Why Some Countries Overperform

Overall climate mitigation efforts have as of yet been disappointing. But in the aftermath of the Kyoto climate conference it became clear that there were quite a few countries that not only met the emission targets but even overperformed. We need to know why this was the case to make climate agreements in the future more effective. This article presents a theoretical model and gives empirical evidence that helps explain this heterogeneity in provision levels for climate mitigation from the industrialized countries under the Kyoto protocol. A central premise of this paper is that lower CO2 emissions are not only beneficial for the world climate but have country-specific effects as well. National climate mitigation measures have a direct economic impact on individual countries which, as this research shows leads to an increased or decreased compliance based on the nature of a country’s economy. When a large renewable industry is present it stimulates a country to take additional steps in providing the public good of climate mitigation. But countries that are ready for climate change or who may actually benefit from high fossil fuel consumption may be less likely to do so. Individual policy preferences, however, only show part of the story. Countries do not exist in a vacuum. This article not only shows how countries are connected but also how complimentary policy preferences are fostered by being more central in the country network. Through the usage of Bonacich centrality, I explain how this can result in an increase of climate mitigation efforts.