Environmental and Resource Economics

, Volume 62, Issue 2, pp 279–308 | Cite as

Prioritarianism and Climate Change

Article
First Online:
Accepted:

Abstract

Prioritarianism is the ethical view that gives greater weight to well-being changes affecting individuals at lower well-being levels. This view is influential both in moral philosophy, and in theoretical work on social choice—where it is captured by a social welfare function (“SWF”) summing a concave transformation of individual well-being numbers. However, prioritarianism has largely been ignored by scholarship on climate change. This Article compares utilitarianism and prioritarianism as frameworks for evaluating climate policy. It reviews the distinctive normative choices that are required for the prioritarian approach: specifying a ratio scale for well-being (if the prioritarian SWF takes the standard “Atkinson” form); determining the degree of concavity of the transformation function (i.e., the degree of social inequality aversion); and choosing between “ex ante” and “ex post” prioritarianism under conditions of risk. The Article also sketches some of salient implications of a prioritarian SWF for climate policy—with respect to the social cost of carbon, the social discount rate, optimal mitigation, and the “dismal theorem.” Finally, it discusses the issue of variable population.

Keywords

Climate change Social choice Social welfare function Prioritarianism Risk and uncertainty Population 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access

Notes

Acknowledgments

This article grows out of presentations by the authors at conferences on climate change held at Duke University, Goteborg University, and Princeton University; at the conference of the European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists (EAERE); and at the Snowmass modelling workshop. Thanks to participants in those events for their comments, and to two anonymous referees. Nicolas Treich acknowledges funding from the chair “Finance Durable et Investissement Responsable” (FDIR).

References

  1. Adler MD (2009) Future generations: a prioritarian view. George Wash Law Rev 77:1478–1519Google Scholar
  2. Adler MD (2012) Well-being and fair distribution: beyond cost-benefit analysis. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  3. Adler MD (2016) Extended preferences. In: Adler MD, Fleurbaey M (eds) Oxford handbook of well-being and public policy. Oxford University Press, New York (forthcoming)Google Scholar
  4. Adler MD, Hammitt JK, Treich N (2014) The social value of mortality risk reduction: VSL versus the social welfare function approach. J Health Econ 35:82–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Adler, MD, Treich N (2014) Consumption, risk and prioritarianism. SSRN working paper no. 2508440Google Scholar
  6. Anthoff D, Hepburn C, Tol RSJ (2009) Equity weighting and the marginal damage costs of climate change. Ecol Econ 68:836–849CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Arneson RJ (2007) Desert and equality. In: Holtug N, Lippert-Rasmussen K (eds) Egalitarianism: new essays on the nature and value of equality. Clarendon Press, Oxford, pp 262–293Google Scholar
  8. Arrhenius G (2016) Population ethics. Oxford University Press, Oxford (forthcoming)Google Scholar
  9. Arrow KJ et al (2014) Should governments use a declining discount rate in project analysis? Rev Environ Econ Policy 8:145–163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bergson A (1948) Socialist economics. In: Ellis HS (ed) A survey of contemporary economics, vol 1. Richard D. Irwin, Homewood, pp 412–448Google Scholar
  11. Bergson A (1954) On the concept of social welfare. Quart J Econ 68:233–252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Blackorby C, Bossert W, Donaldson D (2000) The value of limited altruism. J Econ Theory 95:37–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Blackorby C, Bossert W, Donaldson D (2005) Population issues in social choice theory, welfare economics, and ethics. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Boadway RW, Bruce N (1984) Welfare economics. Blackwell, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  15. Bommier A, Zuber S (2008) Can preferences for catastrophe avoidance reconcile social discounting with intergenerational equity? Soc Choice Welfare 31:415–434CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Bossert W, Weymark JA (2004) Utility in social choice. In: Barberà S, Hammond PJ, Seidl C (eds) Handbook of utility theory, vol. 2 (extensions). Kluwer, Boston, pp 1099–1177CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Botzen WJW, van den Bergh JCJM (2014) Specifications of social welfare in economic studies of climate policy: overview of criteria and related policy insights. Environ Resour Econ 58:1–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Brown C (2005) Priority or sufficiency... or both? Econ Philos 21:199–220Google Scholar
  19. Broome J (2004) Weighing lives. Oxford University Press, OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Broome J (2008) The ethics of climate change. Sci Am 2008:97–102Google Scholar
  21. Carlsson F, Daruvala D, Johansson-Stenman O (2005) Are people inequality-averse or just risk-averse? Economica 72:375–396CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Dasgupta P (2008) Discounting climate change. J Risk Uncertain 37:141–169CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Dasgupta P (2012) Time and the generations. In: Hahn RW, Ulph A (eds) Climate change and common sense: essays in honour of Tom Schelling. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 101–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Dietz S, Asheim G (2012) Climate policy under sustainable discounted utilitarianism. J Environ Econ Manag 63:321–335CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Drèze J, Stern N (1987) The theory of cost-benefit analysis. In: Auerbach AJ, Feldstein M (eds) Handbook of public economics, vol 2. North-Holland, Amsterdam, pp 909–989Google Scholar
  26. Farber DA (2003) From here to eternity: environmental law and future generations. Univ Illinois Law Rev 2003:289–336Google Scholar
  27. Fleurbaey M (2010) Assessing risky social situations. J Polit Econ 118:649–680CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Fleurbaey M (2016) Equivalent income. In: Adler MD, Fleurbaey M (eds) Oxford handbook of well-being and public policy. Oxford University Press, New York (forthcoming)Google Scholar
  29. Fleurbaey M, Bovens L (2012) Evaluating life or death prospects. Econ Philos 28:217–249CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Gaertner W, Schokkaert E (2012) Empirical social choice: questionnaire-experimental studies on distributive justice. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  31. Gollier C (2001) The economics of risk and time. MIT Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  32. Gollier C (2013) Pricing the planet’s future: the economics of discounting in an uncertain world. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  33. Gollier C, Weitzman ML (2010) How should the distant future be discounted when discount rates are uncertain? Econ Lett 107:350–353CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Grant S, Kajii A, Polak B, Safra Z (2010) Generalized utilitarianism and Harsanyi’s impartial observer theorem. Econometrica 78:1939–1971CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Greenstone M, Kopits E, Wolverton A (2013) Developing a social cost of carbon for US regulatory analysis: a methodology and interpretation. Rev Environ Econ Policy 7:23–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Groom B et al (2005) Declining discount rates: the long and the short of it. Environ Resour Econ 32:445–493CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Hammond P (1983) Ex-post optimality as a dynamically consistent objective for collective choice under uncertainty. In: Pattanaik PK, Salles M (eds) Social choice and welfare. North-Holland, Amsterdam, pp 175–205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Harsanyi JC (1977) Rational behavior and bargaining equilibrium in games and social situations. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Holtug N (2010) Persons, interests, and justice. Oxford University Press, OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Holtug N (2015) Theories of value aggregation: utilitarianism, egalitarianism, prioritarianism. In: Hirose I, Olson J (eds) The Oxford handbook of value theory. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 267–284Google Scholar
  41. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Working Group III (2014) Social, economic and ethical concepts and methods. In: Climate change 2014: mitigation of climate changeGoogle Scholar
  42. Kagan S (1989) The limits of morality. Clarendon Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  43. Kaplow L (2008) The theory of taxation and public economics. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  44. Kaplow L (2010) Concavity of utility, concavity of welfare, and redistribution of income. Int Tax Public Finance 17:25–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Kaplow L, Weisbach D (2011) Discount rates, social judgments, individuals’ risk preferences, and uncertainty. J Risk Uncertain 42:125–143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Keeney RL (1980) Equity and public risk. Oper Res 28:527–534CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Koopmans TC (1960) Stationary ordinal utility and impatience. Econometrica 28:287–309CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Kreps DM (1988) Notes on the theory of choice. Westview Press, BoulderGoogle Scholar
  49. Llavador H, Roemer JE, Silvestre J (2011) A dynamic analysis of human welfare in a warming planet. J Public Econ 95:1607–1620CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. McKerlie D (2007) Egalitarianism and the difference between interpersonal and intrapersonal judgments. In: Holtug N, Lippert-Rasmussen K (eds) Egalitarianism: new essays on the nature and value of equality. Clarendon Press, Oxford, pp 157–173Google Scholar
  51. Millner A (2013) On welfare frameworks and catastrophic climate risks. J Environ Econ Manag 65:310–325CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Millner A, Dietz S, Heal G (2013) Scientific ambiguity and climate policy. Environ Resour Econ 55:21–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Neumayer E (2013) Weak versus strong sustainability: exploring the limits of two opposing paradigms. Edward Elgar, CheltenhamCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Nordhaus WD (2007) A review of the Stern review on the economics of climate change. J Econ Lit 45:686–702CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Nordhaus WD (2008) A question of balance: weighing the options on global warming policies. Yale University Press, New HavenGoogle Scholar
  56. Nordhaus WD (2010) Economic aspects of global warming in a post-Copenhagen environment. Proc Natl Acad Sci 107:11721–11726CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Parfit D (1987) Reasons and persons. Revised and corrected paper edition. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  58. Parfit D (1991) Equality or priority. Lindley lecture. University of Kansas. Reprinted in M. Clayton and A. Williams (eds) The Ideal of Equality (Houndmills: Palgrave, 2000), pp 81–125Google Scholar
  59. Parfit D (2012) Another defence of the priority view. Utilitas 24:399–440CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Pindyck RS (2013) Climate change policy: what do the models tell us? J Econ Lit 51:860–872CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Porter T (2012) In defence of the priority view. Utilitas 24:197–206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Ramsey FP (1928) A mathematical theory of saving. Econ J 38:543–559CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Roberts MA (2015) Population axiology. In: Hirose I, Olson J (eds) The Oxford handbook of value theory. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 399–423Google Scholar
  64. Roemer JE (2010) The ethics of intertemporal distribution in a warming planet. Environ Resour Econ 48:363–390CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Samuelson PA (1947) Foundations of economic analysis. Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  66. Scheffler S (1982) The rejection of consequentialism. Clarendon Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  67. Schelling TC (1995) Intergenerational discounting. Energy Policy 23:395–401CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Sidgwick H (1907) The methods of ethics, 7th edn. Macmillan, London. Reprinted 1981 (Indianapolis: Hackett)Google Scholar
  69. Stern N (2007) The economics of climate change: the Stern review. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Sterner T, Persson UM (2008) An even Sterner review: introducing relative prices into the discounting debate. Rev Environ Econ Policy 2:61–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Sumner LW (1996) Welfare, happiness and ethics. Clarendon Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  72. Tol RSJ (2011) The social cost of carbon. Annu Rev Resour Econ 3:419–443CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Traeger CP (2013) Discounting under uncertainty: disentangling the Weitzman and the Gollier effect. J Environ Econ Manag 66:573–582CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Tungodden B (2003) The value of equality. Econ Philos 19:1–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. van den Bergh JCJM, Botzen WJW (2014) A lower bound to the social cost of \(\text{ CO }_{2}\) emissions. Nat Clim Change 4:253–258CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. von Weizsacker CC (1965) Existence of optimal programs of accumulation for an infinite time horizon. Rev Econ Stud 32:85–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Weitzman ML (1998) Why the far-distant future should be discounted at its lowest possible rate. J Environ Econ Manag 36:201–208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Weitzman ML (2001) Gamma discounting. Am Econ Rev 91:260–271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Weitzman ML (2007) A review of the Stern review on the economics of climate change. J Econ Lit 45:703–724CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Weitzman ML (2009) On modelling and interpreting the economics of catastrophic climate change. Rev Econ Stat 91:1–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Weitzman M (2011) Fat-tailed uncertainty in the economics of catastrophic climate change. Rev Environ Econ Policy 5:275–292CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Weymark JA (2016) Social welfare functions. In: Adler MD, Fleurbaey M (eds) Oxford handbook of well-being and public policy. Oxford University Press, New York (forthcoming)Google Scholar
  83. Williams A (2012) The priority view bites the dust? Utilitas 24:315–331CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Duke University School of LawDurhamUSA
  2. 2.Toulouse School of Economics (LERNA, INRA)ToulouseFrance

Personalised recommendations