Skip to main content

A core-theoretic solution for the design of cooperative agreements on transfrontier pollution


For a simple economic model of transfrontier pollution, widely used in theoretical studies of international treaties bearing on joint abatement, we offer in this paper a scheme for sharing national abatement costs through international financial transfers that is inspired by a classical solution concept from the theory of cooperative games—namely, the core of a game. The scheme has the following properties: total damage and abatement costs in all countries are minimized (optimality property), and no coalition or subset of countries can achieve lower total costs for its members by taking another course of action in terms of emissions or transfers, under some reasonable assumption about the reactions of those not in the coalition (core property). In the concluding section economic interpretations of the scheme are proposed, including its connection with the free-riding problem.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.


  • Barrett, S. (1992). “International Environmental Agreements as Games.” In Pethig, R. (ed.),Conflicts and Cooperation in Managing Environmental Resources (pp. 11–36). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bernheim, D., B. Peleg, and M.D. Whinston. (1986). “Coalition-Proof Nash Equilibria. I: Concepts.”Journal of Economic Theory 42(1), 1–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carraro, C., and D. Siniscalco. (1993). “Strategies for the International Protection of the Environment.”Journal of Public Economics 52, 309–328.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chander, P. (1993). “Dynamic Procedures and Incentives in Public Good Economies.”Econometrica 1341–1354.

  • Chander, P., and H. Tulkens. (1992). “Theoretical Foundations of Negotiations and Cost Sharing in Transfrontier Pollution Problems.”European Review 36(2/3), 288–299.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chander, P., and H. Tulkens. (1994). “The Core of an Economy with Multilateral Environmental Externalities.” Mimeo, forthcomingCORE Discussion Paper, April.

  • Dasgupta, P., P. Hammond, and E. Maskin. (1980). “On Imperfect Information and Optimal Pollution control.”Review of Economic Studies 47, 857–860.

    Google Scholar 

  • d'Aspremont, C., and L. Gerard-Varet. (1992). “Incentive Theory Applied to Negotiations on Environmental Issues: National Strategies and International Cooperation.” Mimeo, August.

  • Dreze, J.H., and D. de la Vallee Poussin. (1971). “A Tâtonnement Process for Public Goods.”Review of Economic Studies 38, 133–150.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foley, D. (1970). “Lindahl Solution and the Core of an Economy with Public Goods.”Econometrica 38, 66–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, J. (1990).Game Theory with Applications to Economics (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Germain, M., Ph. Toint, and H. Tulkens. (1994). “Calcul économique itératif pour les négociations internationales sur les pluies acides entre la Finlande, la Russie, l'Etonie.” Mimeo, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE), Catholic University of Louvain.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoel, M. (1992). “Emission Taxes in a Dynamic International Game of CO2 Emissions.” In R. Pethig (ed.),Conflicts and Cooperation in Managing Environmental Resources (pp. 39–68). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaitala, V., K.G. Mäler, and H. Tulkens. (1995). “The Acid Rain Game as a Resource Allocation Process with Application to Negotiations Between Finland, Russia and Estonia.”Scandinavian Journal of Economics 97(2).

  • Kwerel, E. (1977). “To Tell the Truth: Imperfect Information and Optimal Pollution Control.”Review of Economic Studies 44, 595–601

    Google Scholar 

  • Laffont, J.J. (1977).Effets externes et théorie économique. Paris: Monographies du Séminaire d'Econométrie, Editions du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS).

    Google Scholar 

  • Mäler, K.G. (1989–1993). “The Acid Rain Game,” chapter 12. In H. Folmer and E. Van Ierland (eds.),Valuation Methods and Policy Making in Environmental Economics (pp. 231–252. Amsterdam: Elsevier. “The Acid Rain Game II.”Beijer Discussion Paper Series 32, Beijer International Institute of Ecological Economics, Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, Stockholm.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scarf, H. (1971). “On the Existence of a Cooperative Solution for a General Class ofN-Person Games.”Journal of Economic Theory 3, 169–181.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shapley, L., and M. Shubik. (1969). “On the Core of an Economic System with Externalities.”American Economic Review 59, 678–684.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tulkens, H. (1979). “An Economic Model of International Negotiations Relating to Transfrontier Pollution.” In K. Krippendorff (ed.),Communication and Control in Society (pp. 199–212). New York: Gordon and Breach Science.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations


Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Chander, P., Tulkens, H. A core-theoretic solution for the design of cooperative agreements on transfrontier pollution. Int Tax Public Finan 2, 279–293 (1995).

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI:

Key words

  • cost of abatement
  • damage function
  • free riding
  • partial agreement Nash equilibrium
  • γ andα cores
  • optimal emission policy
  • international transfers