Advertisement

Environment, Development and Sustainability

, Volume 13, Issue 4, pp 703–725 | Cite as

Measuring future dynamics of genuine saving with changes of population and technology: application of an integrated assessment model

  • Koji Tokimatsu
  • Rintaro Yamaguchi
  • Masayuki Sato
  • Rieko Yasuoka
  • Masahiro Nishio
  • Kazuhiro Ueta
Article

Abstract

Theoretical and empirical studies have been conducted on the genuine saving (GS) based on neoclassical economic theory to assess sustainable development (SD). However, only market prices and statistical national accounts have been used in empirical studies due to limited data availability. The data availability limits to measure GS only in the past and current, causing a wide gap with theoretical results. In this paper, we propose computing GS using an integrated assessment model (IAM) as connected to the mainframe model of macroeconomy. This enables us to use shadow prices, rather than market prices, obtained through an IAM, which ensures substantial consistency among variables. An example would be endogenous capital–output ratio and the rate of TFP. Also, our indicator of GS is more comprehensive in that they now account for various resources, environmental degradation, and land use. Our simulation results, with a particular focus on GS with population change (GSn) and with technological change as well (GSnt), show a sustainable future for up to the end of the century thanks to declining population in the latter half of the century and technological progress, although GS without accounting for population and technology tend to be negative, driven by, among others, capital depreciation and net primary productivity degraded by land use.

Keywords

Genuine saving Future dynamics Population change Technological change Integrated assessment model 

JEL classifications

Q01 Q56 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors express their sincere appreciation to Kyoto University, the National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology (AIST), and the Institute of Applied Energy (IAE) for their hospitality and support. The model used in this study is based on our earlier collaboration with Takanobu Kosugi (Ritsumeikan University), Tsuyosi Adachi and Shinsuke Murakami (The University of Tokyo), Norihiro Itsubo (Tokyo City University), Ryota Ii (Pacific Consulting, Co., Ltd.), Atsushi Kurosawa (IAE), Hideto Miyachika (SRC, Co., Ltd.,). The lead author (K.T.) expresses his gratitude to those who collaborate with him in developing the model.

References

  1. Arrow, K. J., Dasgupta, P. et al., (2004). Are we consuming too much? Journal of Economic Perspectives, 18(3 Summer), 147–172.Google Scholar
  2. Arrow, K. J., Dasgupta, P. et al., (2007). China, the U.S., and sustainability: Perspectives based on comprehensive wealth. Stanford Center for International Development (Working paper No. 313).Google Scholar
  3. Arrow, K. J., Dasgupta, P. et al., (2010). Sustainability and the measurement of wealth, memorandum.Google Scholar
  4. Arrow, K. J., Dasgupta, P., & Mäler, K.-G. (2003). The genuine savings criterion and the value of population. Economic Theory, 21(2/3), 217–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Asheim, G. B. (2004). Green national accounting with a changing population. Economic Theory, 23(3), 601–619.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Asheim, G. B., Mitra, T., & Tungodden B. (2008). Sustainable recursive social welfare functions. Access date October 10, 2010, from http://folk.uio.no/gasheim/srswf02.pdf. Memorandum, Oslo University, Department of Economics.
  7. Bulckaen, F., & Stampini, A. M. (2009). On shadow prices for the measurement of sustainability. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 11(6), 1197–1213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chichilnisky, G. (1996). An axiomatic approach to sustainable development. Social Choice and Welfare, 13(2), 219–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cuaresma, J. C., & Lutz, W. (2007). Human capital, age structure and economic growth: Evidence from a new dataset. Interim Report IR-07-011, IIASA, Luxemburg, Austria.Google Scholar
  10. Cure, J. D., & Acock, B. (1986). Crop responses to carbon dioxide doubling, a literature survey. Agriculture and Forest Meteorology, 38, 127–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dasgupta, P. (2001). Human well-being and the natural environment. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dasgupta, P. (2005). Sustainable economic development in the world of today’s poor. In R. D. Simpson, M. A. Toman, & R. U. Ayres (Eds.), Scarcity and growth revisited: Natural resources and the environment in the new millennium. Washington, DC: Resources for the Future.Google Scholar
  13. Dasgupta, P. (2009). The welfare economic theory of green national accounts. Environmental & Resource Economics, 42(1), 3–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Dasgupta, P., & Heal, G. M. (1974). The optimal depletion of exhaustible resources. Review of Economic Studies, 41, 3–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dasgupta, P., & Heal, G. M. (1979). Economic theory and exhaustible resources. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Dixit, A., Hammond, P., & Hoel, M. (1980). On Hartwick’s rule for regular maximin paths of capital accumulation and resource depletion. Review of Economic Studies, 47(3), 551–556.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Energy Data and Modeling Center, Institute of Energy Economics (EDMC/IEE). (2002). Handbook of energy and economic statistics in Japan 2002. Energy Conservation Center, Tokyo.Google Scholar
  18. Environment Agency of Japan. (2000). Threatened wildlife of JapanRed data book. (2nd ed., Vol. 8). Vascular plants. Tokyo: Japan Wildlife Research Center.Google Scholar
  19. European Commission. (1999). ExternE–Externalities of energy, Vol. 8: Global warming (EUR 18836). Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg.Google Scholar
  20. ExternE, ExternE-Externalities of Energy. A research project of the European commission. Access date October 10, 2010, from http://www.externe.info/.
  21. Gollin, D. (2002). Getting income shares right. Journal of Political Economy, 110(2), 458–474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hall, R. E., & Jones, C. I. (1999). Why do some countries produce so much more output per worker than others? The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 114(1), 83–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hamilton, K. (2003). Sustaining economic welfare: Estimating changes in total and per capita wealth. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 5(3/4), 419–436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hamilton, K. (2004). Accounting for sustainability. In Organization Economic co-operation and development (OECD), measuring sustainable development: Integrated economic, environmental and social frameworks (pp. 29–37). Paris: OECD.Google Scholar
  25. Hamilton, K., & Atkinson, G. (2006). Wealth, welfare and sustainability: Advances in measuring sustainable development. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  26. Hamilton, K., & Clemens, M. (1999). Genuine savings rates in developing countries. The World Bank Economic Review, 13(2), 333–356.Google Scholar
  27. Hamilton, K., Dietz, S., & Neumayer, E. (Eds.). (2007). Handbook of sustainable development. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  28. Hamilton, K., & Hartwick, J. M. (2005). Investing exhaustible resource rents and the path of consumption. Canadian Journal of Economics, 38(2), 615–621.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hanley, N. et al., (1999). Measuring sustainability: A time series of alternative indicators for Scotland. Ecological Economics, 28(1), 55–73.Google Scholar
  30. Hayashi, K., Nakagawa, A., Itsubo, N., Inaba, A. (2002). Assessment of impacts due to additional emission of ozone depleting substances. In Proceedings of 5th international conference on EcoBalance (pp. 33–36). Tokyo: The Society of Non-Traditional Technology.Google Scholar
  31. Hayashi, K., Okazaki, M., Itsubo, N., Inaba, A. (2004). Development of damage function of acidification for terrestrial ecosystems based on the effect of aluminum toxicity on net primary production. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 9, 13–22.Google Scholar
  32. Honda, Y., Ono, M., Sasaki, A., & Uchiyama, I. (1998). Shift of the short-term temperature mortality relationship by a climate factor–some evidence necessary to take account of in estimating the health effect of global warming. Journal of Risk Research, 1, 209–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Ii, R., Ikemoto, G., Abe, K., Nakagawa, A., Itsubo, N., & Inaba, A. (2002). Life cycle impact assessment for office building considering land use and related impact categories. In Proceedings of 5th international conference on EcoBalance (pp. 367–370). Tokyo: The Society of Non-Traditional Technology.Google Scholar
  34. Itaoka, K., Uchida, H., Itsubo, N., & Inaba, A. (2002). Development of damage functions of GHG on human health. In Proceedings of 5th international conference on EcoBalance (pp. 37–40). Tokyo: The Society of Non-Traditional Technology.Google Scholar
  35. Itsubo, N. et al., (2000). Screening life cycle impact assessment with weighting methodology based on simplified damage functions. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 5(5), 273–280.Google Scholar
  36. Itsubo, N., Sakagami, M., Washida, T., Kokubu, K., & Inaba, A. (2005). Weighting across safeguard subjects for LCIA by the application of conjoint analysis. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 9(3), 196–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Iwaki, H. (1981). Regional distribution of phytomass resources in Japan. Environmental Information Science, 10, 54–61. (in Japanese).Google Scholar
  38. Koopmans, T. C. (1967). Objectives, constraints, and outcomes in optimal growth models. Econometrica, 35(1), 1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Kosugi, T., Tokimatsu, K. et al., (2009). Internalization of the external costs of global environmental damage in an integrated assessment model. Energy Policy, 37(7), 2664–2678.Google Scholar
  40. Kunte, A. et al., (1998). Estimating national wealth: Methodology and results. Washington, DC: The World Bank (Environment Department Working Papers No. 57).Google Scholar
  41. Kurosawa, A., & Itsubo, N. et al., (2007). Linking integrated assessment models (IAMs) with life cycle impact assessment (LCIA): Methodological issues, IPCC TGICA. Expert meeting “Integrating analysis of regional climate change and response options”. Meeting report. Access date October 10, 2010, from http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/supporting-material/tgica_reg-meet-fiji-2007.pdf.
  42. Kurosawa, A. et al., (1999). Analysis of carbon emission stabilization targets and adaptation by integrated assessment model. The Energy Journal, (Kyoto Special Issue), 157–175.Google Scholar
  43. Martens, W. J. M., Jetten, T. H., & Focks, D. A. (1997). Sensitivity of malaria, schistosomiasis and dengue to global warming. Climatic Change, 35, 145–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Matsuda, H. (2000). Environmental ecology: A synthesis of sustainable fisheries, biodiversity conservation, ecosystem management and environmental impact assessment. Tokyo: Kyoritsu Publishing. (in Japanese).Google Scholar
  45. Matsuda, H., Serizawa, S., Ueda, K., Kato, T., & Yahara, T. (2003). Extinction risk assessment of vascular plants in the 2005 world exposition, Japan. Chemosphere, 53, 325–336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Matsuoka, Y., & Kai, K. (1995). An estimation of climatic change effects on malaria. Journal of Global Environmental Engineering, 1, 43–47.Google Scholar
  47. Nagata, Y., Ohara, T., Itsubo, N., & Inaba, A. (2002). Development of damage functions of air pollutants considering local conditions of Japan. In Proceedings of 5th international conference on EcoBalance (pp. 41–44). Tokyo: The Society of Non-Traditional Technology.Google Scholar
  48. Nakagawa, A., Abe, K., Ii, R., Itsubo, N., & Inaba, A. (2002). Development of life-cycle impact assessment method for land use based on endpoint damage. In Proceedings of 5th international conference on EcoBalance (pp. 29–32). Tokyo: The Society of Non-Traditional Technology.Google Scholar
  49. Nakićenović, N., Grübler, A., & McDonald, A. (Eds.). (1998). Global energy perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  50. Nakicenovic, N., & Swart, R. (Eds.). (2000). Special report on emissions scenarios. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  51. Neumayer, E. (2003). Weak versus strong sustainability: Exploring the limits of two opposing paradigms. Cheltenham and Northampton: Edward Elgar Publishing.Google Scholar
  52. Nordhaus, W. D. (1994). Managing the global commons: The economics of climate change. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  53. Nordhaus, W. D., & Boyer, J. (2000). Warming the world—Economic models of global warming. London: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  54. Numata, M. (1987). Biology of plant. Tokyo: Tokai University Press. (in Japanese).Google Scholar
  55. Parry, M., Rosenzweig, C., Iglesias, A., Fischer, G., & Livermore, M. (1999). Climate change and world food security: A new assessment. Global Environmental Change, 9, S51–S67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Pearce, D. W. (2003). Conceptual framework for analyzing the distributive impacts of environmental policies. Prepared for the OECD Environment Directorate Workshop on the Distribution of Benefits and Costs of Environmental Policies, Paris.Google Scholar
  57. Pearce, D. W., & Atkinson, G. (1993). Capital theory and the measurement of sustainable development: An indicator of “weak” sustainability. Ecological Economics, 8(2), 103–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Pezzey, J. C. V. (1989). Economic analysis of sustainable growth and sustainable development. (Environment Department Working Papers No. 15). Published as Sustainable development concepts: An economic analysis. Washington, DC: The World Bank. (World Bank Environment Paper No. 2, 1992).Google Scholar
  59. Pezzey, J. C. V., & Toman, M. A. (2002). Progress and problems in the economics of sustainability. In T. Tietenberg & H. Folmer (Eds.), The international yearbook of environmental and resource economics. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  60. Psacharopoulos, G. (1994). Return to investment in education: A global update. World Development, 22(9), 1325–1343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Ramsey, F. P. (1928). A mathematical theory of saving. Economic Journal, 38(152), 543–559.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Roemer, J. E., & Suzumura, K. (Eds.). (2007). Intergenerational equity and sustainability. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. ISBN: 0230007864.Google Scholar
  63. Sakao, T., Itsubo, N., Pennington, D. W., Tanaka, Y., Yoshida, K., & Inaba, A. (2002). Development of damage functions for emissions of toxic substances in Japan. In Proceedings of 5th international conference on EcoBalance (pp. 363–366). Tokyo: The Society of Non-Traditional Technology.Google Scholar
  64. Simpson, R. D., Toman, M. A., & Ayres, R. U., (Eds.) (2005). Scarcity and growth revisited: Natural resources and the environment in the new millennium, resources for the future. (Japanese translation) Ueta, K. (Eds.). (2009). Frontier of environmental and resource economics. Nihon Hyoron sya, Co. Ltd. Access date October 10, 2010, from http://www.nippyo.co.jp/book/5053.html.
  65. Solow, R. M. (1974). Intergenerational equity and exhaustible resources. Review of Economic Studies, 41, 29–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Stiglitz, J. E. (1974). Growth with exhaustible natural resources: Efficient and optimal growth paths. Review of Economic Studies, 41, 123–137, and Growth with exhaustible natural resources: The competitive economy, ibid, 139–152.Google Scholar
  67. Takahashi, K., Harasawa, H., & Matsuoka, Y. (1997). Climate change impact on global crop production. Journal of Global Environment Engineering, 3, 145–161.Google Scholar
  68. The World Bank (2002). World development indicators. Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  69. The World Bank (2004). World development indicators. Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  70. The World Bank (2005). Where is the wealth of nations? Measuring capital for the 21st century. Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  71. Uchida, H., Takahashi, K., Harasawa, H., Itaoka, K., Itsubo, N., & Inaba, A. (2002). Development of damage function relating the loss of crop and plant productivity with the emission of GHGs. In Proceedings of 5th international conference on EcoBalance (pp. 49–52). Tokyo: The Society of Non-Traditional Technology.Google Scholar
  72. Uchijima, Z., & Seino, H. (1985). Agroclimatic evaluation of net primary productivity of natural vegetation, (1) Chikugo model for evaluating net primary productivity. Journal of Agricultural Meteorology, 40, 343–352.Google Scholar
  73. United Nations. (2003). World population prospects: The revision. New York: United Nations.Google Scholar
  74. United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs/Population Division. (2003). World population to 2300. Access date October 10, 2010, from http://www.un.org/esa/population/publications/longrange2/WorldPop2300final.pdf.
  75. Weitzman, M. L. (1976). On the welfare significance of national product in a dynamic economy. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 90(1), 156–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Koji Tokimatsu
    • 1
    • 2
  • Rintaro Yamaguchi
    • 3
  • Masayuki Sato
    • 3
  • Rieko Yasuoka
    • 4
  • Masahiro Nishio
    • 2
  • Kazuhiro Ueta
    • 3
  1. 1.The Institute of Applied EnergyMinato, TokyoJapan
  2. 2.National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology (AIST)Tsukuba, IbarakiJapan
  3. 3.Kyoto University, Yoshida HonmachiSakyo, KyotoJapan
  4. 4.System Research Center Co., LTDMinato, TokyoJapan

Personalised recommendations