Unilateral Actions the Case of International Environmental Problems

^H = q(H,0)

And will, under the given assumptions, always exist:

Result 3: Given the single crossing condition, there always exists a separating
equilibrium given by (7.a) and (7.b). Proof, see appendix 2.

This result is reproduced in figure 4, where R_i^L and R_i^H are indicated by the dot-
ted lines as defines above. The interception indicated by the bold line indicates
the set of separating equilibrium outcomes, all representing an increase in re-
duction levels for the low cost compared to the full information situation.

Again, as in section 3, the requirement on belief formation will be that if a sig-
nal q’ is weakly dominated for one type θ, but not for the other type, the unin-
formed players’ belief should place zero probability that θ has sent q’, i.e. q’
must be followed by posterior ρ(θ∣q^,)=0. The result of doing this is stated be-
low:

Result 4: There exists one undominated separating equilibrium,

( qL, qH ) = ( qU, q ( H ,0)), where

q_i^UA =suparg{q_i ∈Q_i | NB_i(L,q_i ,1)=NB_i(L,q(L,1),0)}.

Proof, see appendix 2

28

<<   23   24   25   26   27   28   29   >>

More intriguing information