评论
打印
It's obvious.
这已经显而易见。
Global efforts to combat climate change have failed.
对抗气候变化的全球努力都以失败告终。
International summits are full of hot air and greenhouse gas pollution continues to rise.
国际峰会上探讨着继续上升的热空气及温室气体污染。
If a country bails on a climate commitment, they pay a price of, well, zero.
如果一个国家失约于气候承诺,他们将付出零的代价。
Turns out that's okay, at least according to game theory analyses by researchers at the University of Lisbon.
这样的结果不错,至少是按照里斯本大学研究人员的博弈论分析得出。
Their models suggest that punishment by global institutions has no effect.
他们的模型显示全球机构的惩罚根本没有效果。
They also say that global summits actually impede cooperation.
他们还坦言全球峰会实际上是在阻碍合作。
Now, in a new report,
现在,在一项新的报告中,
the researchers suggest that if punishment starts getting handed out at the local level, say city governments, what emerges is a much more cooperative global regime for combating climate change.
研究人员建议如果惩罚交予地方一级实施,比如市政府,呈现的则会是一种对抗气候变化更加合作的全球机制。
The only other way for such collaboration to develop was for there to be a perception that the risks associated with climate change were devastating.
这些协作开发唯一的其他方式是使其产生气候变化相关的风险是毁灭性的感觉。
The report is in the journal Nature Climate Change.
这份研究报告已经在《自然气候变化》杂志上发表。
That's not the case at present, despite the reality of the environmental, economic and health threats posed by global warming.
这不是目前的情况,尽管全球变暖已经威胁现实的环境,经济和健康。
In fact, such threats are reminiscent of the risks associated with the ongoing financial crisis, as noted by the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development.
事实上, 经济合作与发展组织的数据指出这种威胁让人想起持续的金融危机。
Nevertheless, the math of how people play games suggests that successfully curbing carbon pollution will rely on the old adage: think globally… act locally.
然而，人们如何玩这场游戏的关键在于成功地遏制碳排放将遵循古老的格言:全球思维，地方行动。
