Bjorn Lomborg reminds us that "California is handling climate change all wrong." Climate is a global commons and prisoners' dilemma problems are endemic. Go-it-alone California will bear significant costs while the benefits will be negligible.
But people who claim to be on the side of science (and the angels) disagree. Here is a letter to the WSJ editor from Governor Jerry Brown defending the California approach. No mention of Lomborg's key point. Cap-and-trade may be a fine idea (as Brown claims) but he ignores the context.
Prisoner's dilemma is the flip side of gains from trade. The presumed subtlety of the gains-from-trade story is baffling. Most people cooperate; they trade an uncountable number of times and easily see that both parties acquiesce voluntarily -- for obvious reasons. The same people also have eyes and (must) notice that, around the world, those who are more involved in an exchange economy have better lives. How many migrants in the world move away from an exchange economy to one where exchange is absent or difficult?
Bruce Yandle's Bootleggers and Baptists is the best explanation. I do not know whether Jerry Browns' place in all this is as the "Baptist" or as the politician who appreciates the phenomenon. I suppose one can be both. This is not subtle either.