Climatic Change

, Volume 117, Issue 3, pp 433–438 | Cite as

Improving the assessment and valuation of climate change impacts for policy and regulatory analysis

  • Alex L. Marten
  • Robert E. Kopp
  • Kate C. Shouse
  • Charles W. Griffiths
  • Elke L. Hodson
  • Elizabeth Kopits
  • Bryan K. Mignone
  • Chris Moore
  • Steve C. Newbold
  • Stephanie Waldhoff
  • Ann Wolverton
Article

References

  1. Hof AF, Hope CW, Lowe J, Mastrandrea MD, Meinshausen M, Vuuren DP (2011) The benefits of climate change mitigation in integrated assessment models: the role of the carbon cycle and climate component. Climatic ChangeGoogle Scholar
  2. Interagency Working Group on the Social Cost of Carbon, United States Government (2010) Appendix 15a. Social Cost of Carbon for Regulatory Impact Analysis under Executive Order 12866, in: Final Rule Technical Support Document (TSD): Energy Efficiency Program for Commercial and Industrial Equipment: Small Electric Motors. U.S. Department of EnergyGoogle Scholar
  3. Kandlikar M (1996) Indicies for comparing greenhouse gas emissions: integrating science and economics. Energ Econ 18:265–281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Kopp RE, Mignone BK (2012) The U.S. government’s social cost of carbon estimates after their first two years: pathways for improvement. Economics 2012:2012–2015Google Scholar
  5. Kopp R, Tol R, Waldhoff S (eds) (2012a) The social cost of carbon (special issue), economics: The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-JournalGoogle Scholar
  6. Kopp RE, Golub A, Keohane NO, Onda C (2012b) The influence of the specification of climate change damages on the social cost of carbon. Economics 6:2012–2013Google Scholar
  7. Marten AL (2011). Transient Temperature Response Modeling in IAMs: The Effects of Over Simplification on the SCC. Economics: The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal, 5:2011–18Google Scholar
  8. NAS (2009), Hidden Costs of Energy: Unpriced Consequences of Energy Production and Use, National Academies Press, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  9. Nordhaus WD (2011) “Estimates of the social cost of carbon: background and results from the RICE-2011 Model.” NBER Working Paper No. 17450. http://www.nber.org/papers/w17540
  10. O’Neill B (2010) Multi-century scenario development and socioeconomic uncertainty, in: improving the assessment and valuation of climate change impacts for policy and regulatory analysis: modeling climate change impacts and Associated Economic Damages. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and U.S. Department of EnergyGoogle Scholar
  11. Stern N (2007) The economics of climate change: The Stern review. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, pp 161–190Google Scholar
  12. van Vuuren DP, Lowe J, Stehfest E, Gohar L, Hof AF, Hope C, Warren R, Meinshausen M, Plattner GK (2011) How well do integrated assessment models simulate climate change? Clim Chang 104:255–285CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Warren R (2011) The role of interactions in a world implementing adaptation and mitigation solutions to climate change. Phil Trans Roy Soc A 369:217–241CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Warren R, Mastrandrea MD, Hope C, Hof AF (2010) Variation in the climatic response to SRES emissions scenarios in integrated assessment models. Clim Chang 102:671–785CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© U.S. Government 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alex L. Marten
    • 1
  • Robert E. Kopp
    • 2
  • Kate C. Shouse
    • 3
  • Charles W. Griffiths
    • 1
  • Elke L. Hodson
    • 4
    • 5
  • Elizabeth Kopits
    • 1
  • Bryan K. Mignone
    • 4
  • Chris Moore
    • 1
  • Steve C. Newbold
    • 1
  • Stephanie Waldhoff
    • 6
  • Ann Wolverton
    • 1
  1. 1.National Center for Environmental Economics, U.S. Environmental Protection AgencyWashingtonUSA
  2. 2.Department of Earth & Planetary Sciences and Rutgers Energy InstituteRutgers UniversityPiscatawayUSA
  3. 3.Office of Air and Radiation, U.S. Environmental Protection AgencyWashingtonUSA
  4. 4.U.S. Department of EnergyOffice of Climate Change Policy & TechnologyWashingtonUSA
  5. 5.AAAS Science & Technology Policy Fellow, American Association for the Advancement of ScienceWashingtonUSA
  6. 6.Joint Global Change Research Institute, Pacific Northwest National LaboratoryCollege ParkUSA

Personalised recommendations