Regional IAM: analysis of risk-adjusted costs and benefits of climate policies
Across the full range of publications in the field of economics of climate change there is perhaps only one firm agreement: both costs and benefits of climate policy are highly uncertain. In an ideal world one would wait until a good deal of uncertainty is resolved and then make a final decision. Usually in the economic literature it would be interpreted as adopting a relatively weak policy now and adjusting it later. Unfortunately, in the context of path-dependency and irreversibility of climatic events there is no way to preserve a full flexibility for the future: near-term selection of an interim climate policy implies some irreversible consequences. Continued accumulation of GHG in the atmosphere makes some policy targets (expressed in temperature level or GHG ppm concentration) infeasible. The paper examines the application of real option analysis to calculate costs and benefits of an interim climate policy. In contrast to conventional CBA, the proposed methodology also accounts for lost and gained flexibility attributed to the adoption of an interim target.
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.:
- Nordhaus, William D & Yang, Zili, 1996. "A Regional Dynamic General-Equilibrium Model of Alternative Climate-Change Strategies," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 86(4), pages 741-765, September.
- Manne, Alan & Mendelsohn, Robert & Richels, Richard, 1995. "MERGE : A model for evaluating regional and global effects of GHG reduction policies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 23(1), pages 17-34, January.
- Fredrik Hedenus, Christian Azar and Kristian Lindgren, 2006. "Induced Technological Change in a Limited Foresight Optimization Model," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Special I), pages 109-122.
- Dowlatabadi, Hadi, 1998. "Sensitivity of climate change mitigation estimates to assumptions about technical change," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(5-6), pages 473-493, December.
- Ottmar Edenhofer, Kai Lessmann, Nico Bauer, 2006.
"Mitigation Strategies and Costs of Climate Protection: The Effects of ETC in the Hybrid Model MIND,"
The Energy Journal,
International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Special I), pages 207-222.
- Kai Lessmann & Ottmar Edenhofer & Nico Bauer, 2005. "Mitigation Strategies and Costs of Climate Protection: The effects of ETC in the hybrid Model MIND," Working Papers 2005.150, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
- Renaud Crassous, Jean-Charles Hourcade, Olivier Sassi, 2006. "Endogenous Structural Change and Climate Targets Modeling Experiments with Imaclim-R," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Special I), pages 259-276.
- Renaud Crassous & Jean Charles Hourcade & Olivier Sassi, 2006. "Endogenous Structural Change and Climate Targets : Modeling experiments with Imaclim-R," CIRED Working Papers hal-00866411, HAL.
- Anda, Jon & Golub, Alexander & Strukova, Elena, 2009. "Economics of climate change under uncertainty: Benefits of flexibility," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 1345-1355, April.
- David Popp, 2006. "Comparison of Climate Policies in the ENTICE-BR Model," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Special I), pages 163-174.
- Tol, Richard S. J., 1996. "The damage costs of climate change towards a dynamic representation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(1), pages 67-90, October.
- Ortiz, Ramon Arigoni & Golub, Alexander & Lugovoy, Oleg & Markandya, Anil & Wang, James, 2011. "DICER: A tool for analyzing climate policies," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(S1), pages 41-49.
- Toshihiko Masui, Tatsuya Hanaoka, Saeko Hikita, and Mikiko Kainuma, 2006. "Assessment of CO2 Reductions and Economic Impacts Considering Energy-Saving Investments," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Special I), pages 175-190.
- Ramon Arigoni Ortiz & Alexander Golub & Oleg Lugovoy & Anil Markandya & James Wang, 2010. "The DICER Model: Methodological Issues and Initial Results," Working Papers 2010-11, BC3. Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bcc:wpaper:2013-06. 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: (Sergio Faria)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.