Yu. M. Svirezhev, W. von Bloh, and H.-J. Schellnhuber
 
Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK)
 
 P.O. Box 601203, D-14412 Potsdam, Germany
Environmental Modelling and Assessment 4, 234-242 (1999)
If there are no  doubts that we must reduce 
the total emission of carbon dioxide then the problem of 
how much different countries should be allowed to 
contribute to this amount remains a serious one. 
We suggest this problem to be considered as a non-antagonistic 
game (in Germeier's sense). A game of 
this kind is called an ``emission'' game.  Suppose 
that there are n independent actors (countries or 
regions), each of them releasing a 
certain amount of CO
 per year (in carbon units)into the atmosphere, and that 
the emission would be reduced by each actor. Each actor 
has his own aim: to minimise the loss in the Gross 
Domestic Product (GDP) caused by the reduction of 
emissions. On the other hand, taking into account that 
it is impossible to estimate more or less precisely 
the impact of the climate change on GDP for each country today, 
a common strategy will be to reduce the climate change. 
Since one of the main leading factors in global warming is the 
greenhouse effect, then the common aim will be to reduce 
the sum of emissions. This is a typical conflict 
situation. How to resolve it? We can weigh the ``egoistic'' 
and ``altruistic'' criteria for each actor introducing 
so-called ``coefficients of egoism''. This 
coefficient is very large, if the actor uses a very 
egoistic strategy, and conversely, if the actor is a 
``super-altruist'',  then the corresponding coefficient 
is very small. Using these coefficients we get the 
general solution of the game in a form of some 
Pareto's equilibrium. The solution is stable and 
efficient.
Keywords: Global change, CO
 emission, game theory, 
Pareto's equilibrium