[atoav]

Yeah, but this is a game theoretical problem. Let's assume this: the rich per capita emitters say we should look just at absolute number (a metric that by pure coincidence makes them look better) and the worst absolute emitters say we should look only at per capita emissions (a metric which coincidentally makes them look better).

The issue there is that both are right in a certain way. We need to get the absolute emissions down, but to do so fairly the worst emitters per capita should commit to the biggest savings.

Now if both stiffly insist on their position we end up worse off in the long term than if one just gave in.