7/
🔓 Read the full paper here:
"Avoiding Catastrophic Climate Change: Heterogeneous Abatement Costs and Voting on Redistribution"
JEBO, Open Access → tinyurl.com/bde643fx
#Climate #BehavioralEcon #LabExperiment

6/
🌍 Implication: Climate transfers from rich to poor countries aren't just fair—they’re effective.
They boost success, reduce global costs, and even benefit donors.
Policy has much to learn from this.

5/
📈 Most rich participants vote to transfer funds.
Why?
Because the cost of giving is less than the cost of climate catastrophe.
It’s not just altruism—it’s rational self-interest.

4/
💡 Key findings:

Transfers increase the chance of hitting the climate target

They shift efforts to where it’s cheapest

And yes, rich subjects benefit, too—cooperation pays off for everyone

3/
💰 Our lab experiment lets “rich” subjects vote on whether to fund “poor” subjects’ emission reductions.
We mimic global inequality in abatement costs—sound familiar?

2/
🌡️ The challenge: Fighting climate change is a collective-risk dilemma.
Rich countries = high mitigation costs
Poor countries = low costs
But everyone benefits—or suffers—together. So who pays?