Environmental Modeling & Assessment

, Volume 3, Issue 1–2, pp 63–74

On the representation of impact in integrated assessment models of climate change

  • Richard S.J. Tol
  • Samuel Fankhauser
Article

Abstract

The paper provides an overview of attempts to represent climate change impact in over twenty integrated assessment models (IAMs) of climate change. Focusing on policy optimization IAMs, the paper critically compares modeling solutions, discusses alternatives and outlines important areas for improvement. Perhaps the most crucial area of improvement concerns the dynamic representation of impact, where more credible functional forms need to be developed to express time‐dependent damage as a function of changing socio‐economic circumstances, vulnerability, degree of adaptation, and the speed as well as the absolute level of climate change.

climate change impact integrated assessment modeling 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    J. Alcamo, IMAGE 2.0 - Integrated Modeling of Global Climate Change (Kluwer, Dordrecht, 1994).Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    W.R. Cline, The Economics of Global Warming (Institute for International Economics, Washington, DC, 1992).Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    CRU/ERL, Development of a Framework for the Evaluation of Policy Options to Deal with the Greenhouse Effect: Economic Evaluation of Impacts and Adaptive Measures in the European Community (University of East Anglia, Norwich, 1992).Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    R. Darwin, M. Tsigas, J. Lewandrowski and A. Raneses, Land use and cover in ecological economics, Ecological Economics 17(3) (1996) 157–181.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    R. Darwin, M. Tsigas, J. Lewandrowski and A. Raneses, World agriculture and climate change: Economic adaptations, Agricultural Economic Report 703, Economic Research Service, US Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC (1995).Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    H. Dowlatabadi and G. Morgan, A model framework for integrated studies of the climate problem, Energy Policy (1993) 209–221.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    J. Edmonds, M. Wise and C. MacCracken, Advanced energy technologies and climate change: An analysis using the global change assessment model (GCAM), in: Global Climate Change - Science, Policy, and Mitigation Strategies, eds. C.V. Mathai and G. Stensland (Air & Waste Management Association, Boston, MA, 1994).Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    J.A. Edmonds, H.M. Pitcher, N.J. Rosenberg and T.M.L. Wigley, Design of the global change assessment model (GCAM), in: Costs, Impacts, and Benefits of CO 2 Mitigation, eds. Y. Kaya, N. Nakićenović, W.D. Nordhaus and F.L. Toth (IIASA, Laxenburg, 1993).Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    S. Fankhauser, The economic costs of global warming: Some monetary estimates, in: Costs, Impacts, and Benefits of CO2 Mitigation, eds. Y. Kaya, N. Nakićenović, W.D. Nordhaus and F.L. Toth (IIASA, Laxenburg, 1993).Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    S. Fankhauser, Protection vs. retreat: Estimating the costs of sea level rise, Environment and Planning A27 (1994) 299–319.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    S. Fankhauser, Valuing Climate Change - The Economics of the Greenhouse (EarthScan, London, 1995).Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    S. Fankhauser, R.S.J. Tol and D.W. Pearce, The aggregation of climate change damages: A welfare-theoretic approach, Environmental and Resource Economics 10(3) (1997) 249–266.Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    M.J. Grubb, M. Ha Duong and T. Chapuis, The economics of changing course, Energy Policy 23(4/5) (1995) 417–432.Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    J.K. Hammitt, R.J. Lempert and M.E. Schlesinger, A sequentialdecision strategy for abating climate change, Nature 357 (1992) 315–318.Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    T.W. Hertel, ed., Notebook for Short Course in Global Trade Analysis (Department of Agricultural Economics, Purdue University, West Lafayette, 1993).Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    O. Hohmeyer and M. Gaertner, The Costs of Climate Change - A Rough Estimate of Orders of Magnitude (Fraunhofer-Institut für Systemtechnik und Innovationsforschung, Karlsruhe, 1992).Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    C.W. Hope, J. Anderson and P. Wenman, Policy analysis of the greenhouse effect - An application of the PAGE model, Energy Policy 15 (1993) 328–338.Google Scholar
  18. [18]
    C.D. Kolstad, George Bush versus Al Gore - Irreversibilities in greenhouse gas accumulation and emission control investment, Energy Policy 22(9) (1994) 772–778.Google Scholar
  19. [19]
    R.J. Lempert, M.E. Schlesinger and J.K. Hammitt, The impact of potential abrupt climate changes of near-term policy choices, Climatic Change 26 (1994) 351–376.Google Scholar
  20. [20]
    R.J. Lempert, M.E. Schlesinger and S.C. Bankes, When we don't know the costs or the benefits: Adaptive strategies for abating climate change, Climatic Change 33 (1996) 235–274.Google Scholar
  21. [21]
    D. Maddison, A cost-benefit analysis of slowing climate change, Energy Policy 23(4/5) (1995) 337–346.Google Scholar
  22. [22]
    A.S. Manne, R. Mendelsohn and R.G. Richels, MERGE - A model for evaluating regional and global effects of GHG reduction policies, Energy Policy 23(1) (1995) 17–34.Google Scholar
  23. [23]
    A.S. Manne and R.G. Richels, The greenhouse debate: economic efficiency, burden sharing and hedging strategies, Energy Journal 16(4) (1995) 1–37.Google Scholar
  24. [24]
    R. Mendelsohn and J. Neuman, The Impact of Climate Change on the US Economy (forthcoming).Google Scholar
  25. [25]
    S. Mori, MARIA - Multiregional approach for resource and industry allocation model and its first simulations, in: Global Warming, Carbon Limitation and Economic Development, ed. A. Amano (Center for Global Environmental Research, Tsukuba, 1996).Google Scholar
  26. [26]
    S. Mori and M. Takahaashi, Sustainability and catastrophe simulations of an integrated assessment model MARIA - Extension of multiregional approach for resource and industry allocation, Technical Report, Department of Industrial Administration, Science University of Tokyo (1996).Google Scholar
  27. [27]
    S. Mori and M. Takahaashi, An integrated assessment model for the evaluation of new energy technologies and food production - An extension of multiregional approach for resource and industry allocation model, International Journal of Global Energy Issues (1997).Google Scholar
  28. [28]
    T. Morita, M. Kainuma, H. Harasawa, K. Kai, L. Dong-Kun and Y. Matsuoka, Asian-Pacific integrated model for evaluating policy options to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and global warming impacts, AIM Interim Paper, National Institute for Environmental Studies, Tsukuba (1994).Google Scholar
  29. [29]
    T. Morita, M. Kainuma, K. Masuda, H. Harasawa, K. Takahashi, Y. Matsuoka, J. Sun, Z. Li, F. Zhou, X. Hu, K. Jiang, P.R. Shukla, V.K. Sharma, T.Y. Jung, D.K. Lee, D. Hilman, M.F. Helmy, M. Yoshida, G. Hibino and H. Ishii, Asian-Pacific Integrated Model AIM (National Institute for Environmental Studies, Tsukuba, 1997).Google Scholar
  30. [30]
    W.D. Nordhaus, To slow or not to slow: The economics of the greenhouse effect, Economic Journal 101 (1991) 920–937.Google Scholar
  31. [31]
    W.D. Nordhaus, Managing the Global Commons: Economics of Climate Change (The MIT Press, Cambridge, 1994).Google Scholar
  32. [32]
    W.D. Nordhaus and Z. Yang, RICE: A regional dynamic general equilibrium model of optimal climate-change policy, American Economic Review 86(4) (1996) 741–765.Google Scholar
  33. [33]
    D.W. Pearce, W.R. Cline, A.N. Achanta, S. Fankhauser, R.K. Pachauri, R.S.J. Tol and P. Vellinga, The social costs of climate change: Greenhouse damage and the benefits of control, in: Climate Change 1995: Economic and Social Dimensions - Contribution of Working Group III to the Second Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, eds. J.P. Bruce, H. Lee and E.F. Haites (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1996).Google Scholar
  34. [34]
    S.C. Peck and T.J. Teisberg, CETA: A model for carbon emissions trajectory assessment, The Energy Journal 13(1) (1992) 55–77.Google Scholar
  35. [35]
    S.C. Peck and T.J. Teisberg, Optimal carbon emissions trajectories when damages depend on the rate or level of global warming, Climatic Change 28 (1994) 289–314.Google Scholar
  36. [36]
    E.L. Plambeck, C.W. Hope and J. Anderson, Updating PAGE: Policy Analysis for the Greenhouse Effect, Research Papers in Management Studies, Vol. 14 (Judge Institute of Management Studies, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, 1995).Google Scholar
  37. [37]
    E.L. Plambeck and C.W. Hope, Validation and Initial Results for the Updated PAGE Model: Policy Analysis for the Greenhouse Effect, Research Papers in Management Studies, Vol. 15 (Judge Institute of Management Studies, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, 1995).Google Scholar
  38. [38]
    E.L. Plambeck and C.W. Hope, PAGE 95 - An updated valuation of the impacts of global warming, Energy Policy 24(9) (1996) 783–793.Google Scholar
  39. [39]
    J.D. Scheraga, N.A. Leary, R.J. Goettle, D.W. Jorgenson and P.J. Wilcoxen, Macroeconomic modeling and the assessment of climate change impacts, in: Costs, Impacts and Benefits of CO2 Mitigation, eds. Y. Kaya, N. Nakićenović, W.D. Nordhaus and F. Toth (IIASA, Laxenburg, 1993).Google Scholar
  40. [40]
    J.G. Titus, The costs of climate change to the united states, in: Global Climate Change: Implications, Challenges and Mitigation Measures, eds. S.K. Majumdar, L.S. Kalkstein, B. Yarnal, E.W. Miller and L.M. Rosenfeld (Pennsylvania Academy of Science, 1992).Google Scholar
  41. [41]
    R.S.J. Tol, The damage costs of climate change - A note on tangibles and intangibles, applied to DICE, Energy Policy 22(5) (1994) 436–438.Google Scholar
  42. [42]
    R.S.J. Tol, The damage costs of climate change toward more comprehensive calculations, Environmental and Resource Economics 5 (1995) 353–374.Google Scholar
  43. [43]
    R.S.J. Tol, The damage costs of climate change towards a dynamic representation, Ecological Economics 19 (1996) 67–90.Google Scholar
  44. [44]
    R.S.J. Tol, The Climate Framework for Uncertainty, Negotiation and Distribution (FUND), Version 1.5 (Institute for Environmental Studies, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, 1996).Google Scholar
  45. [45]
    R.S.J. Tol, The Damage Costs of Climate Change - Towards an Assessment Model, and a New Set of Damage Estimates (Institute for Environmental Studies, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, 1996).Google Scholar
  46. [46]
    R.S.J. Tol, T. Van der Burg, H.M.A. Jansen and H. Verbruggen, The Climate Fund - Some Notions on the Socio-Economic Impacts of Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Emission Reduction in an International Context (Institute for Environmental Studies, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, 1995).Google Scholar
  47. [47]
    R.T. Watson, M.C. Zinyowera and R.H. Moss, Climate Change 1995: Impacts, Adaptation, and Mitigation of Climate Change - Scientific-Technical Analysis - Contribution of Working Group II to the Second Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1996).Google Scholar
  48. [48]
    J. Weyant, O. Davidson, H. Dowlatabadi, J. Edmonds, M. Grubb, E.A. Parson, R. Richels, J. Rotmans, P.R. Shukla, R.S.J. Tol, W.R. Cline and S. Fankhauser, Integrated assessment of climate change: An overview and comparison of approaches and results, in: Climate Change 1995: Economic and Social Dimensions - Contribution of Working Group III to the Second Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, eds. J.P. Bruce, H. Lee and E.F. Haites (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1996).Google Scholar
  49. [49]
    G.W. Yohe, J. Neumann, P. Marshall and H. Ameden, The economics costs of sea level rise on US coastal properties, Climatic Change 32 (1996) 387–410.Google Scholar
  50. [50]
    G.W. Yohe and R. Wallace, Near-term mitigation policy for global change under uncertainty: Minimizing the expected cost of meeting unknown concentration thresholds, Environmental Modeling and Assessment 1(1/2) (1996) 47–58.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • Richard S.J. Tol
    • 1
  • Samuel Fankhauser
    • 2
  1. 1.Institute for Environmental StudiesVrije UniversiteitAmsterdamThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Centre for Social and Economic Research on the Global EnvironmentUniversity College London and University of East AngliaUK

Personalised recommendations