Climatic Change

, Volume 124, Issue 1–2, pp 21–37 | Cite as

Scientific uncertainty and climate change: Part I. Uncertainty and unabated emissions

  • Stephan Lewandowsky
  • James S. Risbey
  • Michael Smithson
  • Ben R. Newell
  • John Hunter
Article

Abstract

Uncertainty forms an integral part of climate science, and it is often used to argue against mitigative action. This article presents an analysis of uncertainty in climate sensitivity that is robust to a range of assumptions. We show that increasing uncertainty is necessarily associated with greater expected damages from warming, provided the function relating warming to damages is convex. This constraint is unaffected by subjective or cultural risk-perception factors, it is unlikely to be overcome by the discount rate, and it is independent of the presumed magnitude of climate sensitivity. The analysis also extends to “second-order” uncertainty; that is, situations in which experts disagree. Greater disagreement among experts increases the likelihood that the risk of exceeding a global temperature threshold is greater. Likewise, increasing uncertainty requires increasingly greater protective measures against sea level rise. This constraint derives directly from the statistical properties of extreme values. We conclude that any appeal to uncertainty compels a stronger, rather than weaker, concern about unabated warming than in the absence of uncertainty.

Keywords

Uncertainty unabated emissions decision making 

Supplementary material

10584_2014_1082_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (252 kb)
(PDF 251 KB)

References

  1. Ackerman F, Heinzerling L, Massey R (2005) Applying cost-benefit to past decisions: was environmental protection ever a good idea? Adm Law Rev 57:155–192Google Scholar
  2. Aldred J (2009) The skeptical economist: revealing the ethics inside economics. EarthscanGoogle Scholar
  3. Annan JD, Hargreaves JC (2011) On the generation and interpretation of probabilistic estimates of climate sensitivity. Clim Chang 104:423–436CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Anthoff D, Tol RSJ, Yohe GW (2009) Discounting for climate change. Economics: the open access open assessment E-Journal 3Google Scholar
  5. Bahn O, Edwards NR, Knutti R, Stocker TF (2011) Energy policies avoiding a tipping point in the climate system. Energy Policy 39:334–348. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2010.10.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bender FA-M, Ekman AM, Rodhe H (2010) Response to the eruption of mount pinatubo in relation to climate sensitivity in the CMIP3 models. Clim Dyn 35:875–886CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brewster JF, Graham MR, Mutch AC (2005) Convexity, Jensen’s inequality and benefits of noisy mechanical ventilation. J R Soc Interface 2:393–396CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cox PM, Betts RA, Collins M, Harris PP, Huntingford C, Jones CD (2004) Amazonian forest dieback under climate-carbon cycle projections for the 21st century. Theor Appl Climatol 78:137–156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Feintuck M (2005) Precautionary maybe, but what’s the principle? The precautionary principle, the regulation of risk, and the public domain. J Law Soc 32:371–398. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6478.2005.00329.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Freudenburg WR, Gramling R, Davidson DJ (2008) Scientific certainty argumentation methods (SCAMs): science and the politics of doubt. Sociol Inq 78:2–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Freudenburg WR, Muselli V (2013) Reexamining climate change debates: scientific disagreement or scientific certainty argumentation methods (SCAMs)? Am Behav Sci 57:777–795. doi:10.1177/0002764212458274 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Funtowicz SO, Ravetz JR (1994) The worth of a songbird: ecological economics as a post-normal science. Ecol Econ 10:197–207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gardiner S (2006) A core precautionary principle. J Political Philos 14:33–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Garnaut R (2011) The Garnaut review 2011: Australia in the global response to climate change. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hansen J, Russell G, Lacis A, Fung I, Rind D, Stone P (1985) Climate response times: dependence on climate sensitivity and ocean mixing. Science 229:857–859CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hartman R (1972) The effects of price and cost uncertainty on investment. J Econ Theory 5:258–266CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hegerl GC, Crowley TJ, Hyde WT, Frame DJ (2006) Climate sensitivity constrained by temperature reconstructions over the past seven centuries. Nature 440:1029–1032CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Holmes J, Lowe J, Wolff E, Srokosz M (2011) Rapid climate change: lessons from the recent geological past. Glob Planet Chang 79:157–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hunter J (2012) A simple technique for estimating an allowance for uncertain sea-level rise. Clim Chang 113:239–252. doi:10.1007/s10584-011-0332-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2005) Guidance notes for lead authors of the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report on addressing uncertainties. (Technical Report)Google Scholar
  21. Jensen JLWV (1906) Sur les fonctions convexes et les inégalités entre les valeurs moyennes. Acta Mathematica 30:175–193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. John S (2010) In defence of bad science and irrational policies: an alternative account of the precautionary principle. Ethical Theory Moral Pract 13:3–18. doi:10.1007/s10677-009-9169-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kahan DM, Slovic P, Braman D, Gastil J (2006) Laws of fear: beyond the precautionary principle. Harv Law Rev 119:1071–1109Google Scholar
  24. Katz RW, Craigmile PF, Guttorp P, Haran M, Sansto B, Stein ML (2013) Uncertainty analysis in climate change assessments. Nat Clim Change 3:769–771CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Knutti R, Hegerl GC (2008) The equilibrium sensitivity of the Earth’s temperature to radiation changes. Nat Geosci 1:735–743CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Lewandowsky S, Oreskes N, Newell BR, Smithson M, Risbey J (2013) Uncertainty as a barrier to mitigation: historical and psychological factors. (Manuscript in preparation)Google Scholar
  27. Lewandowsky S, Risbey JS, Smithson M, Newell BR (2014) Scientific uncertainty and climate change: part II. Uncertainty and mitigation. Clim Chang. doi:10.1007/s10584-014-1083-6
  28. Li M, Vietri J, Galvani AP, Chapman GB (2010) How do people value life? Psychol Sci 21:163–167. doi:10.1177/0956797609357707 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Meehl GA, Stocker TF, Collins WD, Friedlingstein P, Gaye AT, Gregory JM, Zhao Z-C (2007) Global climate projections. I. In: S. Solomon, et al. (eds) 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 University Press, Cambridge, pp 748–845Google Scholar
  30. Michaels D (2008) Doubt is their product: how industry’s assault on science threatens your health. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  31. Morgan MG, Keith DW (1995) Subjective judgments by climate experts. Environ Sci Tech 29:468A–476AGoogle Scholar
  32. Narita D (2012) Managing uncertainties: the making of the IPCCs special report on carbon dioxide capture and storage. Public Underst Sci 21:84–100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Nicholls RJ, Marinova N, Lowe JA, Brown S, Vellinga P, De Gusmao D, Tol RSJ (2011) Sea-level rise and its possible impacts given a ‘beyond 4 °C’ world in the twenty-first century. Philos Trans R Soc A 369:161–181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Nolt J (2011) How harmful are the average American’s greenhouse gas emissions? Ethics. Policy Environ 14:3–10Google Scholar
  35. Nordhaus WD (2010) Economic aspects of global warming in a post-Copenhagen environment. Proc Natl Acad Sci 107:11721–11726CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Nordhaus WD (2011) The economics of tail events with an application to climate change. Rev Environ Econ Policy 5:240–257CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Padilla LE, Vallis GK, Rowley CW (2011) Probabilistic estimates of transient climate sensitivity subject to uncertainty in forcing and natural variability. J Clim 24:5521–5537. doi:10.1175/2011JCL13989.1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Peterson M (2006) The precautionary principle is incoherent. Risk Anal 26:595–601. doi:10.1111/j.1539-6924.2006.00781.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Raupach MR, Canadell JG, Ciais P, Friedlingstein P, Rayner PJ, Trudinger CM (2011) The relationship between peak warming and cumulative CO2 emissions, and its use to quantify vulnerabilities in the carbon-climate-human system. Tellus 63B:145–164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Ressurreição A, Gibbons J, Dentinho TP, Kaiser M, Santos RS, Edwards-Jones G (2011) Economic valuation of species loss in the open sea. Ecol Econ 70:729–739CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Risbey JS (2006) Some dangers of dangerous climate change. Clim Pol 6:527–536CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Rive N, Myhre G (2012) Communicating the probabilities of extreme surface temperature outcomes. Atmos Clim Sci 2:538–545Google Scholar
  43. Roe GH, Armour KC (2011) How sensitive is climate sensitivity? Geophys Res Lett 38:L14708. doi:10.1029/2011GL047913 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Roe GH, Baker MB (2007) Why is climate sensitivity so unpredictable? Science 318:629–632CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Roe GH, Baker MB (2011) Comment on Another look at climate sensitivity by Zaliapin and Ghil (2010). Nonlinear Process Geophys 18:125–127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Ross A, Matthews HD, Schmittner A, Kothavala Z (2012) Assessing the effects of ocean diffusivity and climate sensitivity on the rate of global climate change. Tellus B 64:17733CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Sarewitz D (2004) How science makes environmental controversies worse. Environ Sci Policy 7:385–403CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Schneider SH (2002) Can we estimate the likelihood of climatic changes at 2100? Clim Chang 52:441–451CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Sherwood SC, Huber M (2010) An adaptability limit to climate change due to heat stress. Proc Natl Acad Sci 107:9552–9555CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Slovic P (1999) Trust, emotion, sex, politics, and science: surveying the risk assessment battlefield. Risk Anal 19:689–701Google Scholar
  51. Smallwood PD (1996) An introduction to risk sensitivity: the use of Jensen’s inequality to clarify evolutionary arguments of adaptation and constraint. Am Zool 36:392–401Google Scholar
  52. Smithson M (1999) Conflict aversion: preference for ambiguity vs conflict in sources and evidence. Organ Behav Hum Decis Processs 79:179–198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Stern N (2007) The economics of climate change: the Stern review. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Sterner T, Persson UM (2008) An even Sterner review: introducing relative prices into the discounting debate. Rev Environ Econ Policy 2:61–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Tol RSJ (2009) The economic effects of climate change. J Econ Perspect 23:29–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Tol RSJ (2011) The social cost of carbon. Ann Rev Res Econ 3:419–443CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Tomassini L, Knutti R, Plattner G-K, van Vuuren DP, Stocker TF, Howarth RB, Borsuk ME (2010) Uncertainty and risk in climate projections for the 21st century: comparing mitigation to non-intervention scenarios. Clim Chang 103:399–422. doi:10.1007/s10584.009.9763.3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Van der Sluijs JP (2005) Uncertainty as a monster in the science policy interface: four coping strategies. Water Sci Tech 52(6):87–92Google Scholar
  59. Van den Brink HW, Können GP (2011) Estimating 10000-year return values from short time series. Intl J Clim 31:115–126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Vlek C (2010a) Judicious management of uncertain risks: I. Developments and criticisms of risk analysis and precautionary reasoning. J Risk Res 13:517–543CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Vlek C (2010b) Judicious management of uncertain risks: II. Simple rules and more intricate models for precautionary decision-making. J Risk Res 13:545–569. doi:10.1080/13669871003629903 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Walley P (1991) Statistical reasoning with imprecise probabilities. Chapman and Hall, LondonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Webster M, Forest C, Reilly J, Babiker M, Kicklighter D, Mayer M, Wang C (2003) Uncertainty analysis of climate change and policy response. Clim Chang 61:295–320. doi:10.1023/B:CLIM.0000004564.09961.9f CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Weitzman ML (2009) On modeling and interpreting the economics of catastrophic climate change. Rev Econ Stat 91:1–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Weitzman ML (2010a) How should the distant future be discounted when discount rates are uncertain? Econ Lett 107:350–353CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Weitzman ML (2010b) What is the damages function for global warming and what difference might it make? Clim Chang Econ 1:57–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Weitzman ML (2011) Fat-tailed uncertainty in the economics of catastrophic climate change. Rev Environ Econ Policy 5:275–292CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Winton M, Adcroft A, Griffes SM, Hallberg RW, Horowitz LW, Stouffer RJ (2013) Influence of ocean and atmosphere components on simulated climate sensitivities. J Clim 26:231–245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Wouter Botzen W, van den Bergh JC (2012) How sensitive is Nordhaus to Weitzman? climate policy in DICE with an alternative damage function. Econ Lett 117:372–374CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Zeebe RE, Zachos JC, Dickens GR (2009) Carbon dioxide forcing alone insuffcient to explain Palaeocene Eocene Thermal Maximum warming. Nat Geosci 2:576–580CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Stephan Lewandowsky
    • 1
    • 2
  • James S. Risbey
    • 3
  • Michael Smithson
    • 4
  • Ben R. Newell
    • 5
  • John Hunter
    • 6
  1. 1.University of Western AustraliaPerthAustralia
  2. 2.University of BristolBristolUK
  3. 3.CSIRO Marine and Atmospheric ResearchHobartAustralia
  4. 4.Australian National UniversityCanberraAustralia
  5. 5.University of New South WalesSydneyAustralia
  6. 6.Antarctic Climate & Ecosystems Cooperative Research CentreHobartAustralia

Personalised recommendations