Future Climate Wealth of Nations’ Winners and Losers



Future wealth of nations is introduced by the concept of climate flexibility defined as the range of temperature variation of a country. In a changing climate, temperature range flexibility is portrayed as a future asset for international trade of commodities but also for production flexibility leading to comparative advantages of countries. A broad spectrum of climate zones has never been defined as asset and comparative edge in free trade but climate change will require territories being more flexible in terms of changing economic production. The more climate variation a nation state possesses, this paper argues, the more degrees of freedom a country has in terms of GDP production capabilities in a differing climate. These preliminary insights aid in answering what financial patterns can we expect given predictions the earth will become hotter. Already now, the degree of climate flexibility is found to be related to human migration inflow and is predicted to determine future climate wealth of nations in a climate changing world. The previously defined climate change winner and loser index will be blended with the novel insights on climate flexibility, leading to an unprecedented outlook on future climate wealth of nations. Lastly, future climate change induced market changes are pegged to scarcity of agriculture production and a prospect of commodity price spikes is given.


  1. Acevedo, S., Mrkaic, M, Novta, N., Poplawski-Ribeiro, M., Pugacheva, E., & Topalova, P. (2018). How can low income countries cope? The effects of weather shocks on economic activity. Presentation delivered at The New School Economics of Climate Change Project, New York: The New School, April 12.Google Scholar
  2. Altenburg, T., & Assmann, C. (2018). United Nations Environment Programme Report on Green Industrial Policy: Concept, policies, country experiences (2018). Geneva and Bonn: United Nations: United Nations Environment Programme & German Development Institute/Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik.Google Scholar
  3. Altenburg, T., & Rodrik, D. (2018). Green industrial policy: Accelerating structural change towards wealthy green economies. In T. Altenburg & C. Assmann (Eds.), United Nations Environment Programme Report on Green Industrial Policy: Concept, policies, country experiences (pp. 2–20). Geneva and Bonn: United Nations: United Nations Environment Programme & German Development Institute/Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik.Google Scholar
  4. Barro, R. (1990). Government spending in a simple model of endogenous growth. Journal of Political Economy, 98, 103–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bürgenmeier, B. (1994). Environmental policy: Beyond the economic dimension. In B. Bürgenmeier (Ed.), Economy, environment, and technology: A socio-economic approach (pp. 166–175). New York: Armonk Sharpe.Google Scholar
  6. Burke, M., Hsiang, S. M., & Miguel, E. (2015). Global non-linear effect of temperature on economic production. Nature, 527, 235–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Centeno, M. A., Creager, A. N., Elga, A., Felton, E., Katz, St. N., Massey, W. A., et al. (2013). Global systemic risk: Proposal for a research community. Working paper. Princeton Institute for International and Regional Studies, Princeton University, NJ.Google Scholar
  8. Chancel, L., & Piketty, T. (2015). Carbon and inequality: From Kyoto to Paris. Paris: Paris School of Economics.Google Scholar
  9. Chichilnisky, G. (1996). Development and global finance: The case for an international bank for environmental settlements. New York: United Nations Development Programme, Office of Development Studies.Google Scholar
  10. Chichilnisky, G. (2007). The economics of global environment: Catastrophic risks in theory and policy. Cham: Springer International.Google Scholar
  11. Chichilnisky, G. (2010). The economics of climate change. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  12. Chichilnisky, G. (2016). Reversing climate change. Global Policy. Retrieved from
  13. Chichilnisky, G., & Bal, P. (2019). Reversing climate change: How carbon removals can resolve climate change and fix the economy. Singapore: World Scientific Publishing.Google Scholar
  14. Chichilnisky, G., & Heal, G. (2000). Environmental markets: Equity and efficiency. New York: Columbia University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Chichilnisky, G., Heal, G., & Vercelli, A. (1998). Sustainability: Dynamics and uncertainty. Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Chichilnisky, G., & Sheeran, K. (2018). Handbook on the economics of climate change. London: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  17. Emmert, H. (2018). The melting point: The economics and environmental impact of the winter sports industry. Unpublished working paper. Economics of the Environment, The New School, New York.Google Scholar
  18. Figuerola-Ferretti, I., & Cervera, I. (2018). Recent credit risk and bubble behavior in the corporate energy sector. Retrieved from
  19. Filip, O., Janda, K., Kristoufek, L., & Zilberman, D. (2018). Food versus fuel: An updated and expanded evidence. CAMA Working paper 73. Retrieved from
  20. Foley, D. (2007). The economic fundamentals of global warming. Working paper 07-12-044. Santa Fe Institute, Santa Fe, NM. Retrieved from
  21. Gonglewski, M., & Helm, A. (2010). An examination of business case methodology: Pedagogical synergies from two disciplines. Global Business Languages, 15(3), 17–31.Google Scholar
  22. Held, D., & McGrew, A. G. (2007). A new world economic order? Global markets and state power: Beyond globalization/anti-globalization: Beyond the great divide. New York: Polity.Google Scholar
  23. Helm, A. (2009). Global marketing classroom: Green marketing. American Marketing Association Global SIG Newsletter, Global Interests.Google Scholar
  24. Kaabia, O., Dhaoui, A., Abid, I., & Guesmi, K. (2018). Oil supply-demand shocks and stock prices. Retrieved from
  25. Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47(2), 263–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kant, I. (1788/2003). Critique of practical reasons. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  27. Lips, J. (2018). Debt and the oil industry: Analysis on the firm and production level. Retrieved from
  28. Nordhaus, W. D. (1994). Mapping the global commons: The economics of climate change. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  29. Otto, I. M., Kim, K. M., Dubrovsky, N., & Lucht, W. (2019). Shift the focus from the super-poor to the super-rich. Nature Climate Change, 9, 82–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Puaschunder, J. M. (2015). Trust and reciprocity drive common goods allocation norms. In Proceedings of the Cambridge Business & Economics Conference. Cambridge: Cambridge University.Google Scholar
  31. Puaschunder, J. M. (2016). Intergenerational climate change burden sharing: An economics of climate stability research agenda proposal. Global Journal of Management and Business Research: Economics and Commerce, 16(3), 31–38.Google Scholar
  32. Puaschunder, J. M. (2017a). Climate in the 21st century: A macroeconomic model of fair global warming benefits distribution to grant climate justice around the world and over time. In Proceedings of the 8th International RAIS Conference on Social Sciences and Humanities organized by Research Association for Interdisciplinary Studies (RAIS) at Georgetown University, Washington, DC, USA, March 26–27, pp. 205–243.Google Scholar
  33. Puaschunder, J. M. (2017b). Mapping climate in the 21st century. Development, 59(3), 211–216.Google Scholar
  34. Puaschunder, J. M. (2017c). Socio-psychological motives of socially responsible investors. Advances in Financial Economics, 19(1), 209–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Puaschunder, J. M. (2017d). Sunny side up! From climate change burden sharing to fair global warming benefits distribution: Groundwork on the metaphysics of the gains of global warming and the climatorial imperative. In Proceedings of the Administrative Sciences Association of Canada Annual Conference, HEC Montreal, Quebec, Canada.Google Scholar
  36. Puaschunder, J. M. (2017e). The call for global responsible inter-generational leadership: The quest of an integration of inter-generational equity in corporate social responsibility (CSR) models. In Natural resources management: Concepts, methodologies, tools, and applications: Information resources management association. Hershey, PA: IGI Global.Google Scholar
  37. Puaschunder, J. M. (2018a). Climate polices with burden sharing: The economies of climate financing. Advances in Financial Economics, 19, 1–13.Google Scholar
  38. Puaschunder, J. M. (2018b). Gifts without borders: Intergenerational glue connecting over distance and time as pure international development in the age of migration. In J. M. Puaschunder (Ed.), Intergenerational responsibility in the 21st century (pp. 143–174). Wilmington, DE: Vernon.Google Scholar
  39. Puaschunder, J. M. (2018c). Nachhaltigkeit und Investment: Psychologische Aspekte von nachhaltigkeitsorientiertem Investitionsverhalten. In C. T. Schmitt & E. Bamberg (Eds.), Psychologie und Nachhaltigkeit: Konzeptionelle Grundlagen, Anwendungsbeispiele und Zukunftsperspektiven (pp. 127–134), Wiesbaden: Springer.Google Scholar
  40. Puaschunder, J. M. (2019). Value at looking back: Towards an Empirical validation of the role of reflexivity in econo-historic backtesting: Economic market prediction corrections correlate with future market performance. Oxford Journal of Finance and Risk Perspectives, 8, 223–239.Google Scholar
  41. Renz, A. (2018). Sector competition for energy resources in a carbon constrained hoteling model. In 6th International Symposium on Environment Energy & Finance Issues, ISEFI 2018, Paris, France, May 24–25.Google Scholar
  42. Ricardo, D. (1817/1951). On the principles of political economy and taxation. In P. Sraffa (Ed.), The works and correspondence of David Ricardo (pp. 1951–1973). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  43. Roberts, G., Barbier, E., & van’t Veld, K. V. (2018). The beginning of the end of the age of oil. Retrieved from
  44. Russell, J. A. (1957). Industrial operations under extremes of weather. Meteorological Monographs, American Meteorological Society.Google Scholar
  45. Sachs, J. D. (2014). Climate change and intergenerational well-being. In L. Bernard & W. Semmler (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of the macroeconomics of global warming (pp. 248–259). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  46. Saussay, A. & Sato, M. (2018). The impacts of energy prices on industrial foreign investment location: Evidence from global firm level data. Retrieved from
  47. Somanathan, E., Somanathan, R., Sudarshan, A. & Tewari, M. (2014). The impact of temperature on productivity and labor supply: Evidence from Indian manufacturing. Discussion Paper in Economics 14-10. Indian Statistical Institute, Economics and Planning Unit.Google Scholar
  48. Täuber, S., van Zomeren, M., & Kutlaca, M. (2015). Should the moral core of climate issues be emphasized or downplayed in public discourse? Three ways to successfully manage the double-edged sword of moral communication. Climate Change, 130(3), 453–464.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. The World Bank. (2015). Green bonds attract private sector climate finance. World Bank Brief.Google Scholar
  50. The World Economic Forum 2015 Report. (2015). Davos, Switzerland: World Economic Forum.Google Scholar
  51. Trinks, A., Mulder, M., & Scholtens, B. (2017). Greenhouse gas emissions intensity and the cost of capital. Retrieved from
  52. Tversky, A., & Shafir, E. (1992). Choice under conflict: The dynamics of deferred decision. Psychological Science, 3(6), 358–361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. United Nations Report on the World Social Situation. (2011). The global social crisis. New York, NY: United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs Report ST/ESA/334.Google Scholar
  54. Wenger, A., Orttung, R. W., & Perovic, J. (2009). Energy and the transformation of international relations: Toward a new producer-consumer framework. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  55. World Bank 2015 Report. (2015). Washington, DC: World Bank.Google Scholar
  56. World Investment Report. (2015). Reforming international investment governance. United Nations Conference on Trade and Development Report. New York, NY: United Nations.Google Scholar
  57. Yarlik, M. V., Filis, G., Lloyd, T., & Degiannakis, St. (2018). Forecasting oil price volatility: The role of mixed-frequency data (MIDAS) model. In 6th International Symposium on Environment Energy & Finance Issues, ISEFI 2018, Paris, France, May 24–25.Google Scholar
  58. Zhang, D. (2018). Upgrading China’s energy structure: The role of financial markets. In 6th International Symposium on Environment Energy & Finance Issues, ISEFI 2018, Paris, France, May 24–25.Google Scholar
  59. Zhou, S. L., Smulders, S., & Gerlagh, R. (2018). Closing the loop in a circular economy: Saving resources or suffocating innovations? In 6th International Symposium on Environment Energy & Finance Issues, ISEFI 2018, Paris, France, May 24–25.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.The New School & Columbia UniversityNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations