Abstract
The adoption of physical thresholds as a ceiling for permitted climate change sidesteps contentious issues such as: policy cost, impact valuation, discounting and equity. In this paper I offer some reflections on the concept of tolerable climate change. I also use an integrated climate assessment model (ICAM-3) to demonstrate how uncertainties in our understanding of socioeconomic and earth systems reduce the probability of success in keeping climate change within a pre-defined tolerable range. Finally, I explore the implications of socioeconomic thresholds for welfare loss in pursuit of a climate policy (e.g., tax rebellions). Crossing such regional socioeconomic thresholds will lead to local failures to pursue climate change mitigation policies — increasing the probability of straying beyond the tolerable window of global climate change. Given various uncertainties and the dynamics of the socioeconomic and the earth systems, the odds of success in staying within a climate change window of ΔT ≤ 2°C, and ΔT/yr ≤ 0.015°C are estimated to be no higher than 25% over the next century. A risk-risk tradeoff approach appears to hold promise, but while adoption of a larger window of tolerance increases the probability of success, it also opens the window specification criteria to contention.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Baskerville, G.L.: 1995, ‘The forestry problem’, in L.H. Gunderson, C.S. Holling and S.S. Light (eds.), Barriers and Bridges to the Renewal of Ecosystem and Institutions, Columbia University Press, New York, pp. 37-102.
Dowlatabadi, H.: 1996, ‘Adaptive management of climate change mitigation: a strategy for coping with uncertainty’, Center for Integrated Study of the Human Dimensions of Global Change, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh.
Dowlatabadi, H.: 1998, ‘The sensitivity of climate change mitigation estimates to assumptions about technical change’, Energy Economics 20(5-6):473-493.
Dowlatabadi, H., Morgan, G. and Kandlikar, M.: 1995, The Integrated Climate Assessment Model 2.1: Parameter and Model Uncertainties, Society for Risk Analysis, Waikiki, Hawaii.
Dowlatabadi, H. and Morgan, M.G.: 2000, ‘The Integrated Climate Assessment Model’, Center for Integrated Study of the Human Dimensions of Global Change, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh.
Eldredge, N.: 1971, ‘The Allopatric Model and Phylogeny in Paleozoic Invertebrates’, Evolution 25, 156-167.
Eldredge, N. and Gould, S.J.: 1972, ‘Punctuated Equilibria: an alternative to phyletic gradualism’, in T. J. M. Schopf (ed.), Models in Paleobiology, Freeman-Cooper, San Francisco, pp. 82-115.
Emanuel, W.B., Shugart, H.H. and Stevenson, M.P.: 1985, ‘Climatic Change and the Broad-Scale Distribution of Terrestrial Ecosystem Complexes’, Climatic Change 7, 29-43.
EMF-14: 1995, ‘Second round Study Design for EMF-14: Integrated Assessment of Climate Change’, Energy Modeling Forum, Stanford University, Stanford, CA.
Gould, S.J.: 1977, Ontology and Phylogeny, The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, USA.
Gunderson, L.H., Holling, C.S. and Light, S.S. (eds.): 1995, Barriers and Bridges to the Renewal of Ecosystem and Institutions, Columbia University Press, New York.
Holdridge, L.R.: 1947, ‘Determination of world formulations from simple climatic data’, Science 105, 367-368.
Houghton, J.T., Filho, L.G.M., Callander, B.A., et al., (eds.): 1996, Climate Change 1995: The Science of Climate Change, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
Lutz, W., Sanderson, W. and Scherbov, S.: 1997, ‘Doubling of world population unlikely’, Nature 387(19), 803-804.
Mahasenan, N., Watts, R.G. and Dowlatabadi, H.: 1997, ‘Low-frequency oscillations in temperature-proxy records and implications for recent climate change’, GRL 24(30), 563-566.
Mann, M.E., Park, J. and Bradley, R.S.: 1995, ‘Global interdecadal and century-scale climate oscillations during the past five centuries’, Nature 378, 266-270.
Mayr, E.: 1954, ‘Change of genetic environment and evolution’, in J. Huxley, A.C. Hardy, E.B. Ford (eds.), Evolution as a Process, Allen and Unwin, London, pp. 157-180.
Morgan, G., Kandlikar, M., Risbey, J. and Dowlatabadi, H.: 1999, ‘Why conventional tools for policy analysis are often inadequate for problems of global change’, Climatic Change 41(3-4):271-281.
Nordhaus, W.D.: 1992, ‘An optimal transition path for controlling greenhouse gases’, Science 258, 1315-1319.
Parry, M. and Livermore, M.: 1997, ‘Tolerable Levels of Climate Change’, Paper Presented at the Worksop on “Climate Change: Thresholds and Response Functions”, Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, Potsdam, Germany.
Prentice, K.C.: 1990, ‘Bioclimatic distribution of vegetation for general circulation model studies’, Journal of Geophysical Research 95(D8), 11811-11830.
Schlesinger, M.E. and Ramankutty, N.: 1994, ‘An oscillation in the global climate system of period 65-70 years’, Nature 367, 723-726.
Shewliakowa, E.,: 1996, Application of Statistical Methods for Modeling Impacts of Climate Change on Terrestrial Distribution of Vegetation, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh.
Smith, T.M. and Shugart, H.H.: 1993, ‘The transient-response of terrestrial carbon storage to a perturbed climate’, Nature 361, 523-526.
Stanley, S.M.: 1979, Macroevolution, W.H. Freeman and Company, San Francisco.
Toth, F.L., Bruckner, T., Füssel, H.-M., Leimbach, M., Petschel-Held, G., Schellnhuber, H.-J.: 1998, ‘The tolerable windows approach to integrated assessments’, in: O.K. Cameron, K. Fukuwatari and T. Morita (eds.), Climate Change and Integrated Assessment Models [IAMs]-Bridging the Gaps, Proceedings of the IPCC Asia-Pacific Workshop on Integrated Assessment Models, Center for Global Environmental Research, Tsukuba, Japan, pp. 403-430.
WBGU: 1995, Scenario for the Derivation of Global CO 2 Reduction Targets and Implementation Strategies, German Advisory Board on Global Change, Bremerhaven.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Dowlatabadi, H. Bumping against a Gas Ceiling. Climatic Change 46, 391–407 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005611713386
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005611713386