Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), 2002, vol. 158, issue 4, 529-547
Treaties seeking to supply transnational public goods are usually modeled as a game in which cooperation is incomplete, with some countries participating and some not. This paper shows that, if the usual rationality concept is weakened somewhat, countries will often do better by negotiating a consensus treaty in which provision of the public good is chosen to maximize the collective payoff of all countries subject to participation in the treaty being full. The theory developed here thus explains when, and why, it may be better to negotiate a treaty that is "broad but shallow" rather than "narrow but deep."
JEL-codes: C7 H41 K33 Q2 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (30) Track citations by RSS feed
Downloads: (external link)
Fulltext access is included for subscribers to the printed version.
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.
Export reference: BibTeX
RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan)
Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:mhr:jinste:urn:sici:0932-4569(200212)158:4_529:ct_2.0.tx_2-z
Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
Mohr Siebeck GmbH & Co. KG, P.O.Box 2040, 72010 Tübingen, Germany
Access Statistics for this article
Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE) is currently edited by Gerd Mühlheußer and Bayer, Ralph-C
More articles in Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE) from Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Thomas Wolpert ().