A unifying theory of foreign intervention in domestic climate policy

We propose a theory of climate-policy foreign intervention in which the climate policy is characterized in a policy externality space spanned by differences between two countries exposure to foreign policy, exposure divergence, and in preferred policy levels, preference asymmetry. Within this framework, we show that strategic behavior such as free-riding and free-driving emerge as equilibrium outcomes of position in this policy externality space, rather than as intrinsic features of a climate policy technology, such as mitigation, adaptation, or geoengineering. We also examine preferences for foreign intervention when a hegemon has three options to intervene in the domestic climate policy of a potential Target: i.) Agreements with Extraction; ii.) Agreements with Rewards; and iii.) Agreements with Sanctions. The hegemon’s choice is determined by the availability of rents that can be extracted from the target country, which is, in turn, a function of the policy externality. This explains why the same technology may require different governance approaches in different contexts and why some climate policies attract foreign intervention while others do not.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization
Published
2026-01-30
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2026.107430
Primary Topic
Climate Change and Geoengineering
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

A unifying theory of foreign intervention in domestic climate policy

Anthony Harding, Juan Moreno-Cruz
Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization
Climate Change and Geoengineering
article

A unifying theory of foreign intervention in domestic climate policy

Anthony Harding, Juan Moreno-Cruz
article en

Abstract

We propose a theory of climate-policy foreign intervention in which the climate policy is characterized in a policy externality space spanned by differences between two countries exposure to foreign policy, exposure divergence, and in preferred policy levels, preference asymmetry. Within this framework, we show that strategic behavior such as free-riding and free-driving emerge as equilibrium outcomes of position in this policy externality space, rather than as intrinsic features of a climate policy technology, such as mitigation, adaptation, or geoengineering. We also examine preferences for foreign intervention when a hegemon has three options to intervene in the domestic climate policy of a potential Target: i.) Agreements with Extraction; ii.) Agreements with Rewards; and iii.) Agreements with Sanctions. The hegemon’s choice is determined by the availability of rents that can be extracted from the target country, which is, in turn, a function of the policy externality. This explains why the same technology may require different governance approaches in different contexts and why some climate policies attract foreign intervention while others do not.

Journal of Economic Behavior & OrganizationVol. 243
Georgia Institute of Technology (US), University of Waterloo (CA)
Climate action
Openalex Percentile: Top 80%
Climate Change and Geoengineering
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.