Hi, can you please explain how a change in the rules of the game could lead to a potential solution to the social dilemma of climate change?

The ideal outcome for the climate strategy game is one in which a dominant strategy equilibrium is achieved when both groups of countries choose to abate emissions.

Figure 2: Payoffs for the climate strategy game with social preferences. Developed Abate No Change Best Good Abate Best Worst Developing Worst Bad No Change Good BadCarbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere today are higher than at any point in at least the past 800,000 years. The risks associated with the resultant climatic change have been well documented. We can model the problem of climate change as a game between two groups: developing nations and developed nations. In this game, each group can choose from one of two possible climate strategies: . Abate: governments enact policies to reduce carbon emissions, for example, by subsidising clean energies or taxing fossil fuels. . No change: governments fail to enact policies to reduce carbon emissions. Businesses and individuals are free to pursue their own self-interest. The outcomes and payoffs of this game are shown in Figure 1 below. Figure 1: Outcomes and payoffs for the climate strategy game. Developed Developed Abate No Change Abate No Change Emissions Developed countries free ride on Good Best reductions that successfully developing Abate Abate moderates climate countries emissions change reductions Good Worst Developing Developing Developing countries free Worst Bad ride on developed No emissions No Change No Change countries reductions emissions Best Bad reductions