On the political economy of environmental survival versus collapse. Clarifying the work done by Tinbergen & Hueting vis-à-vis Weitzman, Nordhaus and Stern
The Stern Review (2006) on the economics of climate change presented a cost estimate of perhaps even 20% of national income and subsequently was criticized by Weitzman and Nordhaus and others in a discussion that centered on the use of the calculus of variations and the choice of the proper rate of discount. The Tinbergen & Hueting (1991) approach deals with the wider environmental collapse, is not formulated in the form of the calculus of variations, and arrives at a sustainable level of national income of about 50% of national income. The Tinbergen & Hueting (TH) approach appears to be neglected by Weitzman, Nordhaus and Stern (WNS) but appears to be better grounded in economic theory, mathematically richer and empirically more relevant. This paper clarifies the misunderstandings and omissions in the work by WNS on environmental economics.
Download Info
To download:
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the
proper application to
view it first. Information about this may be contained
in the File-Format links below. 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.
Publisher Info
Paper provided by University Library of Munich, Germany in its series MPRA Paper with number
10001.
Find related papers by JEL classification: E01 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - General - - - Measurement and Data on National Income and Product Accounts and Wealth Q01 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - General - - - Sustainable Development A11 - General Economics and Teaching - - General Economics - - - Role of Economics; Role of Economists
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports: