Climate Policy under Sustainable Discounted Utilitarianism



and is equivalent to a few percent of output. Unfortunately, what the impacts of
climate change will be for larger amounts of global warming remains largely in the
realm of guesswork (Weitzman, 2009), due to possible non-linearities in the biophys-
ical and socio-economic response to changes in climate variables, as well as possible
singularities in the climate system itself (e.g. a collapse in the Antarctic ice sheet,
or a shutdown in the ocean circulation), all of which are very poorly understood at
present. This points the spotlight at the functional form for damages.

There has never been any stronger justification for the assumption of quadratic
damages than the general supposition of a non-linear relationship, added to the fact
that quadratic functions are of a familiar form to economists, with a tractable linear
first derivative (i.e. the marginal benefit function of emissions reductions). However,
when extrapolated to large temperature levels, the implications of a quadratic func-
tion have recently been cast in doubt. Both Ackerman et al. (2010) and Weitzman
(2010b) have shown that, with Nordhaus' (2008) calibration of eq. (7), 5
oC warming
results in a loss of utility equivalent to just 6% of output, despite such warming being
equivalent to the difference between the present global mean temperature and the
temperature at the peak of the last ice age, while it takes around 18
oC of warming
for losses in utility to exceed the equivalent of 50% of output.

There are various ways to remedy what is increasingly regarded as an implausible
forecast (Ackerman et al., 2010; Stern Review, 2007; Weitzman, 2009). Following
eq. (7), utility losses can be ramped up by increasing the coefficients α
1 and α2 ,
but only at the expense of unrealistically large losses in utility for the initial 3
o C
warming. Conceptually, much follows from the specification of the utility function.
Working with a standard utility function whose sole argument is consumption of the
composite good, we can introduce a higher-order term into the damage function to
capture greater non-linearity, as Weitzman (2010b) does.
9 We specify the following
function:
where α
3 is a normally distributed random coefficient with mean and standard devi-
ation reported in Table 1. The remaining coefficients α
1 and α2 are as in Nordhaus
(2008). If α
3 takes its mean value, 5oC warming results in a loss of utility equiva-
lent to around 7% of output, while 50% of output is not lost until the global mean

Ω(T ) =


1 + αιTt + α2Tt2 + α3Tt7 ,


(8)


9 The alternative is to specify utility as a function not only of consumption but also of environ-
mental quality directly, for example indexed by global mean warming.

15



More intriguing information

1. The name is absent
2. Conservation Payments, Liquidity Constraints and Off-Farm Labor: Impact of the Grain for Green Program on Rural Households in China
3. Fiscal federalism and Fiscal Autonomy: Lessons for the UK from other Industrialised Countries
4. Spatial agglomeration and business groups: new evidence from Italian industrial districts
5. The name is absent
6. fMRI Investigation of Cortical and Subcortical Networks in the Learning of Abstract and Effector-Specific Representations of Motor Sequences
7. The name is absent
8. Nietzsche, immortality, singularity and eternal recurrence1
9. The mental map of Dutch entrepreneurs. Changes in the subjective rating of locations in the Netherlands, 1983-1993-2003
10. Should Local Public Employment Services be Merged with the Local Social Benefit Administrations?
11. The Effects of Reforming the Chinese Dual-Track Price System
12. The name is absent
13. LIMITS OF PUBLIC POLICY EDUCATION
14. The name is absent
15. The name is absent
16. The name is absent
17. Cardiac Arrhythmia and Geomagnetic Activity
18. Restricted Export Flexibility and Risk Management with Options and Futures
19. The name is absent
20. EU enlargement and environmental policy