Understanding and Evaluating the IAM-Based Economics

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


Deepening the problem analysis of the previous parts, Part III analyses both the Working Group (WG) III contribution to the Assessment Reports (ARs) of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) (in Chap.  10) and the underlying economics of climate change (in this chapter,  8 and  9). This chapter will introduce: (1) the economics of climate change (Sect. 7.1), while pointing out the diversity of possible problem framings (and methods) in the economics of climate change; (2) the integrated assessment models (IAMs) as its main methodical tools in the IPCC WG III AR4 and AR5 (Sect. 7.2); and (3) three evaluation criteria for the critical reflection on the IAM-based literature (Sect. 7.3), including a framework for identifying normative assumptions in economics to make them more transparent. The evaluation criteria will mainly build on the refined pragmatic model of scientific expertise in policy from Chap.  6, as the tentative ends-in-view for Part III. (4) Finally, the policy-relevance of the IAM-based literature will be briefly discussed (Sect. 7.4). IAMs can contribute a lot to the important topic of the costs, risks and benefits of global mitigation goals.


Climate Policy Climate Change Mitigation Ethical Judgement Problem Framing Climate Economic 
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.


  1. Ackerman, Frank, Stephen J. DeCanio, Richard B. Howarth, and Kristen Sheeran. 2009. Limitations of integrated assessment models of climate change. Climatic Change 95(3–4): 297–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alberth, Stephan, and Chris Hope. 2006. Developing the PAGE2002 model with endogenous technical change. Cambridge Working Papers in Economics. Accessed 13 Mar 2015.
  3. Beck, Silke. 2009. Das Klimaexperiment und der IPCC. Schnittstellen zwischen Wissenschaft und Politik in den internationalen Beziehungen. Marburg: Metropolis.Google Scholar
  4. Beck, Silke. 2011. Moving beyond the linear model of expertise? IPCC and the test of adaptation. Regional Environmental Change 11(2): 297–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Beckerman, Wilfred. 2011. Economics as applied ethics. Value judgements in welfare economics. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  6. Betz, Gregor. 2006. Prediction or prophecy? The boundaries of economic foreknowledge and their socio-political consequences. Wiesbaden: DUV.Google Scholar
  7. Biewald, Anne, and Martin Kowarsch (equal contributions), Hermann Lotze-Campen, and Dieter Gerten. 2015. Ethical aspects in the economic modeling of water policy options. Global Environmental Change 30: 80–91.Google Scholar
  8. Blaug, Mark. 1992. The methodology of economics: Or how economists explain, 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Brodbeck, Karl-Heinz. 2011. Die Entwicklung der Ökonomik zur normativen Wissenschaft. In Handbuch Wirtschaftsethik, ed. Michael S. Aßländer, 43–52. Stuttgart: J. B. Metzler.Google Scholar
  10. Caldwell, Bruce J. 1994. Beyond positivism. Economic methodology in the twentieth century. Revised Edition. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  11. Dewey, John. 1986. Logic: The theory of inquiry. In John Dewey. The later works, 1925–1953, volume 12: 1938, ed. Jo A. Boydston, 1–527. Carbondale/Edwardsville: Southern Illinois University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Douglas, Heather E. 2009. Science, policy, and the value-free ideal. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.Google Scholar
  13. Douglas, Heather E. 2014. Values in social science. In Philosophy of social science: A new introduction, ed. Nancy Cartwright and Eleonora Montuschi, 162–182. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Dutt, Amitava K., and Charles K. Wilber. 2010. Economics and ethics. An introduction. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  15. Edenhofer, Ottmar. 2006. Die Kopernikanische Wende. Accessed 13 Aug 2014.
  16. Edenhofer, Ottmar, Nico Bauer, and Elmar Kriegler. 2005. The impact of technological change on climate protection and welfare: Insights from the model MIND. Ecological Economics 54: 277–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Edenhofer, Ottmar, Kai Lessmann, and Nico Bauer. 2006a. Mitigation strategies and costs of climate protection: The effect of ETC in the hybrid model MIND. The Energy Journal, Special Issue: Endogenous Technological Change and the Economics of Atmospheric Stabilization: 207–222.Google Scholar
  18. Edenhofer, Ottmar, Kai Lessmann, Claudia Kemfert, Michael Grubb, and Jonathan Köhler. 2006b. Induced technological change: Exploring its implications for the economics of atmospheric stabilization: Synthesis Report from the Innovation Modeling Comparison Project. The Energy Journal, Special Issue: Endogenous Technological Change and the Economics of Atmospheric Stabilization: 57–107.Google 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. Accessed 31 Aug 2014.
  22. Endres, Alfred. 2011. Environmental economics: Theory and policy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Fullbrook, Edward. 2009. Epistemology. In Handbook of economics and ethics, ed. Jan Peil and Irene Staveren, 123–129. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  24. Füssel, Hans-Martin, and Michael Mastrandrea. 2009. Integrated assessment of climate change. In Climate change science and policy, ed. Stephan H. Schneider, Armin Rosencranz, and Michael Mastrandrea, 150–161. Washington, DC: Island Press.Google Scholar
  25. Giersch, Thorsten. 1993. Bergson-Wohlfahrtsfunktion und normative Ökonomie, Finanzwissenschaftliche Schriften, vol. 54. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  26. Hausman, Daniel M., and Michael S. McPherson. 2006. Economic analysis, moral philosophy, and public policy, 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Heal, Geoffrey. 2009. Climate economics: A meta-review and some suggestions for future research. Review of Environmental Economics and Policy 3(1): 4–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hope, Chris. 2005. Integrated assessment models. In Dieter Helm, ed. Climate-Change Policy, 77–98. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  29. Hope, Chris. 2006. The marginal impact of CO2 from PAGE2002: An integrated assessment model incorporating the IPCC’s five reasons for concern. The Integrated Assessment Journal 6(1): 19–56.Google Scholar
  30. IPCC. Eds. James P. Bruce, Hoesung Lee, and Erik F. Haites. 1996. Climate change 1995: economic and social dimensions of climate change: Contribution of Working Group III to the Second Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  31. IPCC. Eds. Bert Metz, Ogunlade Davidson, Peter Bosch, Rutu Dave, and Leo Meyer. 2007. 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
  32. IPCC. Eds. Ottmar Edenhofer, Ramón Pichs-Madruga, Youba Sokona, Ellie Farahani, Susanne Kadner, Kristin Seyboth, and Anna Adler, et al. 2014. 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
  33. Kaul, Inge, Isabelle Grunberg, and Marc A. Stern (eds.). 1999. Global public goods. International cooperation in the 21st century. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Kelly, David L., and Charles D. Kolstad. 1998. Integrated assessment models for climate change control. Accessed 13 Mar 2015.
  35. Knopf, Brigitte, Martin Kowarsch, Michael Lüken, Ottmar Edenhofer, and Gunnar Luderer. 2012. A global carbon market and the allocation of emission rights. 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, 269–286. Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Krijnen, Christian. 2011. Wert. In Handbuch Ethik, 3rd ed, ed. Marcus Düwell, Christoph Hübenthal, and Micha H. Werner, 548–553. Stuttgart: Metzler.Google Scholar
  37. Leimbach, Marian, Nico Bauer, Lavinia Baumstark, and Ottmar Edenhofer. 2010. Mitigation costs in a globalized world: Climate policy analysis with REMIND-R. Environmental Modeling & Assessment 15: 155–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Lomborg, Bjorn. 2007. Cool it: The skeptical environmentalist’s guide to global warming. New York: Knopf.Google Scholar
  39. Nature. 2013. The final assessment. Editorial. Nature 501: 281.Google Scholar
  40. Nordhaus, William D. 2008. A question of balance: Weighing the options on global warming policies. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  41. Nordhaus, William D. 2013a. The climate casino: Risk, uncertainty, and economics for a warming world. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  42. Nordhaus, William D. 2013b. Integrated economic and climate modeling. In Handbook of computable general equilibrium modeling, ed. Peter B. Dixon and Dale W. Jorgenson, 1069–1131. North Holland: Elsevier.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Nordhaus, William D., and Joseph Boyer. 2000. Warming the world. Economic models of global warming. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  44. Parson, Edward A., and Karen Fisher-Vanden. 1997. Integrated assessment models of global climate change. Annual Review of Energy and the Environment 22: 589–628.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Pooley, Eric. 2010. The climate war: True believers, power brokers, and the fight to save the earth. New York: Hyperion.Google Scholar
  46. Popp, David. 2004. ENTICE: Endogenous technological change in the DICE model of global warming. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 48: 742–768.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Putnam, Hilary. 2004. The collapse of the fact/value dichotomy and other essays. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  48. Robbins, Lionel. 1945. An essay on the nature and significance of economic science, 2nd ed. London: Macmillan & Co.Google Scholar
  49. Rodriguez-Sickert, Carlos. 2009. Homo economicus. In Handbook of economics and ethics, ed. Jan Peil and Irene Staveren, 223–229. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  50. Samuelson, Paul A., and William D. Nordhaus. 2010. Economics. International, 19th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  51. Schneider, Stephen H. 1997. Integrated assessment modeling of global climate change: Transparent rational tool for policy making or opaque screen hiding value-laden assumptions? Environmental Modeling and Assessment 2(4): 229–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Shackley, Simon, and Brian Wynne. 1995. Integrating knowledges for climate change. Global Environmental Change 5(2): 113–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Siegmeier, Jan, Linus Mattauch, and Ottmar Edenhofer. 2015. Climate policy enhances efficiency: A macroeconomic portfolio effect. CESifo Working Paper 5161. Accessed 31 Mar 2015.
  54. Smith, Adam. 2008. An inquiry into the nature and causes of the wealth of nations. Ed. Kathryn Sutherland. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  55. Staub-Kaminski, Iris, Anne Zimmer, Michael Jakob, and Robert Marschinski. 2014. Climate policy in practice: A typology of obstacles and implications for integrated assessment modeling. Climate Change Economics 5(1): 1440004.Google Scholar
  56. Stern, Nicolas. 2007. The economics of climate change. The Stern review. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Stern, Nicolas. 2008. The economics of climate change. Richard T. Ely Lecture. American Economic Review Papers & Proceedings 98(2): 1–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Tavoni, Massimo, Elmar Kriegler, Keywan Riahi, Detlef P. can Vuuren, Tino Aboumahboub, Alex Bowen, and Katherine Calvin, et al. 2015. Post-2020 climate agreements in the major economies assessed in the light of global models. Nature Climate Change 5(2): 119–126.Google Scholar
  59. Touffut, Jean-Philippe (ed.). 2009. Changing climate, changing economy. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  60. Weber, Max. 1949. On the methodology of the social sciences. Trans. and ed. By Edward A. Shils and Henry A. Finch. Glencoe: The Free Press.Google Scholar
  61. Weyant, John P. 2009. A perspective on integrated assessment. An editorial comment. Climatic Change 95: 317–323.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