The Prisoner’s Dilemma, a game theory, defines human behavior as purely self-interested. The theory states that individuals will almost always put their own interests ahead of those of a group. “A prisoner’s dilemma” is where individuals make decisions in ways that are less than optimal for the group. An example is the classic Prisoner’s Dilemma of two bankrobbers. These individuals can choose to remain quiet, which will result in both receiving a lesser punishment, or they can “rat” out the other and get no sentence. If one chooses to be silent and another “rats” on them, then they both end up in prison, while the first is released. This theory shows that humans are selfish, and they don’t trust other people. It is not a natural behaviour. The choice to choose the best outcome for each bank robber instead of the optimal one can be seen as selfish behavior. The obvious conclusion is that both would have received the least severe sentence, but they wouldn’t risk trusting each other.
Climate change can be analyzed using the Prisoner’s Dilemma Theory. This theory is analyzed in the context of climate change. Instead of focusing on a few fringe groups, we look at the behavior of everyone. This theory can also be used to explain why people would not want to fight climate change. This theory explains why people have not done all they can to help fight climate change. It is because self-interest has taken precedence over cooperation. Most people don’t realize that even the smallest actions, such as recycling, can make a difference. Each person can help save the planet by recycling even the smallest things, like reusing a bottle of water. Those I’m talking about aren’t those who can’t change their lives, like the poor, indigenous communities, or other people who face social injustices. I’m talking about people who can adapt their lifestyles to fight social injustice. Members of the upper and middle classes, who are financially capable of contributing to the fight, should be held to higher standards.
What are the incentives that will be needed to encourage participation in the fight to combat climate change? What are the incentives that will encourage individuals to put their self-interest aside and choose cooperation? In every area of our lives, the Prisoner Dilemma Theory is prevalent. It explains why people are always choosing themselves and so untrusting of other people. The untrusting behavior seems to be that individuals will not contribute when they feel others won’t. In our mind, we are always mimicking behaviour. Wouldn’t that encourage others to also contribute? The article “Prisoner’s Dilemma : What Game are You Playing?” examines the novel titled, “The Evolution of Cooperation”, in which it is discussed that we were selfish before society constructed social institutions or a central authority. As we all know, human beings are perfectly capable of working together, and this is what makes civilization possible. Civility and living together is the best way to show that we are acting in our mutual interest, not just our own. Although we are naturally self-centred and self interested, it is possible to say that we also have “natures of morality”. The Nature of Morality’makes claims on each of you that are stronger and more important than the demands of law. It takes precedence over self-interest.” While we may have our own interests, we also feel that we owe a duty to others. While we may not be obligated as individuals to improve the environment, we do feel responsible for the future generations. The world would change dramatically if everyone took a step to fight climate change because they wanted better futures for their own children. According to the Prisoner’s Dilemma, human nature is viewed in a very negative light. This theory guarantees that the average person will make the wrong decision if they are faced with a choice between right and wrong. Everyone must be involved in the fight against global warming. Anyone too self-centered to realize this will lead to the destruction of all. In order to make progress and shift the perception of climate change, people must change their focus from “me” to “we”.
As previously mentioned, “Nature of Morality”, the theory of morality protects humanity because we act also in our moral interest. We cannot rely on morality or moral obligations we have towards our family and friends to save the planet. The population must receive additional assistance to become more involved in the fight against climate change. Incentives are a good way to get more people involved in the fight. The Minister of Finance, in December last year announced “2020 Climate Action Incentive Payment Amounts” that are tailored for provinces which have not yet adopted the federal carbon pricing system. The residents are the direct recipients of these payments, who, for instance, have paid for their own homes to be rebuilt after natural disasters. These incentive programs, according to the Canadian government, will not only improve the environment but benefit many families that are struggling during these times of climate change-induced natural disasters. The Minister of Finance stated that most households would receive more money in these payments compared to what they pay for federal pollution charges. This helps families meet their financial obligations as we strive to move towards a greener future. “
The provinces that have adopted the federal system of carbon pollution pricing are also given an incentive, as the Canadian government returns the funds to the provinces or territories where they originated, rather than keeping them. The proceeds are returned to either the provinces or residents who have adopted this federal system. The incentive programs are designed to ensure that everyone is involved, from the major corporations to the individual.
The United Nations published 17 Sustainable Development Goals in 2015. The United Nations has 17 sustainable development goals that they released in 2015. The world must now focus on Goal 13. We are now aware of both the causes as well as the consequences. All that’s left is to get started. Covid-19 is included in “Goal 13”, a plan of action for the United Nations. This virus is a major issue that the world faces today. UN’s “Goal 13” includes a Covid-19 response plan, as this virus is one of the most pressing issues the world faces today. The plan is designed to help countries rebuild their economies in a way that is “clean, green, healthy and safe” so as to reflect the current sustainable economy. The UN Secretary General has suggested six climate-positive measures that governments can take as they rebuild their economies and society.
Investing in green transition will accelerate decarbonization throughout our economy.
Green Jobs and Sustainable and Inclusive Growth
Green Economy: making society and its people more resilient and fair through a transformation that benefits everyone.
Investing in solutions for sustainability is essential: fossil-fuel subsidies must stop and polluters are responsible for their pollution.
Climate Risks: How to Face them All
“No country is successful by itself. Cooperation is key.”
The plan of action by the Secretary-General is extremely intelligent. The virus has done a lot of damage to the economies of all developed countries. It is the ideal time to make sustainable changes while countries rebuild their economy. Why not design it to fight climate change. We have still got time to fix all the damage the population did to the earth.
The Common Heritage of Mankind principle (CHM), which is included in many international treaties that govern the global commons, is simply to be understood as the legacy the current generation will leave behind. Unfortunately, this will be the environmental damage they have caused. Werner Sholtz in a journal article titled “Common Heritage: Save the Environment for Humankind Or Exploiting Resources In The Name Of Eco-Imperialism?” explains five key aspects of the principle of common heritage.
“First of all, there is no territorial claim to the common heritage area. It belongs to none. States are therefore the agents who represent mankind when it comes to the management of common heritage areas. Governments can’t manage these spaces as sovereigns. Thirdly the benefit of the exploitation, use and enjoyment of the relevant areas should be shared. Fourthly, all areas in question may only be used peacefully. Fifthly, it is important to preserve the area for future generations.
The Common Heritage of Mankind was conceptualized primarily around the well-being of poor people. The concept was based on the well-being of those who are often not heard when major decisions are made in the world. Yet, it is the poor that are most affected by the consequences brought about by other countries’ actions. Common Heritage of Humankind, a beautiful concept, must be re-imagined to reflect current needs of underdeveloped nations. Third world countries viewed this concept as a way to maintain equity and prevent developed nations from colonizing the global commons. As we now know, since then, there have been many improvements and changes, but the CHM principle still remains. CHM still holds true today. It is important to save the planet so that mankind can live in peace and sustainability for years to come.
In conclusion, climate change is an international problem that calls for global cooperation. We will face the same negative consequences as the Prisoners Dilemma if we do not participate in a unilateral way. The planet’s health and well-being may suffer a larger erosion. The planet must be viewed as a common and shared space. This is the principle of “Common Heritage of Mankind”. The Common Heritage of Humankind Principle is meant to make the world a better place for the next generation of humans. For the conclusion of this paper, I’ll end with an inspiring quote that sums up my paper: “The individual can make a difference in the short term to combat climate change.” While no one person or entity can stop the global warming, those who are at the forefront of implementing climate-related actions can have an impact multiplier.
