The European Physical Journal Special Topics

, Volume 176, Issue 1, pp 37–51 | Cite as

What to do? Does science have a role?

  • K. Hasselmann
Open Access
Article

Abstract

A new generation of integrated assessment models of climate change policies is needed to capture the basic dynamical processes that govern the required transformation of the present fossil-based global economic system to a sustainable decarbonized system. After an overview of the abatement technologies and policy instruments that are already available and able today to achieve the transformation, three examples are presented of typical actor-based, system-dynamical models that are able to simulate some of the key dynamics of the transition processes. In addition to developing a new hierarchy of integrated assessment models, scientists need also to better educate the public and policy makers on the wide-reaching implications of the inherent inertia of the climate system.

Keywords

Business Cycle European Physical Journal Special Topic Climate Policy Carbon Price Integrate Assessment Model 

References

  1. R.L. Axtell, in Multi-agent Systems Macro: A Prospectus, in Post Walrasian macroeconomics, edited by D. Colander, 203-220 (Cambridge University Press, 2006), p. 416Google Scholar
  2. C. Azar, S.H. Schneider, Are the economic costs of stabilizing the climate prohibitive?, Ecol. Econ. 42, 73–80 (2002)Google Scholar
  3. T. Barker, The Economics of Avoiding Dangerous Climate Change, an editorial essay, Climatic Change 89, 173–194 (2008)Google Scholar
  4. E. Beinhocker, The Origin of Wealth (Harvard Business School Press, 2006), p. 527Google Scholar
  5. D. Colander, Post Walrasian Macroeconomics (Cambridge University Press, 2006), p. 416Google Scholar
  6. B. de Vries, SUSCLIME: a simulation/game on population and development in a climate-constrained world, Simul. Develop. 29, 216–237 (1998)Google Scholar
  7. O. Edenhofer, K. Lessmann, C. Kemfert, M. Grubb, J. Köhler, Induced Technological Change: Exploring its Implications for the Economics of Atmospheric Stabilization: Synthesis Report from the Innovative Modeling Comparison Project, The Energy J. Spec. Iss. 57–107 (2006)Google Scholar
  8. J.M. Epstein, R. Axtell, Growing Artificial Societies, Washington, D.C. (Brookings Institution Press, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1996), p. 208Google Scholar
  9. K. Hasselmann, Simulating human behavior in macroeconomic models applied to climate change, Dahlem Conference “Is there a mathematics of social entities”, Berlin, 14–20 Dec. (2008) (to be published)Google Scholar
  10. K. Hasselmann, M. Latif, G. Hooss, C. Azar, O. Edenhofer, C.C. Jaeger, O.M. Johannessen, C. Kemfert, M. Welp, A. Wokaun, The Challenge of Long-Term Climate Change, Science 302, 1923–1925 (2003)Google Scholar
  11. K. Hasselmann, T. Barker, The Stern Review and the IPCC fourth assessment report: implications for the interaction between policymakers and climate experts. An editorial essay, Clim. Change 89, 219–229 (2008)Google Scholar
  12. K. Hasselmann, D. Kovalevsky, C. Jaeger, A system dynamics approach to the integrated assessment of climate change (2009) (in preparation)Google Scholar
  13. G. Hooss R. Voss, K. Hasselmann, E. Maier-Reimer, F. Joos, A nonlinear impulse response model of the coupled carbon cycle-climate system (NICCS), Clim. Dyn. 18, 189–202 (2001)Google Scholar
  14. P. Howitt, in Monetary Policy and the Limits of Economic Knowledge, in Post Walrasian macro-economics, edited by D. Colander (Cambridge University Press, 2006), p. 416Google Scholar
  15. IPCC, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Fourth Assessment Report, Working Groups 1, 2 and 3 (three volumes), (Cambridge University Press, 2007) (online: http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/ar4-wg1,-wg2,-wg3.htm)Google Scholar
  16. W. Leontief, The Structure of the American Economy: 1919-1929 (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, 1951) 2nd enlarged ed., p. 264Google Scholar
  17. R.E. Jr. Lucas, Models of Business Cycles, (Oxford, Blackwell, 1987), p. 115Google Scholar
  18. D.H. Meadows, D.L. Meadows, J. Randers, W.W. Behrens III, Limits to Growth, Potomac Associates (New York, 1972), p. 207Google Scholar
  19. R.R. Nelson, S.G. Winter, An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change (Cambridge, MA, Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1982), p. 437Google Scholar
  20. C. Roorda, B. de Vries, K. Lindgren, SUSCLIME: Exploring Strategies for Resource Depletion and Climate Change, draft document, 2008Google Scholar
  21. A. Smith, An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations, 1776, Reprint edition, New York (Modern Library, 1994), p. 1131Google Scholar
  22. J.D. Sterman, Business Dynamics (New York, McGraw-Hill, 2000), p. 982Google Scholar
  23. J.D. Sterman, Risk communication on climate: mental models and mass balance, Science 322, 532–533 (2008)Google Scholar
  24. N. Stern, The economics of climate change. The Stern Review (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2007), p. 692 (HM Treasury, online: http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/stern_review_report.htm)Google Scholar
  25. L. Tesfatsion, in Computational modeling and macroeconomics, in Post Walrasian macroeconomics, edited by D. Colander, 175–202 (Cambridge University Press, 2006), p. 416Google Scholar
  26. L. Walras, Elements of Pure Economics, 1874, translated by W. Jaffé, George Allen and Unwin (London, 1954), p. 620Google Scholar
  27. M. Weber, V. Barth, K. Hasselmann, A Multi-Actor Dynamic Integrated Assesment Model (MADIAM) of Induced Technological Change and Sustainable Economic Growth, Ecol. Econom. 54, 306–327 (2005)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© EDP Sciences and Springer 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • K. Hasselmann
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Max-Planck-Institute for MeteorologyHamburgGermany
  2. 2.European Climate ForumHamburgGermany

Personalised recommendations