Please help me with this question.

Here is the background: In March 2023 the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) released its Synthesis Report, capping off seven years of in-depth assessments on various climate-related topics.

The authors of the report concluded:

It was now "unequivocal" that climate is changing as a result of human activity, and that it is a threat to human societies and the natural world.

Climate change is already making extreme weather events more frequent with 3.3 to 3.6 billion people living in places "highly vulnerable" to these changes.

Cuts to emissions need to be "deep, rapid and sustained" if the world is to limit warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius this decade.

If warming goes above that, adaptation will likely be too much for some communities and ecosystems to survive.

In response to the report's findings the United Nations Secretary-General, Antnio Guterres, called for "all G20 members to come together in a joint effort, pooling their resources and scientific capacities as well as their proven and affordable technologies through the public and private sectors to make carbon neutrality a reality by 2050."

We can model how two nations interact with regard to their climate policy using game theory. Let's take two members of the G20, Argentina and France. Assume that each nation can choose from one of two possible climate strategies:

Abate: governments enact policies to reduce carbon emissions, for example, by taxing fossil fuels or subsidising clean energies.

Pollute: governments fail to enact policies to reduce carbon emissions. Businesses and individuals are free to continue to use fossil fuels and pursue their own self- interest.

The payoffs of this game are shown in Figure 1 below. All payoffs represent potential increases to the nation's gross domestic product (GDP), measured in billions of USD.