Future harm and current obligations: the case of global warming
There is a time during which aggregate benefits from greenhouse gas emissions dominate costs, but less comfort should be drawn from this situation than current emphasis on double CO2 scenarios suggests. The intertemporal asymmetry of impacts means initial benefits to most regions, from slight global warming, turn into very large economic costs, as warming continues. Economic decisions over what action, if any, to take concerning the greenhouse effect are essentially controlled by the social discount rate. The discount rate chosen implicitly attributes intertemporal weights to welfare and implies a moral stance. Once the future is considered from an ethical perspective a conflict is apparent between the view that the current generation need be unconcerned over the loss or injury caused to future generations, because they will benefit from advances in technology, investments in both man-made and natural capital, and direct bequests, and the requirement to avoid harming the innocent. Changes in units of welfare cannot be viewed as equivalent regardless of their direction. In general, doing harm is not cancelled out by doing good. The result is a rejection of the potential compensation principle and acceptance of the need to carefully consider the moral constraints upon economic activities creating global warming.
|Date of creation:||Jul 1993|
|Date of revision:|
|Publication status:||Published in Ecological Economics 1.10(1994): pp. 27-36|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Ludwigstraße 33, D-80539 Munich, Germany|
Web page: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de
More information through EDIRC
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.:
- Bromley, Daniel W., 1991. "Entitlements, missing markets, and environmental uncertainty: Reply," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 20(3), pages 297-302, May.
- Nordhaus, William D, 1991. "To Slow or Not to Slow: The Economics of the Greenhouse Effect," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 101(407), pages 920-37, July.
- Bromley, Daniel W., 1989. "Entitlements, missing markets, and environmental uncertainty," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 181-194, September.
- Cline, William R, 1991. "Scientific Basis for the Greenhouse Effect," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 101(407), pages 904-19, July.
- R. C. D'Arge & K. C. Kogiku, 1973. "Economic Growth and the Environment," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 40(1), pages 61-77.
- Spash, Clive L. & d'Arge, Ralph C., 1989. "The greenhouse effect and intergenerational transfer," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 88-96, April.
- Robert Ayres & Jörg Walter, 1991. "The greenhouse effect: Damages, costs and abatement," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 1(3), pages 237-270, September.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:39626. 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: (Joachim Winter)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.