This kind of dominance seeking approach of diplomacy has been helpful to most of these countries in mitigating possible impacts of discriminations and disparities in as far as power bargaining is concerned. Most countries have therefore opted for bilateral approach based on standards which take care of their participation in equilibrium membership considerations to negotiate their way through. In an attempt to collectively arrive at sound solutions, political and economic approaches employed to promote mutual decision making and negotiations (Bromley et al 2004: 419). Alongside this they have been able to offer them with trade systems that are viable in terms of their development and their political and economic stabilization in as far as differences are concerned. This presentation attempts to outline and evaluate the game theory explanation game theory explanation of the difficulties faced in solving collective action problems amongst different players.
Game Theory Explanation of the Difficulties Faced In Solving Collective Action Problems
Politics and economics have a number of areas that associate them together especially those that are debatable and capable of significant considerations. The arising issue in this aspect is to call on political and economic systems which are favorable to trade rules so as to alleviate potential inequalities which are pertinent between different parties, in this case different states (Bromley et al 2004: 419). This is to imply on operations of the involved parties in ascertaining that they truly reveal their approaches to exercise power or strategies in a more satisfying way for all the parties. There have been instances whereby richer countries have taken advantage of the weaker ones thereby making developing nations hold that only the richer countries are mandated to sail in terms of economic development. This has been particularly the case with the World Trade Organization whereby the richer nations have always been accorded chances to be heard (World Bank 2000). Nevertheless, there have been incidences whereby some of the developing nations aggressively seek co-operation with regard to trade systems and rules. There have been issues underlying such occurrences which have further contributed to positions of developing countries being contrasted, hence identifying reflections on various understandings of international politics. These have mostly been pinned on economic concepts and the differences are deemed to lie with varied views and opinions based on nature of politics. Partially, this has contended views regarding economic and political differences that there are between the developing and developed nations (Bromley et al 2004: 417). There have been efforts especially from the developing countries to promote and set up multilateral forums from which international trade rules and regimes may be negotiated mutually. The main argument attached to this kind of view is the fact that all nations are sovereign in one way or the other; thereby, there is relevance in having all rules and principles formulated in a way that accommodates all the nations regardless of their economic and political positioning. For the case of the WTO, there is no imposition made on any nation to be part of it as a member. However, political approaches emphasize that international systems are indeed a global sovereignty (Bromley et al 2004: 469). This further implies that every member state possesses some aspect of monopolized political system as regards each country’