We find that, either with learning and quadratic abatement costs or without learning, harmonized taxes outperform emission standards and auctioned permits in terms of investment efficiency. Without learning, a large cost of nonparticipation (that a country incurs) in the IEA can be beneficial to the country. Whether learning improves investment efficiency depends on the size of this nonparticipation cost.     

Intellectual property rights and innovation in developing countries

This paper studies intellectual property rights (IPRs) and innovation in developing countries. A model is developed to illustrate the trade-off between imitating foreign technologies and encouraging domestic innovation in a developing country's choice of IPRs. It is shown that innovations in a developing country increase in its IPRs, and a country's IPRs can depend on its level of development non-monotonically, first decreasing and then increasing. Empirical analysis, with a panel of data for 64 developing countries, confirms both the positive impact of IPRs on innovations in developing countries and the presence of a U-shaped relationship between IPRs and economic development.     

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS AND ECONOMIC GROWTH

This paper studies the relationship between intellectual property rights (IPRs) and economic growth for a cross-section of countries for the period 1960–1990. The analysis focuses on effects of IPRs on growth using a quantitative index of IPRs. The paper finds that IPRs affect economic growth indirectly by stimulating the accumulation of factor inputs like R&D and physical capital. The positive effects of IPRs on factor accumulation, particularly of R&D capital, are present even when the analysis controls for a more general measure of property rights     

Self-enforcing International Environmental Agreements with Costly Monitoring for Compliance

Theoretical analyses of international environmental agreements (IEAs) have often employed the concept of self-enforcing agreements to predict the number of parties to such an agreement. The term self-enforcing, however, is a bit misleading. The concept refers to the stability of cooperative agreements, not to enforcing compliance with these agreements once they are in place. In this paper we analyze an IEA game in which parties to an agreement finance an independent monitor who audits the compliance performance of the members of an agreement. These audits reveal instances of noncompliance so they can be sanctioned. We find that costly monitoring of compliance limits the circumstances under which international cooperation to protect the environment is worthwhile, but when IEAs do form they will often involve greater participation than IEAs that do not require costly monitoring. Consequently, costly monitoring of IEAs can produce higher international environmental quality. Moreover, under certain conditions, aggregate welfare is higher when IEAs require costly monitoring.      

How does the design of international environmental agreements affect investment in environmentally-friendly technology?

In this paper, we investigate how the design of international environmental agreements (IEAs) affects the incentives for the private sector to invest in environmentally-friendly technology. The givens are a transboundary pollution problem involving two asymmetric countries in terms of benefits arising from global abatement. There is a single polluting firm in each country. We account for two types of IEAs: an agreement based on a uniform standard with transfers and an agreement based on differentiated standards without transfers. To carry out this study, we use a two-stage game where the private sector anticipates its irreversible investment given the expected level of abatement standards resulting from future negotiations. Our findings indicate that the implementation of the agreement based on a uniform standard with transfers may be preferable for the two countries, as it creates greater incentives for firms to invest in costly abatement technology. This result arises when this technology’s level of the sunk cost of investment is low. If this level is sufficiently high, the implementation of the same agreement is not beneficial to countries, because it takes away the incentive of each firm to invest in new abatement technology. Moreover, this agreement is not able to generate any positive gains for either country through cooperation, thus no country is motivated to cooperate.     

The Growth Effects of National Patent Policies*

We construct a two‐country (innovative North and imitating South) model of product‐cycle trade, fully endogenous Schumpeterian growth, and national patent policies. A move towards harmonization based on stronger Southern intellectual property rights (IPR) protection accelerates the long‐run global rates of innovation and growth, reduces the North–South wage gap, and has an ambiguous effect on the rate of international technology transfer. Patent harmonization constitutes a suboptimal global‐growth policy. However, if the global economy is governed by a common patent policy regime, then stronger global IPR protection: (a) increases the rates of global innovation and growth; (b) accelerates the rate of international technology transfer; and (c) has no impact on the North–South wage gap.     

Private patent protection in the theory of Schumpeterian growth

We develop a Schumpeterian growth model with privately optimal intellectual property rights (IPRs) enforcement and investigate the implications for intellectual property and R&D policies. In our setting, successful innovators undertake costly rent protection activities (RPAs) to enforce their patents. RPAs deter innovators who seek to discover higher quality products and thereby replace the patent holder. RPAs also deter imitators who seek to capture a portion of the monopoly market by imitating the patent holder's product. We investigate the role of private IPR protection by considering the impact of subsidies to RPAs on economic growth and welfare. We find that a larger RPA subsidy raises the innovation rate if and only if the ease of imitation is above a certain level. With regards to welfare, we find that depending on the parameters it may be optimal to tax or subsidize RPAs. Thus a prohibitively high taxation of RPAs is not necessarily optimal. We also show that the presence of imitation strengthens the case for subsidizing R&D.     

Intellectual Property Rights and Entry into a Foreign Market: FDI versus Joint Ventures

We study the effect of the intellectual property rights (IPR) regime of a host country (South) on a multinational's decision between serving a market via greenfield foreign direct investment to avoid the exposure of its technology or a North–South joint venture (JV) with a local firm, which allows R&D spillovers under imperfect IPRs. JV is the equilibrium market structure when R&D intensity is moderate and IPRs strong. The South can gain from increased IPR protection because it encourages a JV, whereas policies to limit foreign ownership in a JV gain importance in technology‐intensive industries as complementary policies to strong IPRs.     

Modesty May Pay!

Most noncooperative game theoretic models of international environmental agreements (IEAs) draw a pessimistic picture of the prospective of successful cooperation. In this paper, we consider the possibility that countries agree on modest instead of ambitious abatement targets. It is shown that this can be an explanation for higher participation and more successful treaties. Thus, modesty may well pay, though the first‐best optimum cannot be achieved. It is also demonstrated that our model extension makes it easier to relate the stylized model to actual negotiations.     

A Dynamic Model for International Environmental Agreements

In this paper we develop a model that uses a dynamic framework to analyze the process through which countries join international environmental agreements (IEAs). In the model, while all countries suffer from the same environmental damage as a result of total global emissions, non-signatory countries decide on their emission levels by maximizing their own welfare, whereas signatory countries decide on their emission levels by maximizing the aggregate welfare of all signatory countries. It is assumed that signatory countries will be able to punish non-signatories, at some cost to themselves. When countries decide on their pollution emissions, they account for the evolution of the stock of pollution over time. Moreover, we propose a mechanism to describe how countries reach a stable IEA. The model is able to capture situations characterized by partial cooperation within an IEA that is stable over time. It also captures situations where all countries participate in a stable agreement, and situations where no stable agreement is feasible. Where more than one possibility coexist, the long-term outcome of the game depends on the initial conditions (i.e., the initial number of signatory countries and pollution level).     

Bidding for brains: Intellectual property rights and the international migration of knowledge workers

We introduce international mobility of knowledge workers into a model of Nash equilibrium IPR policy choice among countries. We show that governments have incentives to use IPRs in a bidding war for global talent, resulting in Nash equilibrium IPRs that can be too high, rather than too low, from a global welfare perspective. These incentives become stronger as developing countries grow in size and wealth, thus allowing them to prevent the ‘poaching’ of their ‘brains’ by larger, wealthier markets.     

Coalition Stability in Public Goods Provision: Testing an Optimal Allocation Rule

We test the canonical model of international environmental agreements (IEAs) in a laboratory setting with asymmetric agents. IEA participation represents coalition formation and public good provision where there are gains to cooperation, but an incentive to free-ride. We test four competing methods of dividing the coalition’s worth: a recently proposed optimal rule which accounts for subjects’ payoffs as a single free-rider, the Shapley value, the Nash bargaining solution, and an equal split. Each treatment generates the theoretically predicted coalition size more often than not. The shares of the potential gains to cooperation achieved by each rule are: 51, 36, 40 and 13%, respectively. These results highlight the importance of using an optimal rule to improve IEAs, and more broadly for voluntary public good provision.     

International environmental agreements with ancillary benefits: Repeated games analysis

Both ancillary and primary benefits, generated by climate change mitigation, are indispensable key factors to implement the full participation in international environmental agreement (IEA). This paper presents a new IEA model with ancillary benefits, using a repeated game with the linear and quadratic emission abatement cost functions of each country. This study also investigates the effect of ancillary benefits on the condition for full participation in IEA. Ancillary benefits function as a complementary device of punishment scheme for IEA. Our main results show that ancillary benefits can facilitate full participation in IEA, thus suggesting that they should be considered in climate change negotiations.