IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ssb/dispap/322.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Political Economy of Global Warming. From Data to Decisions

Author

Listed:

Abstract

This article studies the process from data acquisition to policy decision in relation to an optimum policy on global warming. Policymakers must be reasonably skeptical before proposing remedies to curb warming, but policymakers cannot await the final proof of any proposal's merit. Balancing evidence with doubt requires an informed approach, in which information is converted to knowledge and used to illuminate and compare human welfare connected to different scenarios. This article suggests, normatively, three essential elements for data based policies: evidence, consequence, and strategy. The presented framework for data based policymaking combines results from decision theory, economics, and political theory.

Suggested Citation

  • Erling Røed Larsen, 2002. "The Political Economy of Global Warming. From Data to Decisions," Discussion Papers 322, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
    • Handle: RePEc:ssb:dispap:322
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.ssb.no/a/publikasjoner/pdf/DP/dp-322.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Deirdre N. McCloskey & Stephen T. Ziliak, 1996. "The Standard Error of Regressions," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 34(1), pages 97-114, March.
    2. David F. Bradford, 1997. "On the Uses of Benefit-Cost Reasoning in Choosing Policy Toward Global Climate Change," NBER Working Papers 5920, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Vicki Knoblauch, 2001. "Using elections to represent preferences," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 18(4), pages 823-831.
    4. Keuzenkamp, H.A. & Magnus, J.R., 1995. "On tests and significance in econometrics," Other publications TiSEM 1808e2e0-3805-4999-b9a1-5, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    5. Keuzenkamp, H.A. & Magnus, J.R., 1994. "On tests and significance in econometrics," Other publications TiSEM deda69ee-1b8e-418f-9e1f-d, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    6. Becker, Gary S, 1993. "Nobel Lecture: The Economic Way of Looking at Behavior," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 101(3), pages 385-409, June.
    7. W. Baumol, 2001. "What Marshall Didn't Know: On the Twentieth Century's Contributions to Economics," Voprosy Ekonomiki, NP Voprosy Ekonomiki, vol. 2.
    8. Margaret Forsyth, 2000. "On estimating the option value of preserving a wilderness area," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(2), pages 413-434, May.
    9. Robert M. Solow, 1974. "The Economics of Resources or the Resources of Economics," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Chennat Gopalakrishnan (ed.), Classic Papers in Natural Resource Economics, chapter 12, pages 257-276, Palgrave Macmillan.
    10. Christopher A. Sims, 2001. "Pitfalls of a Minimax Approach to Model Uncertainty," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(2), pages 51-54, May.
    11. Keuzenkamp, Hugo A. & Magnus, Jan R., 1995. "On tests and significance in econometrics," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 67(1), pages 5-24, May.
    12. Kenneth J. Arrow & Anthony C. Fisher, 1974. "Environmental Preservation, Uncertainty, and Irreversibility," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Chennat Gopalakrishnan (ed.), Classic Papers in Natural Resource Economics, chapter 4, pages 76-84, Palgrave Macmillan.
    13. Salvador Barberà, 2001. "An introduction to strategy-proof social choice functions," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 18(4), pages 619-653.
    14. Buchanan, J M, 1998. "Majoritarian Logic," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 97(1-2), pages 13-21, October.
    15. Tol, Richard S. J., 2001. "Equitable cost-benefit analysis of climate change policies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 71-85, January.
    16. W. Michael Hanemann, 1994. "Valuing the Environment through Contingent Valuation," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(4), pages 19-43, Fall.
    17. Weitzman, Martin L., 1998. "Why the Far-Distant Future Should Be Discounted at Its Lowest Possible Rate," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 201-208, November.
    18. 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.
    19. Fernandez, Raquel & Rodrik, Dani, 1991. "Resistance to Reform: Status Quo Bias in the Presence of Individual-Specific Uncertainty," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 81(5), pages 1146-1155, December.
    20. James Buchanan, 2002. "Game theory, mathematics, and economics," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(1), pages 27-32.
    21. John Geweke & John Rust & Herman K. Van Dijk, 2000. "Introduction: inference and decision making," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(6), pages 545-546.
    22. Lawrence H. Summers, 2000. "International Financial Crises: Causes, Prevention, and Cures," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 90(2), pages 1-16, May.
    23. Moretto, Michele, 2000. "Irreversible investment with uncertainty and strategic behavior," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 17(4), pages 589-617, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Michaelides, Michael, 2021. "Large sample size bias in empirical finance," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    2. Jae H. Kim & Kamran Ahmed & Philip Inyeob Ji, 2018. "Significance Testing in Accounting Research: A Critical Evaluation Based on Evidence," Abacus, Accounting Foundation, University of Sydney, vol. 54(4), pages 524-546, December.
    3. Kevin Hoover & Mark Siegler, 2008. "Sound and fury: McCloskey and significance testing in economics," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(1), pages 1-37.
    4. W. Botzen & Jeroen Bergh, 2014. "Specifications of Social Welfare in Economic Studies of Climate Policy: Overview of Criteria and Related Policy Insights," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 58(1), pages 1-33, May.
    5. Jae H. Kim & Andrew P. Robinson, 2019. "Interval-Based Hypothesis Testing and Its Applications to Economics and Finance," Econometrics, MDPI, vol. 7(2), pages 1-22, May.
    6. Muhammad Ishaq Bhatti & Jae H. Kim, 2020. "Towards a New Paradigm for Statistical Evidence in the Use of p -Value," Econometrics, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-3, December.
    7. Kim, Jae H. & Ji, Philip Inyeob, 2015. "Significance testing in empirical finance: A critical review and assessment," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 1-14.
    8. Stephen T. Ziliak & Deirdre N. McCloskey, 2004. "Size Matters: The Standard Error of Regressions in the American Economic Review," Econ Journal Watch, Econ Journal Watch, vol. 1(2), pages 331-358, August.
    9. Meszaros, Sandor, 2008. "Theory testing (hypothesis testing) in agricultural economics," Studies in Agricultural Economics, Research Institute for Agricultural Economics, vol. 107, pages 1-13, March.
    10. Jae H. Kim, 2022. "Moving to a world beyond p-value," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 16(8), pages 2467-2493, November.
    11. Jan R. Magnus, 2019. "On Using the t -Ratio as a Diagnostic," Econometrics, MDPI, vol. 7(2), pages 1-3, May.
    12. Thomas Mayer, 2012. "Ziliak and McCloskey's Criticisms of Significance Tests: An Assessment," Econ Journal Watch, Econ Journal Watch, vol. 9(3), pages 256-297, September.
    13. Thomas Mayer, 2006. "The Empirical Significance of Econometric Models," Working Papers 620, University of California, Davis, Department of Economics.
    14. Bardsen, Gunnar & Eitrheim, Oyvind & Jansen, Eilev S. & Nymoen, Ragnar, 2005. "The Econometrics of Macroeconomic Modelling," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199246502, Decembrie.
    15. Kim, Jae & Choi, In, 2015. "Unit Roots in Economic and Financial Time Series: A Re-Evaluation based on Enlightened Judgement," MPRA Paper 68411, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    16. Chris Doucouliagos & T.D. Stanley, 2013. "Are All Economic Facts Greatly Exaggerated? Theory Competition And Selectivity," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(2), pages 316-339, April.
    17. Charles G. Renfro, 2009. "The Practice of Econometric Theory," Advanced Studies in Theoretical and Applied Econometrics, Springer, number 978-3-540-75571-5, February.
    18. Thomas Mayer, 2012. "Ziliak and McClosky?s Criticisms of Significance Tests: A Damage Assessment," Working Papers 61, University of California, Davis, Department of Economics.
    19. Kim, Jae, 2015. "How to Choose the Level of Significance: A Pedagogical Note," MPRA Paper 66373, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    20. Thomas Mayer, 2012. "Ziliak and McClosky?s Criticisms of Significance Tests: A Damage Assessment," Working Papers 126, University of California, Davis, Department of Economics.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    data based; decision making; global warming; loss function; policymaking; social welfare; strategy; type-I error;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C44 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods: Special Topics - - - Operations Research; Statistical Decision Theory
    • D78 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Positive Analysis of Policy Formulation and Implementation
    • H10 - Public Economics - - Structure and Scope of Government - - - General
    • Q28 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Government Policy

    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:ssb:dispap:322. 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: L Maasø (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ssbgvno.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.