Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Risk aversion - a necessary condition for limiting global environmental risks?


Author Info

  • Ohl, Cornelia
Registered author(s):


    Standard risk economic analysis suggests that global environmental risk is lower in the case of risk aversion than in the case of risk neutrality or risk seeking. Maybe the reason why the Advisory Council of the German Government on Global Environmental Change (WBGU) explicitly recommends to behave as a risk averter when dealing with problems of global risk management. However risk aversion not always guaranties the limitation of a global pollutant, like CO2. To show this the paper focuses on two different landscapes of risk that are motivated by aspects of ecological vulnerability of the nations as well as the country-specific abilities to cope with environmental change. Each is defined in terms of the means – and of the standard deviation ó of the national welfare distributions in different states of emission behaviour. The nations under consideration are either risk neutral, risk averse or risk seeking and are sovereign in taking measures of global risk reduction. Following the assumption of expected utility maximisation it is revealed that taking and enforcing measures of risk reduction critically depend on the interplay of the subjective risk preferences and the landscape of risk induced by the effects of global risk control. Hence, given the national risk preferences, it is the landscape of risk that determines the co-operative power of national risk attitudes and with it attributes the nations as environmental-friendly or not. -- Risikoökonomische Analysen lassen den Schluss zu, dass die Begrenzung globaler Umweltrisiken im Fall der Risikoscheu auf einem höheren Niveau erfolgt als unter Risikoneutralität oder Risikofreude. Möglicherweise empfiehlt deshalb auch der Wissenschaftliche Beirat der Bundesregierung Globale Umweltveränderung (WBGU 2000) bei der globalen Risikobegrenzung eine risikoscheue Haltung einzunehmen. Die vorliegende Analyse zeigt jedoch, dass eine risikoscheue Haltung keine Garantie für die Verringerung globaler Schadstoffe, etwa von CO2, ist. Betrachtet werden zwei Risikolandschaften, die sich durch unterschiedliche Risiko- Ertragsstrukturen auszeichnen. Die Ursache sind länderspezifische Betroffenheitslagen im Fall einer Risikofreisetzung sowie nationale Unterschiede bei der Risikobewältigung. In den Risikolandschaften agieren zwei Länder, die souverän über den Beitritt zu einem internationalen Umweltschutzabkommen entscheiden. Jedes Land optimiert entsprechend seiner länderindividuellen Risikopräferenz (die risikoscheu, risikoneutral oder risikofreudig ausgeprägt sein kann) die jeweils nationale Wohlfahrtslage. Dabei wird deutlich, dass der Beitritt zu einem internationalen Umweltschutzabkommen und die Umsetzung der damit verbundenen Pflichten wesentlich davon abhängen, ob die ?subjektive? Risikobewertung durch die Risikopräferenzen der Staaten mit den ?objektiven? (d.h. von Experten geschätzten) Risiko-Ertragsstrukturen harmonieren. Daraus ergibt sich, dass bei gegebener Risikohaltung der Staaten, letztlich der Typ der vorliegenden Risikolandschaft über die kooperationsfördernde Wirkung des Risikoverhaltens bestimmt und in Folge auch festlegt, welchen Staaten das Attribut der Umweltfreundlichkeit und welchen das des Freifahrers zufällt.

    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.
    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    Bibliographic Info

    Paper provided by Hamburg Institute of International Economics (HWWA) in its series HWWA Discussion Papers with number 190.

    as in new window
    Date of creation: 2002
    Date of revision:
    Handle: RePEc:zbw:hwwadp:26360

    Contact details of provider:
    Postal: Neuer Jungfernstieg 21, D-20347 Hamburg
    Phone: 0049-40-42834-0
    Fax: 0049-40-42834-451
    Web page:
    More information through EDIRC

    Related research



    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
    as in new window
    1. Chichilnisky, Graciela, 2000. "An axiomatic approach to choice under uncertainty with catastrophic risks," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 221-231, July.
    2. Oleg Eismont & Heinz Welsch, 1996. "Optimal greenhouse gas emissions under various assessments of climate change ambiguity," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 8(2), pages 129-140, September.
    3. Kahneman, Daniel & Tversky, Amos, 1979. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(2), pages 263-91, March.
    4. Fisher, Anthony C., 2000. "Investment under uncertainty and option value in environmental economics," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 197-204, July.
    5. Dasgupta, Partha, 1990. "The Environment as a Commodity," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 6(1), pages 51-67, Spring.
    6. Barrett, Scott, 1994. "Self-Enforcing International Environmental Agreements," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 46(0), pages 878-94, Supplemen.
    7. Roughgarden, Tim & Schneider, Stephen H., 1999. "Climate change policy: quantifying uncertainties for damages and optimal carbon taxes," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(7), pages 415-429, July.
    8. Benedick, Richard Elliot, 1999. "Contrasting approaches: the ozone layer, climate change, and resolving the Kyoto dilemma," Discussion Papers, Research Professorship Environmental Policy FS II 99-404, Social Science Research Center Berlin (WZB).
    9. Dasgupta, P., 1990. "The Environment as Commodity.i," Research Paper 84, World Institute for Development Economics Research.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)



    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.


    Access and download statistics


    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:zbw:hwwadp:26360. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (ZBW - German National Library of Economics).

    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.