Skip to main content

Conflicts of economic interests by limiting global warming to +3 °C

Abstract

This paper combines available assessments on the impacts of climate change with climate projections from an earth system model to estimate the economic consequences for 15 sectors in 11 world regions. If the standard way of thinking about how economies work, the theory of market equilibrium, applies. The aim is to identify potential sources of conflicts between economic interests if the world succeeds in reducing emissions from a pathway with high emissions, where temperatures increase at around +6 °C in 2100 to a lower emission path, where the temperatures increase by +3 °C. Both pathways are recommended by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change as standard descriptions of anthropogenic drivers for climate modelling. It is difficult to identify conflicts between developed and developing regions, but conflicts between sector interests are apparent. Fossil fuel extracting industries lose by mitigation in all regions. Nearly all other sectors gain in all regions. The results also reveal potential conflicts between socioeconomic groups. The main challenges relate to conflicts of interest between generations. The present generation can commence on a transformation to low-carbon economies without notable economic consequences, but the next generation stands to lose, while generations beyond will clearly gain.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

References

  1. Aaheim A (2010) The determination of optimal climate policy. Ecol Econ 69:562–568

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Aaheim A, Ahlert G, Meyer M, Meyer B, Orlov A, Heyndrickx C (2015a) Integration of top-down and bottom-up analyses of adaptation to climate change in Europe—the cases of energy transport tourism and health. ToPDAd D3.4, EC Grant Agreement No 308620

  3. Aaheim A, Amundsen H, Dokken T, Wei T (2012) Impacts and adaptation to climate change in European economies. Glob Environ Chang 22:959–968

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Aaheim A, Romstad B, Wei T, Kristjánsson JE, Muri H, Niemeier U, Schmidt H (2015b) An economic evaluation of solar radiation management. Sci Total Environ 532:61–69

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Aaheim A, Rive N (2005) A model for global responses to anthropogenic changes in the environment (GRACE), CICERO Rep 2005:5 Oslo

  6. Aaheim A, Schjolden A (2004) An approach to utilise climate change impacts studies in national assessments. Glob Environ Chang 14:147–160

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Ackermann F (1999) Still dead after all these years: interpreting the failure of general equilibrium theory Working Paper no. 00–01, Global Development and Environmental Institute, Tufts Univ. MA

  8. Anthoff D, Tol RSJ (2014) The income elasticity of the impact of climate change. In Tiezzy S, Martini C (eds) Is the Environment a Luxury? An inquiry into the realtionship between environment and income. Routledge, p 34–47

  9. Badri N G, Walmsley TL (eds) (2008) Global trade, assistance, and production: the GTAP 7 data base. Center for Global Trade Analysis, Purdue Univ

  10. Biswas BK, Svirezhev Yu M, Bala BK, Wahab MA (2009) Climate change impacts on fish catch in the world fishing grounds. Clim Chang 93(1–2):117–136

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Bosello F, Carraro C, de Cian E (2010) Climate policy and the optimal balance between mitigation, adaptation and unavoided damage. Clim Chang Econ 1(2):71–92

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Brander KM (2007) Global fish production and climate change. PNAS 104(59):19709–19714

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Ciscar J-C (2012) The impacts of climate change in Europe (the PESETA research project). Clim Chang 112(1):1–6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Cline W (2007) Global warming and agriculture impact estimates by country. Center for Glob Dev, Washington DC

    Google Scholar 

  15. de Cian E, Lanzi E, Roson R (2007) The impact of temperature change on energy demand: a dynamic panel analysis. FEEM Work Pap No. 46.2007, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei

  16. Dietz S, Bowen A, Dixon C, Gradwell P (2016) ‘Climate value at risk’ of global financial assets. Nat Clim Chang. doi:10.1038/NCLIMATE2972

    Google Scholar 

  17. Eboli F, Parrado R, Roson R (2010) Climate-change feedback on economic growth: explorations with a dynamic general equilibrium model. Environ Dev Econ 15:515–533

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Ehmer P, Heymann E (2008) Climate change and tourism: where will the journey lead? Deutche Bank Research, ISSN 1612–3158, Frankfurt

  19. Giorgetta M, Jungclaus JH, Reick CH, Legutke S, Brovkin V, Crueger T, Esch M, Fieg K, Glushak K, Gayler V, Haak H, Hollweg H-D, Ilyina T, Kinne S, Kornblueh L, Matei D, Mauritsen T, Mikolajewicz U, Mueller WA, Notz D, Raddatz T, Rast S, Redler R, Roeckner E, Schmidt H, Schnur R, Segschneider J, Six K, Stockhause M, Wegner J, Widmann H, Wieners K-H, Claussen M, Marotzke J, Stevens B (2013) Climate and carbon cycle changes from 1850 to 2100 in MPI-ESM simulations for the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phase 5. J Adv Mod Earth Syst 5:572–597

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Gollier C, Weitzmann ML (2010) How should the distant future be discounted when discount rates are uncertain? Econ Lett 107:350–353

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Global Carbon Project (2015) CDIAC Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center. http://cdiac.ornl.gov/GCP/carbonbudget

  22. Hope C, Newberry D (2006) Calculating the social cost of carbon. Electricity Policy Research Group Working Papers, No EPRG07/02, University of Cambridge, Cambridge UK

  23. International Monetary Fund IMF (2008) Chapter 4. Climate change and the global economy. World Economic and Financial Surveys: World Economic Outlook: Housing and Business Cycle. http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2008/01/index.htm

  24. Kolstad C, Urama K, Broome J, Bruvoll A, Cariρo Olvera M, Fullerton D, Gollier C, Hanemann WM, Hassan R, Jotzo F, Khan MR, Meyer L, Mundaca L (2014) Social, economic and ethical concepts and methods. In: Edenhofe, O, Pichs-Madruga R, Sokona Y, Farahani F, Kadner S, Seyboth K, Adler A, Baum I, Brunner S, Eickemeier P, Kriemann B, Savolainen J, Schlömer S, von Stechow C, Zwickel T, Minx JC (eds) Climate change 2014: mitigation of climate change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  25. Mechler R, Brouwer LM (2015) Understanding trends and projections of disaster losses and climate change: is vulnerability a mission link? Clim Chang 133:23–35

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Mendelsohn R, Morrison W, Schlesinger WE, Andronova NG (2000) Country-specific market impacts of climate change. Clim Chang 45:553–569

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Nordhaus WD (1991) To slow or not to slow: the economics of the greenhouse effect. Econ J 101:920–937

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Nordhaus WD, Boyer J (2000) Warming the world. Economic models of global warming. MIT Press, Cambridge Mass

    Google Scholar 

  29. Nordhaus WD (2008): A question of balance. Weighing the Options on Global Warming Policies, Yale University Press

  30. Pindyck RS (2013) Climate change policy: what do the models tell us? J Econ Lit 51(3):860–872

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Riahi K, Rao S, Krey V, Cho C, Chirkov V, Fisher G, Kindermann G, Nakicenovic N, Rafai P (2011) RCP8.5—a scenario for comparatively high greenhouse gas emissions. Clim Chang 109:33–57

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Stern NH (2006) The stern review. The economics of climate change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  33. Teigland J (2002) Sosialøkonomiske effekter av ekstremvær i Norge—en studie av effekter over tid og rom av nyttårsorkanen i 1992 (in norwegian). VF/Rapport 7/2002. Vestlandsforskning. Sogndal

  34. Tol RSJ (2010) The economic impact of climate change. Perspekt Wirtsch 11(S1):13–37

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. van Vuuren DP, Edmonds JA, Kainuma M, Riahi K, Thomson AM, Hibbard K, Hurtt GC, Kram T, Krey V, Lamarque J-F, Masui T, Meinshausen M, Nakicenovic N, Smith SJ, Rose S (2011a) The representative concentration pathways: an overview. Clim Chang 109:5–31

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. van Vuuren DP, Stehfest E, den Elzen MGJ, Kram T, van Vliet J, Deetman S, Isaac M, Glodewijk KK, Hof A (2011b) RCP2.6: exploring the possibility to keep global mean temperature increase below 2 °C. Clim Chang 109:95–116

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Weyant JP, de la Chesnaye FC, Blanford GJ (2006) Overview of EMF-21: multigas mitigation and climate policy. Energy J (Special Issue):1–32

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Asbjørn Aaheim.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Aaheim, A., Wei, T. & Romstad, B. Conflicts of economic interests by limiting global warming to +3 °C. Mitig Adapt Strateg Glob Change 22, 1131–1148 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11027-016-9718-8

Download citation

Keywords

  • Climate change
  • Conflicts of interest
  • CGE modelling
  • Economic impacts
  • Integrated assessment