IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/11863.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Perception and Valuation of the Risks of Climate Change: A Rational and Behavioral Blend

Author

Listed:
  • W. Kip Viscusi
  • Richard Zeckhauser

Abstract

Over 250 respondents--graduate students in law and public policy--assessed the risks of climate change and valued climate-change mitigation policies. Many aspects of their behavior were consistent with rational behavior. For example, respondents successfully estimated distributions of temperature increases in Boston by 2100. The median value of best estimates was 1-3 degrees Fahrenheit. In addition, people with higher risk estimates, whether for temperature or related risks (e.g., hurricane intensities) offered more to avoid warming. Median willingness to pay (WTP) to avoid global warming was $0.50/gallon, and 3% of income. And important scope tests (e.g., respondents paid more for bigger accomplishments) were passed. However, significant behavioral propensities also emerged. For example, accessibility of neutral information on global warming boosted risk estimates. Warming projections correlated with estimates for unrelated risks, such as earthquakes and heart attacks. The implied WTP for avoidance was much greater when asked as a percent of income than as a gas tax, a percent thinking bias. Home team betting showed itself; individuals predicting a Bush victory predicted smaller temperature increases. In the climate-change arena, behavioral decision tendencies are like a fun-house mirror: They magnify some estimates and shrink others, but the contours of rational decision remain recognizable.

Suggested Citation

  • W. Kip Viscusi & Richard Zeckhauser, 2005. "The Perception and Valuation of the Risks of Climate Change: A Rational and Behavioral Blend," NBER Working Papers 11863, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:11863
    Note: EH LE PE EEE
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w11863.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Israel Debra & Levinson Arik, 2004. "Willingness to Pay for Environmental Quality: Testable Empirical Implications of the Growth and Environment Literature," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 3(1), pages 1-31, February.
    2. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    3. David Laibson, 1997. "Golden Eggs and Hyperbolic Discounting," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 112(2), pages 443-478.
    4. R. H. Strotz, 1955. "Myopia and Inconsistency in Dynamic Utility Maximization," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 23(3), pages 165-180.
    5. Joseph E. Aldy & Scott Barrett & Robert N. Stavins, 2003. "Thirteen plus one: a comparison of global climate policy architectures," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 3(4), pages 373-397, December.
    6. Kahneman, Daniel & Knetsch, Jack L., 1992. "Valuing public goods: The purchase of moral satisfaction," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 57-70, January.
    7. Richard B. Stewart & Jonathan B. Wiener, 2003. "Reconstructing Climate Policy," Books, American Enterprise Institute, number 53156, September.
    8. Kahneman, Daniel, 2002. "Maps of Bounded Rationality," Nobel Prize in Economics documents 2002-4, Nobel Prize Committee.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Onno J. Kuik & Barbara Bucher & Michela Catenacci & Etem Karakaya & Richard S.J. Tol, 2006. "Methodological aspects of recent climate change damage cost studies," Working Papers FNU-122, Research unit Sustainability and Global Change, Hamburg University, revised Dec 2006.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Joni Hersch & W. Kip Viscusi, 2005. "The Generational Divide in Support for Environmental Policies: European Evidence," NBER Working Papers 11859, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Mario GRAZIANO & Daniele SCHILIRÒ, 2011. "Rationality And Choices In Economics: Behavioral And Evolutionary Approaches," Theoretical and Practical Research in the Economic Fields, ASERS Publishing, vol. 2(2), pages 182-195.
    3. Uri Ben-Zion & Jan Pieter Krahnen & TAL SHAVIT, 2007. "Subjective Evaluation Of Delayed Risky Outcomes: An Experimental Approach," Working Papers 0709, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Department of Economics.
    4. Maria Alessandra Antonelli & Valeria De Bonis & Angelo Castaldo & Alessandrao Gandolfo, 2022. "Sin goods taxation: an encompassing model," Public Finance Research Papers 52, Istituto di Economia e Finanza, DSGE, Sapienza University of Rome.
    5. Zachary Breig, 2020. "Prediction and Model Selection in Experiments," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 96(313), pages 153-176, June.
    6. Francesco Cerigioni, 2021. "Dual Decision Processes: Retrieving Preferences When Some Choices Are Automatic," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 129(6), pages 1667-1704.
    7. Ali al-Nowaihi & Sanjit Dhami, 2018. "Foundations for Intertemporal Choice," CESifo Working Paper Series 6913, CESifo.
    8. David Laibson & Andrea Repetto & Jeremy Tobacman, 2005. "Estimating Discount Functions with Consumption Choices over the Lifecycle," Levine's Bibliography 784828000000000643, UCLA Department of Economics.
    9. Richard H. Thaler, 2016. "Behavioral Economics: Past, Present, and Future," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 106(7), pages 1577-1600, July.
    10. Scholten, Marc & Read, Daniel, 2006. "Beyond discounting: the tradeoff model of intertemporal choice," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 22710, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    11. Kazuhiro Miyagawa & Tadanobu Misawa & Tetsuya Shimokawa, 2011. "The role of the orbitofrontal cortex in human adaptive learning under strategic environments," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 31(3), pages 2284-2297.
    12. Han, Ruokang & Takahashi, Taiki, 2012. "Psychophysics of time perception and valuation in temporal discounting of gain and loss," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 391(24), pages 6568-6576.
    13. Ludwig, Alexander & Groneck, Max & Zimper, Alexander, 2021. "Who Saves More, the Naive or the Sophisticated Agent?," CEPR Discussion Papers 16412, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    14. Brigitte C. Madrian, 2014. "Applying Insights from Behavioral Economics to Policy Design," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 6(1), pages 663-688, August.
    15. Lisa A. Robinson & James K. Hammitt, 2013. "Behavioral economics and the conduct of benefit–cost analysis: towards principles and standards," Chapters, in: Scott O. Farrow & Richard Zerbe, Jr. (ed.), Principles and Standards for Benefit–Cost Analysis, chapter 10, pages 317-363, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    16. Klaus Wälde, 2015. "Stress and Coping - An Economic Approach," LIDAM Discussion Papers IRES 2015018, Université catholique de Louvain, Institut de Recherches Economiques et Sociales (IRES).
    17. Schilirò, Daniele, 2011. "Decisioni e razionalità in economia [Decisions and rationality in economics]," MPRA Paper 29477, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    18. Neszveda, G., 2019. "Essays on behavioral finance," Other publications TiSEM 05059039-5236-42a3-be1b-3, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    19. Alexander K. Koch & Julia Nafziger, 2011. "Self‐regulation through Goal Setting," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 113(1), pages 212-227, March.
    20. Christine Jolls, 2007. "Behavioral Law and Economics," NBER Working Papers 12879, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • Q25 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Water
    • H23 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Externalities; Redistributive Effects; Environmental Taxes and Subsidies

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:11863. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.