GAME THEORETIC CONSIDERATION ON AN INTERNATIONAL CLIMATE CHANGE NEGOTIATION PROCESS

Abstract

This paper examines the game theoretic models on international climate change negotiation by comparing the actual negotiation process in Kyoto protocol and post-Kyoto negotiation. It reveals that the model's does not reflect EU's leadership, domestic constrain to countries' negotiation position and ethical issues between developed and developing countries, and importance of people's recognition on benefit from mitigation measures. The paper proposes "matching mechanism" similar to conditional pledges by Australia as effective approaches toward ambitious reduction agreement in climate change.