Climate policy without intertemporal dictatorship: Chichilnisky criterion versus classical utilitarianism in dice

Research output: Contribution to JournalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

Unlike discounting and the damage function, the social welfare function has not received so much attention in the debate on climate economics. An important challenge has been to combine efficiency and equity considerations in a single social welfare framework. The Chichilnisky criterion is one way to resolve this. We consider its implementation in the climate-economy model Dynamic Integrated Climate-Economy (DICE), and compare results for different damage functions, namely the standard one in DICE and the one proposed by Weitzman implying potential large climate damages at high temperature increases. We calculate optimal climate policy for different parameter settings and compare the results with those under the green golden rule (only final utility matters) and classical utilitarianism (no discounting). Optimal emission abatement trajectories turn out to be very different between standard discounted utilitarianism, classical utilitarianism and Chichilnisky specifications. The results are very sensitive to the damage function, the climate sensitivity parameter and especially the "Chichilnisky weight" given to utility of generations in the far future. We discuss conditions and reasons for preferring either classical utilitarianism or the Chichilnisky criterion, and conclude that a critical factor is the time horizon used in climate policy analysis. Adopting sustainable preferences as formalized by the Chichilnisky criterion in climate policy analysis has the advantage that the very long-term implications of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere on the environment and human welfare are not downplayed.

Original languageEnglish
Article number1850002
Pages (from-to)1-17
Number of pages17
JournalClimate Change Economics
Volume9
Issue number2
Early online date12 Dec 2017
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - May 2018

Fingerprint

environmental policy
climate
damage
policy analysis
equity
Climate
Dictatorship
Utilitarianism
Climate policy
greenhouse gas
trajectory
Damage
atmosphere
economics
economy
parameter
social welfare
Policy analysis
Discounting
Integrated

Keywords

  • Chichilnisky welfare criterion
  • classical utilitarianism
  • climate change
  • DICE model
  • Weitzman damage function

Cite this

@article{58798fc822c44cefacd2fa70ca34de0c,
title = "Climate policy without intertemporal dictatorship: Chichilnisky criterion versus classical utilitarianism in dice",
abstract = "Unlike discounting and the damage function, the social welfare function has not received so much attention in the debate on climate economics. An important challenge has been to combine efficiency and equity considerations in a single social welfare framework. The Chichilnisky criterion is one way to resolve this. We consider its implementation in the climate-economy model Dynamic Integrated Climate-Economy (DICE), and compare results for different damage functions, namely the standard one in DICE and the one proposed by Weitzman implying potential large climate damages at high temperature increases. We calculate optimal climate policy for different parameter settings and compare the results with those under the green golden rule (only final utility matters) and classical utilitarianism (no discounting). Optimal emission abatement trajectories turn out to be very different between standard discounted utilitarianism, classical utilitarianism and Chichilnisky specifications. The results are very sensitive to the damage function, the climate sensitivity parameter and especially the {"}Chichilnisky weight{"} given to utility of generations in the far future. We discuss conditions and reasons for preferring either classical utilitarianism or the Chichilnisky criterion, and conclude that a critical factor is the time horizon used in climate policy analysis. Adopting sustainable preferences as formalized by the Chichilnisky criterion in climate policy analysis has the advantage that the very long-term implications of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere on the environment and human welfare are not downplayed.",
keywords = "Chichilnisky welfare criterion, classical utilitarianism, climate change, DICE model, Weitzman damage function",
author = "Botzen, {W. J.Wouter} and {Van Den Bergh}, {Jeroen C.J.M.} and Graciela Chichilnisky",
year = "2018",
month = "5",
doi = "10.1142/S2010007818500021",
language = "English",
volume = "9",
pages = "1--17",
journal = "Climate Change Economics",
issn = "2010-0078",
publisher = "World Scientific Publishing",
number = "2",

}

Climate policy without intertemporal dictatorship : Chichilnisky criterion versus classical utilitarianism in dice. / Botzen, W. J.Wouter; Van Den Bergh, Jeroen C.J.M.; Chichilnisky, Graciela.

In: Climate Change Economics, Vol. 9, No. 2, 1850002, 05.2018, p. 1-17.

Research output: Contribution to JournalArticleAcademicpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Climate policy without intertemporal dictatorship

T2 - Chichilnisky criterion versus classical utilitarianism in dice

AU - Botzen, W. J.Wouter

AU - Van Den Bergh, Jeroen C.J.M.

AU - Chichilnisky, Graciela

PY - 2018/5

Y1 - 2018/5

N2 - Unlike discounting and the damage function, the social welfare function has not received so much attention in the debate on climate economics. An important challenge has been to combine efficiency and equity considerations in a single social welfare framework. The Chichilnisky criterion is one way to resolve this. We consider its implementation in the climate-economy model Dynamic Integrated Climate-Economy (DICE), and compare results for different damage functions, namely the standard one in DICE and the one proposed by Weitzman implying potential large climate damages at high temperature increases. We calculate optimal climate policy for different parameter settings and compare the results with those under the green golden rule (only final utility matters) and classical utilitarianism (no discounting). Optimal emission abatement trajectories turn out to be very different between standard discounted utilitarianism, classical utilitarianism and Chichilnisky specifications. The results are very sensitive to the damage function, the climate sensitivity parameter and especially the "Chichilnisky weight" given to utility of generations in the far future. We discuss conditions and reasons for preferring either classical utilitarianism or the Chichilnisky criterion, and conclude that a critical factor is the time horizon used in climate policy analysis. Adopting sustainable preferences as formalized by the Chichilnisky criterion in climate policy analysis has the advantage that the very long-term implications of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere on the environment and human welfare are not downplayed.

AB - Unlike discounting and the damage function, the social welfare function has not received so much attention in the debate on climate economics. An important challenge has been to combine efficiency and equity considerations in a single social welfare framework. The Chichilnisky criterion is one way to resolve this. We consider its implementation in the climate-economy model Dynamic Integrated Climate-Economy (DICE), and compare results for different damage functions, namely the standard one in DICE and the one proposed by Weitzman implying potential large climate damages at high temperature increases. We calculate optimal climate policy for different parameter settings and compare the results with those under the green golden rule (only final utility matters) and classical utilitarianism (no discounting). Optimal emission abatement trajectories turn out to be very different between standard discounted utilitarianism, classical utilitarianism and Chichilnisky specifications. The results are very sensitive to the damage function, the climate sensitivity parameter and especially the "Chichilnisky weight" given to utility of generations in the far future. We discuss conditions and reasons for preferring either classical utilitarianism or the Chichilnisky criterion, and conclude that a critical factor is the time horizon used in climate policy analysis. Adopting sustainable preferences as formalized by the Chichilnisky criterion in climate policy analysis has the advantage that the very long-term implications of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere on the environment and human welfare are not downplayed.

KW - Chichilnisky welfare criterion

KW - classical utilitarianism

KW - climate change

KW - DICE model

KW - Weitzman damage function

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85045452854&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85045452854&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1142/S2010007818500021

DO - 10.1142/S2010007818500021

M3 - Article

VL - 9

SP - 1

EP - 17

JO - Climate Change Economics

JF - Climate Change Economics

SN - 2010-0078

IS - 2

M1 - 1850002

ER -