Discounting Nordhaus
Abstract
This paper evaluates Nordhaus's neoclassical complaints about the Stern Review from the vantage point of classical growth theory. Nordhaus criticizes the Stern Review because it uses a discount rate that is well below the market rate of return on capital. From the perspective of classical growth theory, Nordhaus's belief in choosing preference parameters for the social planner based on observed market rates of return is equivalent to assigning the preferences of the capitalist agents to the social planner. This equivalence is an implication of the Cambridge Theorem, which interprets the Ramsey equation as the saving function of the capitalist agents.Download Info
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Bibliographic Info
Article provided by Taylor and Francis Journals in its journal Review of Political Economy.
Volume (Year): 22 (2010)
Issue (Month): 4 ()
Pages: 535-549
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://taylorandfrancis.metapress.com/link.asp?target=journal&id=102233
Order Information:
Web: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals/subscription.asp
Related research
Keywords:References
No references listed on IDEASYou can help add them by filling out this form.
Citations
Lists
This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.Statistics
Access and download statisticsCorrections
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:revpoe:v:22:y:2010:i:4:p:535-549For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Michael McNulty).
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

