Discuss a bilateral strategy by which green house gas emissions can be effectively reduced AND both nations involved can attain some relative benefits:

What will be an ideal response?

Ans: Two of the heaviest emitters can get together in order to reduce their emissions by working in concert. Of course, these two cannot comprehensively solve the problem alone but it’s a start. The solution is similar to a repeated prisoners dilemma game leading to a jointly cooperative result. The key is to repeatedly take turns in their emissions reductions. Both nations become invested if the wealthier nation puts up the money AFTER reductions are realized. One nation must agree to reduce their emissions by a negotiable percent. The percent would be based on a cost/benefit analysis that is not so costly that the nation cannot afford it but not so cheap that there are no measurable reductions. The other nation should do the same thing. Perhaps annual or bi-annual monitoring would repeatedly bring both nations to the table and hold one another accountable for missed goals or reward them for achieving their goals. The idea is to make cooperation the best outcome for all where either both cheating and one cheating is more costly than cooperating in the long run. The wealthier of the two nations puts up money only after both nations reduce emissions. As time goes on, the temptation to cheat is reduced and cooperation is more and more attractive as years go on.