Abstract
Abstract This paper revisits one of the rare success stories in global environmental cooperation: the Montreal Protocol and the phase-out of ozone-depleting substances. I show that the protocol increased science and innovation on alternatives to ozone-depleting substances and argue that agreements can indeed be useful in solving global public goods problems. This contrasts with game-theoretical predictions that agreements occur only when costs to the players are low and with the often-heard narrative that substitutes were readily available. I reconcile theory and empirics by discussing the role of induced innovation in models of environmental agreements.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
