Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The Tuvalu Syndrome

Can geoengineering solve climate’s collective action problem?

  • Published:
Climatic Change Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Geoengineering research has historically been inhibited by fears that the perceived availability of a technological fix for climate change, such as the deployment of space-based deflectors, may undermine greenhouse gas abatement efforts. I develop a game theoretic model to show that the credible threat of unilateral geoengineering may instead strengthen global abatement and lead to a self-enforcing climate treaty with full participation. A ‘rogue nation’ may wish to unilaterally geoengineer if it faces extreme climate damages (as with Tuvalu), or if there are minimal local side effects from geoengineering, such as hydrological cycle disruption or stratospheric ozone depletion. However, the costly global side effects of geoengineering may make it individually rational for other countries to reduce emissions to the level where this rogue nation no longer wishes to unilaterally geoengineer. My results suggest a need to model the impacts of a “selfish geoengineer” intent only on maximizing net domestic benefits, as well as a “benevolent geoengineer” out to restore global mean temperature and minimize global side effects.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aldy JE, Barrett S, Stavins RN (2003) Thirteen plus one: a comparison of global climate policy architectures. Clim Policy 3(4):373–397

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Angel R (2006) Feasibility of cooling the Earth with a cloud of small spacecraft near the inner Lagrange point (L1). Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 103(46):17184–17189. doi:10.1073/pnas.0608163103

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bala G, Duffy PB, Taylor KE (2008) Impact of geoengineering schemes on the global hydrological cycle. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 105(22):7664–7669. doi:10.1073/pnas.0711648105

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ban-Weiss GA, Caldeira K (2010) Geoengineering as an optimization problem. Environ Res Lett 5(034009):1–9

    Google Scholar 

  • Barrett S (1994) Self-enforcing international environmental agreements. Oxf Econ Pap 46:878–894

    Google Scholar 

  • Barrett S (1997) The strategy of trade sanctions in international environmental agreements. Resour Energy Econ 19(4):345–361

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barrett S (2005) The theory of international environmental agreements. In: Mäler K-G, Vincent JR (eds) Handbook of environmental economics, vol 3. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 1458–1516

    Google Scholar 

  • Barrett S (2006) Climate treaties and “breakthrough” technologies. Am Econ Rev Pap Proc 96(2):22–25

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barrett S (2008) The incredible economics of geoengineering. Environ Resour Econ 39(1):45–54

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barrett S (2011) Climate treaties and approaching catastrophes. Working Paper

  • Barrett S, Stavins R (2003) Increasing participation and compliance in international climate change agreements. Int Environ Agreem-P 3(4):349–376

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blackstock JJ, Battisti DS, Caldeira K, Eardley DM, Katz JI, Keith DW, Patrinos AAN, Schrag DP, Socolow RH, Koonin SE (2009) Climate Engineering Responses to Climate Emergencies. Novim, Santa Barbara

    Google Scholar 

  • Bodansky D (1996) May we engineer the climate? Clim Change 33(3):309–321

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boucher O, Lowe JA, Jones CD (2009) Implications of delayed actions in addressing carbon dioxide emission reduction in the context of geo-engineering. Clim Change 92:261–273

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brovkin V, Petoukhov V, Claussen M, Bauer E, Archer D, Jaeger C (2009) Geoengineering climate by stratospheric sulfur injections: earth system vulnerability to technological failure. Clim Change 92(3/4):243–259

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carraro C (1998) Beyond Kyoto: a game theoretic perspective. Prepared for OECD workshop, “Climate Change and Economic Modelling. Background Analysis for the Kyoto Protocol,” Paris

  • Chou P, Sylla C (2008) The formation of an international environmental agreement as a two-stage exclusive cartel formation game with transferable utilities. Int Environ Agreem-P 8(4):317–341. doi:10.1007/s10784-008-9082-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cicerone RJ (2006) Geoengineering: encouraging research and overseeing implementation. Clim Change 77:221–226

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • EcoEquity and Christian Aid (2006) Greenhouse development rights

  • Finus M (2008) Game theoretic research on the design of international environmental agreements: insights, critical remarks, and future challenges. International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics 2(1):29–67

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Finus M, Saiz ME, Hendrix EMT (2009) An empirical test of new developments in coalition theory for the design of international environmental agreements. Environ Dev Econ 14:117–137. doi:10.1017/s1355770x08004634

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fleming JR (2007) The climate engineers. Wilson Quarterly (Spring 2007): 46–60

  • Fleming JR (2010) Fixing the Sky. The Checkered History of Weather and Climate Control. Columbia University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Frankel J (2008) An elaborated proposal for global climate policy architecture: specific formulas and emission targets for all countries in all decades. Discussion Paper 08–08, Harvard Project on International Climate Agreements, Cambridge

  • Heckendorn P, Weisenstein D, Fueglistaler S, Luo BP, Rozanov E, Schraner M, Thomason LW, Peter T (2009) The impact of geoengineering aerosols on stratospheric temperature and ozone. Environ Res Lett 4:045108

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Irvine PJ, Ridgwell A, Lunt DJ (2010) Assessing the regional disparities in geoengineering impacts. Geophys Res Lett 37(L18702):1–6. doi:10.1029/2010GL044447

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones A, Haywood J, Boucher O (2009) Climate impacts of geoengineering marine stratocumulus clouds. J Geophys Res 114:D10106. doi:10.1029/2008JD011450

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keith DW (2000) Geoengineering the climate: history and prospect. Annu Rev Energy Environ 25(1):245–284

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kotowitz Y (2008) Moral hazard. In: Durlauf SN, Blume LE (eds), The new Palgrave dictionary of economics online, Palgrave Macmillan

  • Lin AC (2009) Geoengineering governance. Issues Leg Scholars 8(3):1–24

    Google Scholar 

  • Lunt DJ, Ridgwell A, Valdes PJ, Seale A (2008) “Sunshade World”: a fully coupled GCM evaluation of the climatic impacts of geoengineering. Geophys Res Lett 35:L12710. doi:10.1029/2008gl033674

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacCracken MC (2009) On the possible use of geoengineering to moderate specific climate change impacts. Environ Res Lett 4:045107. doi:10.1088/1748-9326/4/4/045107

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matthews HD, Caldeira K (2007) Transient climate-carbon simulations of planetary geoengineering. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 104(24):9949–9954. doi:10.1073/pnas.0700419104

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matthews HD, Cao L, Caldeira K (2009) Sensitivity of ocean acidification to geoengineered climate stabilization. Geophys Res Lett 36:L10706

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Michaelson J (1998) Geoengineering: a climate change Manhattan Project. Stanf Environ Law J 17:73–140

    Google Scholar 

  • Moreno-Cruz J (2010) Mitigation and the geoengineering threat. Working Paper

  • Naik V, Wuebbles DJ, DeLucia EH, Foley JA (2003) Influence of geoengineered climate on the terrestrial biosphere. Environ Manag 32(3):373–381

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • North DC, Weingast BR (1989) Constitutions and commitment: the evolution of institutional governing public choice in seventeenth-century England. J Econ Hist 49(4):803–832

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olson M (1993) Dictatorship, democracy, and development. Am Polit Sci Rev 87(3):567–576

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ridgwell A, Singarayer JS, Hetherington AM, Valdes PJ (2009) Tackling regional climate change by leaf albedo bio-geoengineering. Curr Biol 19:146–150

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robock A, Oman L, Stenchikov GL (2008) Regional climate responses to geoengineering with tropical and Arctic SO2 injections. J Geophys Res 113:D16101. doi:10.1029/2008jd010050

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robock A, Marquardt A, Kravitz B, Stenchikov GL (2009) Benefits, risks, and costs of stratospheric geoengineering. Geophys Res Lett 36:L19703

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Royal Society (2009) Geoengineering the climate. Science, governance and uncertainty. The Royal Society, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Schelling TC (1996) The economic diplomacy of geoengineering. Clim Change 33:303–307

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schneider SH (1996) Geoengineering: could-or should-we do it? Clim Change 33(3):291–302

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stern N (2007) The economics of climate change: the Stern review. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Tilmes S, Müller R, Salawitch R (2008) The sensitivity of polar ozone depletion to proposed geoengineering schemes. Science 320(5880):1201–1204. doi:10.1126/science.1153966

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tilmes S, Garcia RR, Kinnison DE, Gettelman A, Rasch PJ (2009) Impact of geoengineered aerosols on the troposphere and stratosphere. J Geophys Res 114:D12305. doi:10.1029/2008JD011420

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trenberth KE, Dai A (2007) Effects of Mount Pinatubo volcanic eruption on the hydrological cycle as an analog of geoengineering. Geophys Res Lett 34:L15702

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Victor DG (2008) On the regulation of geoengineering. Oxf Rev Econ Policy 24(2):322–336. doi:10.1093/oxrep/grn018

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Victor DG, Morgan MG, Apt J, Steinbruner J, Rich K (2009) The geoengineering option. Foreign Aff 88(2):64–76

    Google Scholar 

  • Virgoe J (2009) International governance of a possible geoengineering intervention to combat climate change. Clim Change 95:103–119

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Emmett Interdisciplinary Program in Environment and Resources, Stanford University, Yang & Yamazaki Environment and Energy Building-4210, Stanford, CA, 94305, USA

    Adam Millard-Ball

Authors
  1. Adam Millard-Ball
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Adam Millard-Ball.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Millard-Ball, A. The Tuvalu Syndrome. Climatic Change 110, 1047–1066 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-011-0102-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-011-0102-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation