Introduction to the Mercury Negotiation Simulation Created by: Leah Stokes, Dr. Noelle Selin, Dr. Lawrence E. Susskind Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Agenda Game objectives Playing your role The players The options

Game objectives To explore the roles scientific information, scientific uncertainty and scientists play in the international mercury negotiations To explore the interaction between science and political concerns in environmental negotiations. To think about how to negotiate with multiple parties, including issues such as: coalitions, issue linkage and option-creation.

Playing your role Each player has: 1) General instructions 2) Role specific confidential instructions 3) A copy of the International Mercury Assessment (IMA) You will have 30 minutes to review these materials and prepare your opening statement and position.

Playing your role The game situation is fictionalized, yet realistic. The scientific facts in the International Mercury Assessment are all true. The generals and confidentials provide context and roles for the game based on the actual negotiations. These documents summarize key issues, and are illustrative rather than comprehensive. The game focuses on the science, asking is there sufficient information to proceed with formal negotiations?

Playing your role The game has flexibility: It will be up to you how you play the role. You can be creative. You still need to reflect the direction in your confidentials Timing: 30 minutes preparation (prepare opening statements) 1 hour of negotiations 15 minute break out for informal negotiations 30 minutes of negotiation

The players Japan is the Chair Brazil, also representing GRULAC Canada European Union People’s Republic of China United Republic of Tanzania, also representing the African Group United States of America The country roles were chosen to illustrate international environmental negotiation dynamics.

The players NGOs/IGOs also participate in this meeting, sharing information: The Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme Mercury Free Future World Coal Power Association Countries are given speaking priority over NGOs/IGOs.

The options There are four issues and a series of related options. Your role ranks these options at the end of your confidentials. You can be creative. If you want to add another option, you can – that is up to the group to discuss The options set the context for the negotiations Consider the linkages between issues; you may wish to discuss all four issues before commitments are made.

The options Issue 1: Form of future action Voluntary agreement: This action would likely be faster It may not lead to as much action or financial commitments. It may allow for the science to evolve over time. Formal negotiations for a legally binding Convention: This action would likely take longer. It may bind parties more effectively than a voluntary agreement. It would likely set common rules and guidelines (i.e. Best Available Technology)

Questions? mit.edu/mercurygame mercurygame@mit.edu