Climate Policy under Sustainable Discounted Utilitarianism



Table 2. Change in expected stationary equivalent
of 2 CO
2 and 1.5 CO2 policies compared with
business as usual, according to SDU and DU.

Abatement

SDU

5%

DU

policy

5%

Mean

95%

Mean

95%

2 CO2

-0.13

4.70

0.72

-0.14

0.20

0.67

1.5 CO2

-1.69

3.83

0.51

-1.70

-0.67

0.41

aversion is set to two. For these (and all subsequent) calculations, we use the full
modelling horizon from 2005 to 2395.

The table contains our core result, showing that willingness to pay for emissions
abatement is significantly larger under SDU than under DU. For the 2 CO
2 policy,
the expected increase in the stationary equivalent is 4.7% under SDU, over twentyfold
higher than the corresponding estimate of 0.2% under DU. For the 1.5 CO
2 policy,
the expected increase is 3.83% under SDU, but -0.67% under DU. Intriguingly, this
policy reduces social welfare according to DU, but according to SDU it increases it.
These results follow directly from the finding, detailed in Figure 1, that consumption
is more likely to fall under business as usual than under either of the two abatement
policies. SDU places greater value on these policies than DU as a consequence: they
are more likely to guarantee sustainability, defined as non-decreasing wellbeing.

What Table 2 also shows is the influence of uncertainty, specifically the small
number of random draws in which climate damage is severe. This is evident in
comparing the expected change in the stationary equivalent with the 95th percentile
change under SDU. For both policies, the expected change is in fact greater than the
95th percentile, indicating that a few random draws (less than 5%) have a change
in the stationary equivalent so large as to drive the expectation above the 95th
percentile. This is one way of showing that concerns about intergenerational equity
and concerns about uncertainty are closely linked in the context of climate change.

Figure 2 explores the sensitivity of the expected change in the stationary equiva-
lent as estimated under both SDU and DU to ρ. We examine values for ρ
(0, 0.05)
(corresponding to a range for the decadal discount factor of 1-0.62). It is evident
that, in line with the distribution of near-term abatement costs and longer-term ben-
efits, the expected change in the stationary equivalent of the two abatement policies
is a decreasing function of ρ, both under SDU and under DU. Indeed, it falls rapidly
as ρ is initially increased from 0.

19



More intriguing information

1. Work Rich, Time Poor? Time-Use of Women and Men in Ireland
2. The Value of Cultural Heritage Sites in Armenia: Evidence From a Travel Cost Method Study
3. Foreign Direct Investment and the Single Market
4. Tissue Tracking Imaging for Identifying the Origin of Idiopathic Ventricular Arrhythmias: A New Role of Cardiac Ultrasound in Electrophysiology
5. The name is absent
6. Micro-strategies of Contextualization Cross-national Transfer of Socially Responsible Investment
7. Food Prices and Overweight Patterns in Italy
8. Imputing Dairy Producers' Quota Discount Rate Using the Individual Export Milk Program in Quebec
9. School Effectiveness in Developing Countries - A Summary of the Research Evidence
10. Do imputed education histories provide satisfactory results in fertility analysis in the Western German context?
11. A Location Game On Disjoint Circles
12. The name is absent
13. The economic value of food labels: A lab experiment on safer infant milk formula
14. Personal Income Tax Elasticity in Turkey: 1975-2005
15. TECHNOLOGY AND REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT: THE CASE OF PATENTS AND FIRM LOCATION IN THE SPANISH MEDICAL INSTRUMENTS INDUSTRY.
16. Correlation Analysis of Financial Contagion: What One Should Know Before Running a Test
17. The name is absent
18. Studying How E-Markets Evaluation Can Enhance Trust in Virtual Business Communities
19. The name is absent
20. The resources and strategies that 10-11 year old boys use to construct masculinities in the school setting