Equity weighting and the marginal damage costs of climate change

被引:113
作者
Anthoff, David [1 ,2 ,3 ,4 ]
Hepburn, Cameron [5 ,6 ,7 ]
Tol, Richard S. J. [1 ,3 ,4 ,8 ,9 ]
机构
[1] Econ & Social Res Inst, Dublin 2, Ireland
[2] Int Max Planck Res Sch Earth Syst Modelling, Hamburg, Germany
[3] Univ Hamburg, Res Unit Sustainabil & Global Change, Hamburg, Germany
[4] Ctr Marine & Atmospher Sci, Hamburg, Germany
[5] Univ Oxford, Smith Sch Enterprise & Environm, Oxford, England
[6] Univ Oxford, James Martin Inst, Said Business Sch, Oxford, England
[7] New Coll, Oxford, England
[8] Vrije Univ Amsterdam, Inst Environm Studies, Amsterdam, Netherlands
[9] Carnegie Mellon Univ, Pittsburgh, PA 15213 USA
关键词
Marginal damage costs; Climate change; Equity; GREENHOUSE-GAS EMISSIONS; BENEFIT-ANALYSIS; SOCIAL COST; DISTRIBUTIONAL WEIGHTS; FUND; POLICY; UNCERTAINTY;
D O I
10.1016/j.ecolecon.2008.06.017
中图分类号
Q14 [生态学(生物生态学)];
学科分类号
071012 ; 0713 ;
摘要
Climate change will give rise to different impacts in different countries, and different countries have different levels of development. Equity-weighted estimates of the (marginal) impact of greenhouse gas emissions reflect these differences. This paper analyses the impact of equity weighting on the marginal damage cost of carbon dioxide emissions, and reaches four main conclusions. First, equity-weighted estimates are substantially higher than estimates without equity-weights; equity-weights may even change the sign of the social cost estimates. Second, estimates differ by two orders of magnitude depending on the region to which the equity weights are normalised. Third, equity-weighted estimates are sensitive to the resolution of the impact estimates. Depending on the assumed intra-regional income distribution, estimates may be more than twice as high if national rather than regional impacts are aggregated. Fourth, variations in the assumed inequality aversion have different impacts in different scenarios, not only because different scenarios have different emissions and hence warming, but also because different scenarios have different income differences, different growth rates, and different vulnerabilities. (C) 2008 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:836 / 849
页数:14
相关论文
共 63 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], DISCOUNTING INTERGEN
[2]  
[Anonymous], 2000, SPECIAL REPORT EMISS
[3]  
[Anonymous], 1996, CLIMATE CHANGE 1995
[4]  
[Anonymous], 2006, EC CLIMATE CHANGE ST, DOI DOI 10.1378/CHEST.128.5
[5]  
[Anonymous], CLIMATE CHANGE 1995
[6]  
[Anonymous], CLIMATE CHANGE 1992
[7]  
[Anonymous], 2004, Portuguese Economic Journal
[8]  
[Anonymous], 2002, Int. Environ. Agreem, DOI DOI 10.1023/A:1015034429715
[9]  
ANTHOFF D, 2007, 127 U HAMB RES UNIT
[10]   Weight factors in cost-benefit analysis of climate change [J].
Azar, C .
ENVIRONMENTAL & RESOURCE ECONOMICS, 1999, 13 (03) :249-268