1 / 8

Policy ramp versus big bang: optimal global mitigation policy

Policy ramp versus big bang: optimal global mitigation policy. Economic consensus: the bottom line. “Virtually every activity directly or indirectly involves combustion of fossil fuels, producing emissions of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.

alesia
Download Presentation

Policy ramp versus big bang: optimal global mitigation policy

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Policy ramp versus big bang:optimal global mitigation policy

  2. Economic consensus: the bottom line • “Virtually every activity directly or indirectly involves combustion of fossil fuels, producing emissions of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. • Single bottom line for policy: “correct this market failure by ensuring that: • all people, everywhere, and for the indefinite future are confronted with a market price for the use of carbon that reflects the social costs of their activities.” Nordhaus et al. (2008)

  3. Discounting – Ramsey equation • Ramsey optimal growth model: • central framework for thinking about dynamic investment decisions • organizing principle for setting long-run discount rates • The Ramsey equation holds in the welfare optimum • r = ρ + ƞ *g • ρ: rate at which utility from consumption is discounted • ƞ: How quickly marginal utility falls as consumption rises. Utility(c) low ƞ social rate of time preference elasticity of marginal utility of consumption real return on capital growth rate of consumption high ƞ ct ct+1 c: consumption

  4. Discounting • SR approach—prescriptive/normative • r = ρ + ƞg = 0.1% + 1*1.3% = 1.4%. • ρ: favors a “low” social rate of time preference = 0.1% • Argument: the only ethical reason to discount future generations is that they might not be there at all (e.g. cataclysmic comet) [consistent with Frank Ramsey] • Prob. of extinction: 0.1%/year • g: growth rate of consumption ~ 1.3%; • ƞ: elasticity of marginal utility of consumption = 1 • (intergenerational) inequality aversion: lower • Nordhaus approach--descriptive/positive • ρ = 1.5% (assumed, Nordhaus 2008, p. 51) • ƞ = 2 (calibrated, given r, ρand g) • (intergenerational) inequality aversion: higher • r = 6.5% in 2015, falls over time to 4.5% in 2095 as g falls (in DICE 2007, Arrow et al. 2012)

  5. Comparison of the discount rate Discount weight under various assumptions The level at any given time t represents the weight given to consumption arriving at year t. Discount weight

  6. Damages SR used a level of GHG damage at the high end of the expected range. • The ratio of aggregate damages to the size of the economy ($D/$GDP) 100 years from now • commonly assumed: 1-4%. (Weitzman, 2007) • SR: >= 5% Nordhaus (2008, p. 51)

  7. Some conclusions • Weitzman (2007): `On the political side … my most-charitable interpretation of (the Stern Review’s) urgent tone is that the report is … • an essay in persuasion… • that is more about gut instincts regarding the horrors of uncertain rare disasters whose probabilities we do not know… • than it is about (conventional) economic analysis. • SR might be right (“act now”) for the wrong reasons (due to bad model parameters instead of a careful analysis of uncertainty).’

  8. The role of uncertainty in climate change policy—Weitzman (2009) • What happens to expected utility-based BCA for fat-tailed disasters? • Can “turn thin-tail-based climate-change policy on it’s head” (p. 2). • Concretely: a fat-tailed distribution over a climate sensitivity parameter (S) which maps CO2 changes into temperature changes. • Can drive applications of EU theory more than discounting (p. 5).

More Related