Advertisement

The Need for an Integrated Economic Assessment of Climate Policy Options

  • Martin Kowarsch
Chapter
Part of the Boston Studies in the Philosophy and History of Science book series (BSPS, volume 323)

Abstract

This chapter indicates the need for appropriate integrated economic assessments to support climate policy-making. A normative point of departure for this is John Dewey’s concept of a scientifically well-informed, collective regulation of indirect consequences of human actions – as the essence of “the public” (Sect. 2.1). From this Deweyan philosophy of deliberative democracy, a few (widely accepted) general norms for the role of the desired scientific expertise in policy can also be derived: sound science, policy-relevance, good communication and political legitimacy. Employing Dewey’s political philosophy, I argue that integrated economic expertise, if it complies with the general norms for expertise in policy, is urgently needed to adequately understand and design complex climate policy where so much is at stake for so many (present and future) people (Sect. 2.2). This is particularly, although not exclusively, true for climate change mitigation where many socially relevant aspects are still poorly understood. Section 2.3 introduces the highly influential Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and its integrated economic assessments, particularly those of IPCC Working Group III, on which this book will focus.

Keywords

United Nations Climate Policy Deliberative Democracy Political Democracy International Climate Policy 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Adler, Caroline E., and Katharina Rietig. 2013. Quo vadis? The state of social sciences and climate and global environmental change in Europe. In world social science report 2013: Changing global environments, ed. ISSC and UNESCO, 158–167. Paris: UNESCO Publishing.Google Scholar
  2. Agrawala, Shardul. 1998a. Context and early origins of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Climatic Change 39(4): 605–620.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Agrawala, Shardul. 1998b. Structural and process history of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Climatic Change 39(4): 621–642.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Agrawal, Arun, Maria C. Lemos, Ben Orlove, and Jesse Ribot. 2012. Cool heads for a hot world: Social sciences under a changing sky. Global Environmental Change 22(2): 329–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Beck, Silke. 2009. Das Klimaexperiment und der IPCC. Schnittstellen zwischen Wissenschaft und Politik in den internationalen Beziehungen. Marburg: Metropolis.Google Scholar
  6. Beckerman, Wilfred. 2011. Economics as applied ethics. Value judgements in welfare economics. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  7. Bodansky, Daniel. 2001. The history of the global climate change regime. In International relations and global climate change, ed. Urs Luterbacher and Detlef Sprinz, 23–40. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  8. Bolin, Bert. 2007. A history of the science and politics of climate change: The role of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Brennan, Geoffrey. 2009. Climate change: A rational choice politics view. Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 53(3): 309–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Brown, Mark B. 2009. Science in democracy: Expertise, institutions, and representation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cash, David W., William C. Clark, Frank Alcock, Nancy M. Dickson, Noelle Eckley, David H. Guston, Jill Jäger, and Ronald B. Mitchell. 2003. Knowledge systems for sustainable development. PNAS 100(14): 8086–8091.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Creutzig, Felix, Christoph von Stechow, David Klein, Carol Hunsberger, Nico Bauer, Alexander Popp, and Ottmar Edenhofer. 2012. Can bioenergy assessments deliver? Economics of Energy & Environmental Policy 1(2): 65–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dahl, Robert. 1989. Democracy and its critics. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Dannenberg, Astrid, Bodo Sturm, and Carsten Vogt. 2010. Do equity preferences matter for climate negotiators? An experimental investigation. Environmental and Resource Economics 47(1): 91–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dewey, John. 1927. The public and its problems. New York: Henry Hold & Co.Google Scholar
  16. Dietz, Simon, Cameron J. Hepburn, and Nicolas Stern. 2009. Economics, ethics and climate change. In Arguments for a better world: Essays in honour of Amartya Sen. Volume 2: Society, institutions and development, ed. Kaushik Basu and Ravi Kanbur, 365–386. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Dimitrov, Radoslav. 2010. Inside Copenhagen: The state of climate governance. Global Environmental Politics 10(2): 18–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Edenhofer, Ottmar, Brigitte Knopf, Jan Steckel, and Gunnar Luderer. 2008. The honest broker: Stuck half way through. Nature 452: 531–532.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Edenhofer, Ottmar, Brigitte Knopf, Terry Barker, Lavinia Baumstark, Elie Bellevrat, Bertrand Chateau, Patrick Criqui, et al. 2010. The economics of low stabilization: Model comparison of mitigation strategies and costs. The Energy Journal 31(Special Issue 1: The Economics of Low Stabilization): 11–48.Google Scholar
  20. Edenhofer, Ottmar, Johannes Wallacher, Hermann Lotze-Campen, Michael Reder, Brigitte Knopf, and Johannes Müller (eds.). 2012. Climate change, justice and sustainability: Linking climate and development policy. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  21. Edenhofer, Ottmar, Christian Flachsland, Michael Jakob, and Kai Lessmann. 2013. The atmosphere as a global commons: Challenges for international Cooperation and governance. Harvard Kennedy School. Harvard Project on Climate Agreements. Discussion Paper 2013-58. http://belfercenter.hks.harvard.edu/files/hpcadp58_edenhofer-flachsland-jakob-lessmann.pdf. Accessed 31 Aug 2014.
  22. Falkner, Robert, Hannes Stephan, and John Vogler. 2010. International climate policy after Copenhagen: Towards a ‘building blocks’ approach. Global Policy 1(3): 252–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Feenberg, Andrew. 1999. Questioning technology. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  24. Grundmann, Reiner, and Nico Stehr. 2011. Die Macht der Erkenntnis. Berlin: Suhrkamp. English edition: Stehr, Nico, and Reiner Grundmann. 2011. Experts: The knowledge and power of expertise. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  25. Gupta, Joyeeta, and Nicolien van der Grijp. 2014. Mainstreaming climate change in development cooperation. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Habermas, Jürgen. 1968. Technik und Wissenschaft als Ideologie. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp. English edition: Habermas, Jürgen. 1971. Toward a rational society. Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
  27. Hecht, Alan D., and Dennis Tirpak. 1995. Framework agreement on climate change: A scientific and policy history. Climatic Change 29(4): 371–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. IAC. 2010. Climate change assessments: Review of the process and procedures of the IPCC. http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/IAC_report/IAC%20Report.pdf. Accessed 13 Mar 2015.
  29. IPCC. 2004. 16 years of scientific assessment in support of the climate convention. http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/10th-anniversary/anniversary-brochure.pdf. Accessed 13 Aug 2014.
  30. IPCC. eds. Susan Solomon, Dahe Qin, Martin Manning, Zhenlin Chen, Melinda Marquis, Kristen B. Averyt, Melinda Tignor, and Henry L. Miller. 2007a. Climate change 2007: The physical science basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  31. IPCC. eds. Martin Parry, Osvaldo Canziani, Jean Palutikof, Paul van der Linden, and Clair Hanson. 2007b. Climate change 2007: Impacts, adaption, vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  32. IPCC. eds. Bert Metz, Ogunlade Davidson, Peter Bosch, Rutu Dave, and Leo Meyer. 2007c. Climate change 2007: Mitigation of climate change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  33. IPCC. 2008. Procedures for the preparation review, acceptance, adoption, approval and publication of IPCC reports. Appendix A to the principles governing IPCC work. http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/ipcc-principles/ipcc-principles-appendix-a.pdf. Accessed 13 Aug 2014.
  34. IPCC. eds. Thomas Stocker, Dahe Qin, Gian-Kasper Plattner, Melinda Tignor, Simon Allen, Judith Boschung, and Alexander Nauels, et al. 2013. Climate change 2013: The physical science basis. Working Group I contribution to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  35. IPCC. eds. Christopher B. Field, Vicente Barros, David Jon Dokken, Katharine J. Mach, Michael D. Mastrandrea, T. Elen Bilir, and Monalisa Chatterjee, et al. 2014a. Climate change 2014: Impacts, adaption, and vulnerability. Working Group II contribution to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Part A: Global and sectoral aspects. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  36. IPCC. eds. Ottmar Edenhofer, Ramón Pichs-Madruga, Youba Sokona, Ellie Farahani, Susanne Kadner, Kristin Seyboth, and Anna Adler, et al. 2014b. 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: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  37. IPCC. eds. Core Writing Team, Rajendra K. Pachauri, and Leo A. Meyer. 2014c. Climate change 2014: Synthesis report. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  38. Jäger, Jill, and Tim O’Riordan. 1996. The history of climate change science and politics. In Politics of climate change: A European perspective, ed. Tim O’Riordan and Jill Jäger, 1–31. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  39. Jakob, Michael, and Jan C. Steckel. 2014. How climate change mitigation could harm development in poor countries. WIREs Climate Change 5(2): 161–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Jones, Nicola. 2013. Climate assessments: 25 years of the IPCC. Nature 501, News Feature: 298–299.Google Scholar
  41. Keohane, Robert O., and David G. Victor. 2010. The regime complex for climate change. Harvard Kennedy School. Harvard Project on Climate Agreements. Discussion Paper 2010-33. http://belfercenter.ksg.harvard.edu/files/Keohane_Victor_Final_2.pdf. Accessed 13 Aug 2014.
  42. Kitcher, Philip. 2001. Science, truth, and democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Knopf, Brigitte, Martin Kowarsch, Christian Flachsland, and Ottmar Edenhofer. 2012a. The 2°C target reconsidered. In Climate change, justice and sustainability: Linking climate and development policy, ed. Ottmar Edenhofer, Johannes Wallacher, Hermann Lotze-Campen, Michael Reder, Brigitte Knopf, and Johannes Müller, 121–138. Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Knopf, Brigitte, Martin Kowarsch, Ottmar Edenhofer, and Gunnar Luderer. 2012b. Climate change mitigation: Options, costs and risks. In Climate change, justice and sustainability: Linking climate and development policy, ed. Ottmar Edenhofer, Johannes Wallacher, Hermann Lotze-Campen, Michael Reder, Brigitte Knopf, and Johannes Müller, 139–150. Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Kowarsch, Martin, and Andreas Gösele. 2012. Triangle of justice. In Climate change, justice and sustainability: Linking climate and development policy, ed. Ottmar Edenhofer, Johannes Wallacher, Hermann Lotze-Campen, Michael Reder, Brigitte Knopf, and Johannes Müller, 73–90. Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Lange, Andreas, Andreas Löschel, Carsten Vogt, and Andreas Ziegler. 2010. On the self-interested use of equity in international climate negotiations. European Economic Review 54(3): 359–375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Lenton, Timothy, Hermann Held, Elmar Kriegler, Jim Hall, Wolfgang Lucht, Stefan Rahmstorf, and Hans Joachim Schellnhuber. 2008. Tipping elements in the earth’s climate system. PNAS 105(6): 1786–1793.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Olivier, Jos, Greet Janssens-Maenhout, Jeroen Peters, and Julian Wilson. 2011. Long term trend in global CO 2 emissions 2011 report. The Hague: PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency.Google Scholar
  49. Parker, Wendy. 2014. Climate change. In Philosophy of social science: A new introduction, ed. Nancy Cartwright and Eleonora Montuschi, 31–37. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  50. Pickering, Jonathan, Steve Vanderheiden, and Seumas Miller. 2009. Ethical issues in the United Nations climate negotiations: A preliminary analysis of parties’ positions. Draft paper. http://www.cappe.edu.au/research/Ethics%20in%20negs.pdf. Accessed 13 Aug 2014.
  51. Posner, Richard A. 2003. Law, pragmatism, and democracy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  52. Posner, Richard A. 2004. John Dewey and the intersection of democracy and law. In Dewey, pragmatism, and economic methodology, ed. Elias L. Khalil, 167–186. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  53. Putnam, Hilary. 1992. Renewing philosophy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  54. Rong, Fang. 2010. Understanding developing country stances on post-2012 climate change negotiations: Comparative analysis of Brazil, China, India, Mexico, and South Africa. Energy Policy 38(8): 4582–4591.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Royal Society. 2009. Geoengineering the climate: Science, governance and uncertainty. RS Policy document 10/09. http://royalsociety.org/geoengineering-the-climate/. Accessed 13 Aug 2014.
  56. Siegmeier, Jan, Linus Mattauch, and Ottmar Edenhofer. 2015. Climate policy enhances efficiency: A macroeconomic portfolio effect. CESifo Working Paper 5161. http://www.mcc-berlin.net/uploads/media/cesifo1_working_paper_5161.pdf. Accessed 31 Mar 2015.
  57. Slyke, Van, M. David, Rosemary O’Leary, and Soonhee Kim. 2010. Conclusion: Challenges and opportunities, crosscutting themes, and thoughts on the future of public administration. In The future of public administration around the world. The Minnowbrook perspective, ed. Rosemary O’Leary, David M. Van Slyke, and Soonhee Kim, 281–294. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
  58. Smiley, Marion. 1992. Pragmatic inquiry and social conflict: A critical reconstruction of Dewey’s model of democracy. In John Dewey: Critical assessments. Vol. 2: Political theory and social practice, ed. Jim Tiles, 287–306. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  59. Smith, Joel, Stephen Schneider, Michael Oppenheimer, Gary Yohe, William Hare, Michael D. Mastrandrea, Anand Patwardhan, et al. 2009. Assessing dangerous climate change through an update of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) “reasons for concern.”. PNAS 106(11): 4133–4137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Stern, Nicolas. 2007. The economics of climate change. The Stern review. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Szarka, Joseph. 2011. The EU, the USA and the climate divide: Reappraising strategic choices. European Political Science 11: 31–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. UN. 1988. A/RES/43/53: Protection of global climate for present and future generations of mankind. http://www.un.org/documents/ga/res/43/a43r053.htm. Accessed 13 Aug 2014.
  63. UN. 1992. United Nations framework convention on climate change. http://www.un-documents.net/unfccc.htm. Accessed 13 Aug 2014.
  64. UNFCCC. 2009. The Copenhagen Accord. http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2009/cop15/eng/l07.pdf. Accessed 13 Mar 2015.
  65. UNFCCC. 2010. The Cancun agreements: Outcome of the work of the ad hoc working group on long-term cooperative action under the convention. http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2010/cop16/eng/07a01.pdf#page=2. Accessed 13 Aug 2014.
  66. UNFCCC. 2011. Report of the conference of the Parties on its seventeenth session, held in Durban from 28 November to 11 December 2011. http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2011/cop17/eng/09a01.pdf. Accessed 13 Aug 2014.
  67. UNFCCC. 2012. Report of the conference of the Parties on its eighteenth session, held in Doha from 26 November to 8 December 2012. http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2012/cop18/eng/08a01.pdf. Accessed 13 Aug 2014.
  68. Victor, David G. 2011. Global warming gridlock: Creating more effective strategies for protecting the planet. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Victor, David G. 2015. Climate change: Embed the social sciences in climate policy. Comment. Nature 520: 27–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Wagner, Gernot, and Martin L. Weitzman. 2015. Climate shock: The economic consequences of a hotter planet. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Weaver, Christopher P., Siân Mooney, David Allen, Nancy Beller-Simms, T. Fish, Anne E. Grambsch, William Hohenstein, et al. 2014. From global change science to action with social sciences. Commentary. Nature Climate Change 4: 656–659.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Weitzman, Martin L. 2009. On modelling and interpreting the economics of catastrophic climate change. The Review of Economics and Statistics 91(1): 1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Martin Kowarsch
    • 1
  1. 1.Mercator Research Institute on Global Commons and Climate Change (MCC)BerlinGermany

Personalised recommendations