Fair Bargaining; Voluntariness and Reciprocity

  • Luke Tomlinson


Building on the concept of political equality outlined in Chap.  5, Chap.  6 considers how member states can bargain fairly in the UNFCCC. Bargaining is a fundamental part of multilateral negotiations, allowing actors to reach a compromise agreement on issues that they would otherwise disagree on. But power inequalities play a major role in determining how outcomes are reached in bargaining processes. This leaves serious doubts about the promise of arriving at a fair outcome through bargaining when there are large differences between actors. In this chapter, I identify the necessary conditions for fair bargaining. I argue that bargaining processes are fair provided that they meet some requirements of voluntariness and reciprocity. I then consider what can be done to make bargaining between states more fair. I argue that the UNFCCC should put certain constraints on permissible bargaining between states.


World Trade Organisation Bargaining Power Clean Development Mechanism Procedural Justice Reservation Price 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Albin, C. 2001. Justice and fairness in international negotiation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Albin, C. 2003. Getting to fairness: Negotiations over global public goods. In Providing public goods: Managing globalization, ed. I. Kaul, P. Conceição, K. Le Goulven, and R.U. Mendoza. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Andonova, L.B., and A. Alexieva. 2012. Continuity and change in Russia’s climate negotiations position and strategy. Climate Policy 12(5): 614–629.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Andresen, S., and J. Wettestad. 1992. International resource cooperation and the greenhouse problem. Global Environmental Change, Human and Policy Dimensions 2(4): 277–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Arneson, R. 1992. Exploitation. In Encyclopedia of ethics, ed. Lawrence C. Becker, 350–352. New York: Garland.Google Scholar
  6. Barrett, S. 1995. Trade restrictions in international environmental agreements. London: London Business School.Google Scholar
  7. Barrett, S. 1997. The strategy of trade sanctions in international environmental agreements. Resources and Energy Economics 19(4): 345–361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Barrett, S. 2001. International cooperation for sale. European Economic Review 45(10): 1835–1850.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Barrett, S., and R.N. Stavins. 2003. Increasing participation and compliance in international climate change agreement. International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics 3: 349–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Becker, L.C. 2005. Reciprocity, justice, and disability. Ethics 116(1): 9–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Buchanan, A. 1985 Ethics, efficiency, and the market. Totowa: Rowman and Allanheld.Google Scholar
  12. Burtraw, D., and M.A. Toman. 1993. Equity and international agreements for CO2 constraint. Journal of Energy Engineering 118(2): 122–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Carraro, C., and D. Siniscalco. 1998. International environmental agreements: Incentives and political economy. European Economic Review 42: 561–572.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Chasek, P.S., D.L. Downie, et al. 2006. Global environmental politics. Boulder: Westview Press.Google Scholar
  15. Christiano, T. 1996. The rule of the many: Fundamental issues in democratic theory. Boulder/Oxford: Westview Press.Google Scholar
  16. Christiano, T. 2009. Democratic legitimacy and international institutions. In The philosophy of international law, ed. S. Besson and J. Tastioulas. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Depledge, J. 2008. Striving for no: Saudi Arabia in the climate change regime. Global Environmental Politics 8(4): 9–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Depledge, J., and F. Yamin. 2009. The global climate change regime: A defence. In The economics and politics of climate change, ed. D. Helm and C. Hepburn. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  19. DeSombre, E.R. 2002. The global environment and world politics. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
  20. Dimitrov, R.S. 2010. Inside UN climate change negotiations: The Copenhagen conference. Review of Policy Research 27(6): 795–821.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Feinberg, J. 1990. The moral limits of the criminal law, Volume 4: Harmless wrongdoing. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Fisher, R., W. Ury, et al. 1991. Getting to yes: Negotiating agreement without giving in. New York: Penguin.Google Scholar
  23. Ghosh, A. 2010. Making climate look like trade? Questions on incentives, flexibility and credibility, Policy brief for centre for policy research. New Delhi: Dharma Marg.Google Scholar
  24. Ghosh, A., and N. Woods. 2009. Governing climate change: Lessons from other governance regimes. In The economics and politics of climate change, ed. D. Helm and C. Hepburn. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  25. Goodin, R.E. 1980. Manipulatory politics. New Haven/London: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Hall, D., M. Levi, et al. 2010. Policies for developing country engagement. In Post-Kyoto international climate policy: Implementing architectures for agreement, ed. J.E. Aldy and R.N. Stavins. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  27. Harstad, B. 2009. The dynamics of climate agreements. CMS-EMS Discussion Paper 1474.
  28. Harstad, B. 2010. How to negotiate and update climate agreements. In Post-Kyoto international climate policy: Implementing architectures for agreement, ed. J.E. Aldy and R.N. Stavins. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  29. Kane, R. 1999. The significance of free will. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Karp, L., and J. Zhao. 2010. Kyoto’s successor. In Post-Kyoto international climate policy: Implementing architectures for agreement, ed. J.E. Aldy and R.N. Stavins. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  31. Knight, J., and J. Johnson. 1997. What sort of political equality does democratic deliberation require. In Deliberative democracy, ed. J. Bohman and W. Rehg. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  32. Kverndokk, S. 1995. Tradeable CO2 emission permits: Initial distribution as a justice problem. CSERGE GEG Working Paper, 92–35.Google Scholar
  33. Lamond, G. 2000. The coerciveness of law. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 20(1): 39–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Miller, D. 1987. Exploitation in the market. In Modern Theories of Exploitation, ed. A. Reeve. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  35. Miller, D. 2009. Democracy’s domain. Philosophy & Public Affairs 37(3): 201–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Mitchell, R.B., and P.M. Keilbach. 2001. Situation structure and institutional design: Reciprocity, coercion, and exchange. International Organisation 55(4): 891–917.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Nash, J. 1950. The bargaining problem. Econometrica 28: 155–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Nozick, R. 1974. Anarchy, state and Utopia. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  39. Olsaretti, S. 2004. Liberty, desert and the market: A philosophical study. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Pereboom, D. 2001. Living without free will. Cambridge/New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Raiffa, H. 1982. The art and science of negotiation. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  42. Rudinow, J. 1978. Manipulation. Ethics 88: 338–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Sebenius, J.K. 1984. Negotiating the law of the sea. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  44. Sheeran, K.A. 2006. Side-payments or exemptions: The efficient climate control. Eastern Economic Journal 32(2): 515–532.Google Scholar
  45. Shue, H. 1992. The unavoidability of justice. In The international politics of the environment: Actors, interests and institutions, ed. A. Hurrell and B. Kingsbury. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  46. Snyder, J.C. 2008. Needs exploitation. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 11(4): 389–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Stokke, O.S. 2004. Trade measures and climate compliance: Institutional interplay between WTO and the Marrakesh accords. International Environment Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics 4: 339–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Susskind, L. 1994. Environmental diplomacy: Negotiating more effective global agreements. New York/Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  49. Susskind, L., and C. Ozawa. 1992. Negotiating more effective international environmental agreements. In The international politics of the environment, ed. B. Kingsbury and A. Hurrell. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  50. Viguier, L. 2004. A proposal to increase developing country participation in international climate policy. Environmental Science & Policy 7: 195–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Weiler, F. 2013. Determinants of bargaining success in the climate change negotiations. Climate Policy 12(5): 552–574.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Wertheimer, A. 1989. Coercion. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  53. Wertheimer, A. 1996. Exploitation. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  54. Zartman, I.W., and J.Z. Rubin. 2000. Power and negotiation. Ann Arbour: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
  55. Zartman, I., and S. Touval. 2010. International cooperation: The extents and limits of multilateralism. New York/Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Zwolinski, M. 2007. Sweatshops, choice, and exploitation. Business Ethics Quarterly 17(4): 689–727.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Luke Tomlinson
    • 1
  1. 1.LondonUK

Personalised recommendations