“Game Theory Says the Paris Agreement Looks Like a Winner for the Climate” – How Climate Change is a (Winning) Stag Hunt Game
As we have learned in our Networks class, the stag hunt game is a classic dilemma in the subject of game theory. Its premise is simple: there are two hunters who can choose to either cooperate or work alone. If the hunters cooperate, they will win the stag. If either chooses to work alone, they can catch a rabbit instead.
In classical game theory analysis, as we executed in lecture, the hunters will always choose to go for the rabbit. This is because the risk of the other hunter choosing not to go for the stag when you have is too great – you may end up going home with no meat at all if they do not cooperate. Therefore, players in this game typically go for the guarantee of some meat and catching a rabbit.
As the Quartz article explains, this perfectly parallels our global climate crisis; each cooperation and country would benefit by working together to heal our planet, but many choose to “cheat by sticking to fossil fuels” to prevent the dreaded scenario of making no profit while others continue to cheat.
The only “solution” to this game comes with trust and cooperation – the stag hunt game is called a “trust game” because it requires establishing trust in each other.
This is where the Paris Agreement comes in – game theorists believe that this agreement, in which countries commit to limiting global warming to below 2 degrees Celsius, perfectly parallels a stag hunt game. If the agreement is done right, then there will be set rules that discourage countries from “cheating” and straying from the plan. The rewards of trusting each other will be appealing enough to each country that this will be their dominant strategy.
However, as our professors have emphasized in our course, to make the Paris Agreement successful, it is crucial that every country knows which game is being played. If any country does not fully understand the payoffs or has a different interpretation of them, then they are playing a different game where the benefits of cooperation may not outweigh the benefits of self-assured success.
Optimistic game theorists believe that countries will choose the option that will save our planet and mutually benefit everybody; unfortunately, only time will tell if our world leaders are willing to give up the “hunt” of fossil fuels for the “stag” of saving our earth.
https://qz.com/2099301/game-theory-says-the-paris-agreement-might-be-a-climate-winner/