Skip to content
EEEP
Menu
  • 2012
    • Volume 1
      • Number 1
      • Number 2
      • Number 3
  • 2013
    • Volume 2
      • Number 1
      • Number 2
  • 2014
    • Volume 3
      • Number 1
      • Number 2
  • 2015
    • Volume 4
      • Number 1
      • Number 2
  • 2016
    • Volume 5
      • Number 1
      • Number 2
  • 2017
    • Volume 6
      • Number 1
      • Number 2
  • 2018
    • Volume 7
      • Number 1
      • Number 2
  • 2019
    • Volume 8
      • Number 1
      • Number 2
  • 2020
    • Volume 9
      • Number 1
      • Number 2
  • 2021
    • Volume 10
      • Number 1
      • Number 2
    • Volume 9
      • Number 2
  • 2022
    • Volume 10
      • Number 2
    • Volume 11
      • Number 1
      • Number 2
  • 2023
    • Volume 11
      • Number 2
    • Volume 12
      • Number 1
      • Number 2
  • 2024
    • Volume 13
      • Number 1
      • Number 2
  • 2025
    • Volume 14
      • Number 1
  • 2026
    • Volume 15
      • Number 1
      • Number 2
      • Number 3
      • Number 4
Menu

EEEP » 2015 » Volume 4 » Number 2 » An International Carbon-Price Commitment Promotes Cooperation

An International Carbon-Price Commitment Promotes Cooperation

Posted on February 4, 2026February 9, 2026 by admin

To promote cooperation in international climate negotiations, negotiators should focus on a common commitment. Such commitments have the advantage of facilitating reciprocal “I will if you will” agreements in a group. Reciprocity is the basis for cooperation in repeated public goods games, and a uniform price would provide a natural focal point for a common international commitment. Such a price is also essential for efficient abatement. Countries would retain flexibility in how to implement the price – with cap-and-trade, a carbon tax, or a hybrid approach. Country risk is reduced relative to risk under international cap-and-trade since carbon revenues stay within the country. Price commitments also tend to equalize effort intensity and can facilitate enforcement. To encourage participation by less-developed countries, a green fund is needed to transfer money from richer to poorer countries. Transfers are smaller and more predictable with a uniform price commitment than with international cap and trade.

Authors: Peter Cramton, Axel Ockenfels, and Steven Stoft
DOI: 10.5547/2160-5890.4.2.aock
Keywords: carbon pricing, Climate change, Global warming, international public goods, prices versus quantities, UN climate negotiations
🔓 Download PDF🔓 Executive Summary PDF

Account

  • Log in
  • Entries feed
  • Comments feed
  • WordPress.org

Tags

carbon emissions Carbon tax China Climate change Climate policy computable general equilibrium Cost of Debt Decentralized energy governance difference-­in-­differences Electricity generation electricity market Electricity market design Electricity markets Electric Utilities Energy Energy communities Energy crisis energy economics Energy efficiency Energy Policy Energy poverty Energy security Energy transition Europe European Union evaluation Flexibility Geopolitics Investment market design Merit Order Middle East Natural gas Policy policy instruments quantile regression Regulation Renewable energy Renewables Resilience Resource adequacy Scenarios Smart meters Spain Sub-Saharan Africa

Archives

  • August 2026
  • July 2026
  • June 2026
  • April 2026
  • March 2026
  • February 2026
© 2026 EEEP | Powered by Minimalist Blog WordPress Theme