Climate Response Uncertainty and the Benefits of Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reductions

  • Stephen C. NewboldEmail author
  • Adam Daigneault


Some recent research suggests that uncertainty about the response of the climate system to atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations can have a disproportionately large influence on benefits estimates for climate change policies, potentially even dominating the effect of the discount rate. In this paper we conduct a series of numerical simulation experiments to investigate the quantitative significance of climate response uncertainty for economic assessments of climate change. First we characterize climate uncertainty by constructing two probability density functions—a Bayesian model-averaged and a Bayesian updated version—based on a combination of uncertainty ranges for climate sensitivity reported in the scientific literature. Next we estimate the willingness to pay of a representative agent for a range of emissions reduction policies using two simplified economic models. Our results illustrate the potential for large risk premiums in benefits estimates as suggested by the recent theoretical work on climate response uncertainty, and they show that the size and even the sign of the risk premium may depend crucially on how the posterior distribution describing the overall climate sensitivity uncertainty is constructed and on the specific shape of the damage function.


Climate change Climate sensitivity Uncertainty Catastrophe 


  1. Andronova NG, Schlesinger ME (2001) Objective estimation of the probability density function for climate sensitivity. J Geophys Res 106(D19): 22605–22611CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Andronova N, Schlesinger ME, Dessai S, Hulme M, Li B (2007) The concept of climate sensitivity: history and development. In: Schlesinger M, Kheshgi H, Smith J, Chesnaye F, Reilly JM, Wilson T, Kolstad C (eds) Human-induced climate change: an interdisciplinary assessment. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  3. Annan JD, Hargreaves JC (2006) Multiple observationally based constraints to estimate climate sensitivity. Geophys Res Lett 33: L06704
  4. Annan JD, Hargreaves JC (2008) On the generation and interpretation of probabilistic estimates of climate sensitivity.
  5. Anthoff D, Tol RSJ (2009) The impact of climate change on the balanced growth equivalent: an application of FUND. Environ Res Econ doi: 10.1007/s10640-009-9269-5
  6. Arrow KJ, Cropper ML, Eads GC, Hahn RW, Lave LB, Noll RG, Portney PR, Russel M, Schmalensee R, Smith VK, Stavins RN (1996) Is there a role for benefit-cost analysis in environmental, health, and safety regulation?. Science 272: 211–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Ceronsky M, Anthoff D, Hepburn C, Tol RSJ (2005) Checking the price tag on catastrophe: the social cost of carbon under non-linear climate response. Working paper FNU-87
  8. Dasgupta P (2007) Comments on the Stern Review’s economics of climate change
  9. DeCanio SJ (2003) Economic models of climate change: a critique. Palgrave MacMillan, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Forest CE, Stone PH, Sokolov AP, Allen MR, Webster MD (2002) Quantifying uncertainties in climate system properties with the use of recent observations. Science 295: 113–117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Forest CM, Webster M, Reilly J (2004) Narrowing uncertainty in global climate change. Ind Phys AugSep: 22–25.
  12. Forest DJ, Stone PH, Sokolov AP (2006) Estimated PDFs of climate system properties including natural and anthropogenic forcings. Geophys Res Lett 33: L01705CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Forster PM de DF, Gregory JM (2006) The climate sensitivity and its components diagnosed from Earth radiation budget data. J Clim 19: 39–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Frame DJ, Booth BBB, Kettleborough JA, Stainforth DA, Gregory JM, Collins M, Allen MR (2005) Constraining climate forecasts: The role of prior assumptions. Geophys Res Lett 32: L09702CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gregory JM, Stouffer RJ, Raper SCB, Stott PA, Rayner NA (2002) An observationally based estimate of the climate sensitivity. J Clim 15(22): 3117–3121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hammitt JK, Lempert RJ, Schlesinger ME (1992) A sequential-decision strategy for abating climate change. Nature 357: 315–318CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Harvey LDD, Kaufmann RK (2002) Simultaneously constraining climate sensitivity and aerosol radiative forcing. J Clim 15(20): 2837–2861CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Heal G (2008) Climate economics: a meta-review and some suggestions. NBER working paper
  19. Heal G, Kristrom B (2002) Uncertainty and climate change. Environ Res Econ 22: 3–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 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
  21. Hegerl GC, Zwiers FW, Braconnot P, Gillett NP, Luo Y, Marengo Orsini JA, Nicholls N, Penner JE, Stott PA (2007) Understanding and attributing climate change. In: Solomon S, Qin D, Manning M, Marquis M, Averyt K, Tignor MMB, Miller HL, Chen Z (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, United KingdomGoogle Scholar
  22. Hoeting JA, Madigan D, Rafterty AE, Volinsky CT (1999) Bayesian model averaging: a tutorial. Stat Sci 14(4): 382–417CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hoffert MI, Covey C (1992) Deriving global climate sensitivity from paleoclimate reconstructions. Nature 360: 573–576CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hope C (2006) The marginal impact of CO 2 from PAGE2002: an integrated assessment model incorporating the IPCC’s five reasons for concern. The Integr Assess J 6(1): 19–56
  25. Keller K, Bolker BM, Bradford DF (2004) Uncertain climate thresholds and optimal economic growth. J Environ Econ Manage 48: 723–741CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kerr RA (2004) Three degrees of consensus. Science 305: 932–934CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Knutti R, Stocker TF, Joos F, Plattner G-K (2002) Constraints on radiative forcing and future climate change from observations and climate model ensembles. Nature 416: 719–723CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kolstad CD (1996) Learning and stock effects in environmental regulation: the case of greenhouse gas emissions. J Environ Econ Manage 31: 1–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Morgan MG, Keith D (1995) Subjective judgments by climate experts. Environ Sci Technol 29: 468A–476ACrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Murphy JM, Sexton DMH, Barnett DN, Jones GS, Webb MJ, Collins M, Stainforth DA (2004) Quantification of modeling uncertainties in a large ensemble of climate change simulations. Nature 430: 768–772CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Nordhaus W (2007) Critical assumptions in the Stern Review on climate change. Science 317: 201–202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Nordhaus W (2008) A question of balance: weighing the options on global warming policies.
  33. Nordhaus WD, Boyer J (2000) Warming the world: economic models of global warming.. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  34. Piani C, Frame DJ, Stainforth A, Allen MR (2005) Constraints on climate change from a multi-thousand member ensemble of simulations. Geophys Res Lett 32(23): L23825CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Pindyck RS (2009) Uncertainty, extreme outcomes, and climate change policy. MIT working paperGoogle Scholar
  36. Pizer WA (1998) Optimal choice of policy instrument and stringency under uncertainty: the case of climate change. RFF discussion paper 98-XX.
  37. Pizer WA (1999) The optimal choice of climate change policy in the presence of uncertainty. Resour Energy Econ 21: 255–287CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Ramanathan V, Feng y (2008) On avoiding dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system: formidable challenges ahead. Proc Natl Acad Sci 105: 14245–14250CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Roe GH, Baker MB (2007) Why is climate sensitivity so unpredictable?. Science 318: 629–632CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Runde J (1998) Clarifying Frank Knight’s discussion of the meaning of risk and uncertainty. Cambridge J Econ 22: 539–546CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Schneider von Deimling T, Held H, Ganopolski A, Rahmstorf S (2006) Climate sensitivity estimated from ensemble simulations of glacial climate. Clim Dyn 27: 149–163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Smith SJ, Wigley TML (2006) Multi-gas forcing stabilization with MiniCAM (Mini Climate Assessment Model). Energy J Spec Issue 3: 373–392Google Scholar
  43. Stainforth DA, Aina T, Christensen C, Collins M, Faull N, Frame DJ, Kettleborough JA, Knight S, Martin A, Murphy JM, Piani C, Sexton D, Smith LA, Spicer RA, Thorpe AJ, Allen MR (2005) Uncertainty in predictions of the climate response to rising levels of greenhouse gases. Nature 433: 403–406CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Stern N (2006) The Stern Review on the economics of climate change. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  45. Stern N, Taylor C (2007) Climate change: risk, ethics and the Stern Review. Science 317: 203–204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Sterner P, Persson UM (2007) An even Sterner Review: introducing relative prices into the discounting debate. Resources for the future working paper.
  47. Tol RSJ (2003) Is the uncertainty about climate change too large for expected cost-benefit analysis?. Clim Change 56: 265–289CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Tol RSJ (2006) The climate framework for uncertainty, negotiation and distribution (FUND), technical description, version 2.8Google Scholar
  49. Tol RSJ, de Vos AF (1998) A Bayesian statistical analysis of the enhanced greenhouse effect. Clim Change 38: 87–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. USEPA (2007) EPA analysis of the climate stewardship and innovation act of 2007: S.280 in the 110th Congress.
  51. Vaughan DG, Arthern R (2007) Why is it hard to predict the future of ice sheets?. Science 315: 1503–1504CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Webster M, Jakobovits L, Norton J (2008) Learning about climate change and implications for near-term policy. Clim Change 89: 67–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Weitzman ML (2007) The Stern Review of the economics of climate change.
  54. Weitzman ML (2009) On modeling and interpreting the economics of catastrophic climate change. Rev Econ Stat 91(1): 1–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Wigley TML (1994) MAGICC (Model for the assessment of greenhouse-gas induced climate change): user’s guide and scientific reference manual. National Center for Atmospheric Research: Boulder, CO.
  56. Wigley TML, Ammann CM, Santer BD, Raper SCB (2005) Effect of climate sensitivity on the response to volcanic forcing. J Geophys Res 110: D09107CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© United States Environmental Protection Agency 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.National Center for Environmental EconomicsUS EPAWashingtonUSA
  2. 2.Climate Change DivisionUS EPAWashingtonUSA
  3. 3.Climate Change DivisionUS EPAWashingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations