Skip to main content

Discounting Utility and the Evaluation of Climate Policy

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
The Economics of the Global Environment

Part of the book series: Studies in Economic Theory ((ECON.THEORY,volume 29))

  • 915 Accesses

Abstract

This essay discusses the relation between utility discounting and climate policy. Using a cost-benefit model, I show that the planner’s willingness to pay to eliminate a climate event is greater, but less sensitive to discounting, when the event is random instead of deterministic. Examples in an optimizing setting show that policy may be less sensitive to discounting, the more nonlinear is the underlying model. I then explain why, in general, there should be no presumption that the risk of catastrophe swamps discounting in the assessment of climate policy. I conclude by pointing out that intertemporal transfers between the same agent at different points in their life, and transfers between different agents at different points in time, are qualitatively different, and should not be assessed using the same discount rate.

I thank an anonymous reviewer for comments on an earlier draft of this paper. The usual disclaimer applies. Sects. 3.2 and 4 of this paper are adapted from Karp (2009), and Sect. 5 is based on Karp (2013a, b).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 139.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    The utility discount rate (the pure rate of time preference, or PRTP) is related to, but distinct from, the social discount rate, used to compare consumption (as distinct from utility) across two points in time. In the standard deterministic setting, the social discount rate equals the PRTP plus the growth rate multiplied by the inverse of the elasticity of intertemporal substitution. The latter provides a measure of the willingness to substitute consumption between “infinitely close” periods.

  2. 2.

    The model in this section is based on Karp and Tsur (2008). That paper considers non-constant PRTP, whereas here the PRTP is constant. In the model here, society can eliminate the risk, whereas in the Karp and Tsur model society is able only to prevent the hazard from increasing. Neither model is nested in the other. Appendix 1 derives Eqs. 1 and 2.

  3. 3.

    Figures 11, and 12 in Appendix 1 shows graphs of the premia as functions of \(\eta \), and g. Those parameters have the same qualitative effect as \(\rho \) on the two premia (under deterministic and stochastic event time), although of course the magnitudes of their effects are different.

  4. 4.

    The increase in the tax from $42/tC to $102/tC leads to a fall in per capital income (during the period when it is lowest, presumably the first period) from $6,801 to $6,799, i.e. about 0.03 %. In view of parameter uncertainty, a 0.03 % reduction in per capita income, equivalently a $15 billion increase in aggregate abatement costs (at Gross World Product—GWP—of $50 trillion), is close to rounding error.

  5. 5.

    This model assumes that the sacrifice of one unit of consumption today makes one unit available in the future period. If instead, the sacrifice of v units makes \(\theta \left( v\right) \) units available the future, the numerator of the right side of Eq. 4 becomes \(\frac{du\left( c^{\prime }+\theta \left( v\right) \right) }{dv}\theta ^{\prime }\left( v\right) \). These and other extensions can be easily treated, but the simple model that I use is adequate for my purposes.

  6. 6.

    These numerical results are interesting, but someone who accepts the controversial interpretation of the dismal theorem will not regard them as a convincing counter-argument to that interpretation. All of the numerical experiments arise in a deterministic context, and in that respect they do not really confront the dismal theorem, which makes sense only in a setting with risk and uncertainty. For this reason, I think that Horowitz and Lange’s very simple treatment of the problem is particularly helpful.

  7. 7.

    In order to keep this example simple, suppose that current emissions affect only next period utility. Obviously, a realistic climate model has to take into account that today’s emissions persist in the atmosphere, affecting utility over a long span.

References

  • Arrow, K. (2007). Globak climate change: A challange to policy. The Economists Voice, 4, 1–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barro, R. (1999). Ramsey meets Laibson in the neoclassical growth model. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 114, 1125–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Calvo, G., & Obstfeld, M. (1988). Optimal time-consistent fiscal policy with finite lifetimes. Econometrica, 56, 32–411.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, C. W. (1975). Mathematical bioeconomics: The optimal management of renewable resources. Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cropper, M., & Laibson, D. (1999). The implications of hyperbolic discounting for project evaluation. In P. R. Portney & J. Weyant (Eds.), Discounting and Intergenerational Equity. Resources for the Future.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ekeland, I., Karp, L., & Sumaila, R. (2012). Equilibrium management of fisheries with altruistic overlapping generations. University of British Columbia Working Paper.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ekeland, I., & Lazrak, A. (2010). The golden rule when preferences are time inconsistent. Mathematical and Financial Economics, 4(1), 29–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fujii, T., & Karp, L. (2008). Numerical analysis of non-constant pure rate of time preference: a model of climate policy. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Forthcoming, 56, 83–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fujii, T. (2008). Numerical analysis of non-constant pure rate of time preference: a model of climate policy. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 56, 83–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gerlagh, R., & Liski, M. (2012). Carbon prices for the next thousand years. Unpublished Working Paper.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harris, C., & Laibson, D. (2001). Dynamic choices of hyperbolic consumers. Econometrica, 69(5), 935–957.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heal, G. (1998). Valuing the future: economic theory and sustainability. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heal, G. (2001). Intertemporal welfare economics and the environment. In K.-G. Maler & J. Vincent (Eds.), The handbook of environmental economics. Amsterdam: North Holland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Horowitz, J., & Lange, A. (2008). What’s wrong with infinity—a note on Weitzman’s dismal theorem. University of Maryland Working Paper.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karp, L. (2005). Global Warming and hyperbolic discounting. Journal of Public Economics, 89, 261–282.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karp, L. (2009). Sacrifice, discounting and climate policy: five questions. Giannini Foundation working paper.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karp, L. (2013a). Overlapping generations and environmental policy: An Introduction. Giannini Foundation Working Paper.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karp, L. (2013b). Provision of a public good with altruistic overlapping generations and many tribes. Giannini Foundation Working Paper.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karp, L. (2013c). Railroad discounting. Giannini Foundation Working Paper.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laibson, D. (1997). Golden eggs and hyperbolic discounting. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 62, 443–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nordhaus, W. D. (2007). A Review of the stern review on the economics of climate change. Journal of Economic Literature, 3, 686–702.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Norhaus, W. (2009). An analysis of the dismal theorem. Cowles Foundatiuon Discussion Paper No 1686.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phelps, E., & Pollack, R. (1968). On second-best national savings and game: equilibrium growth. Review of Economic Studies, 35, 185–199.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramsey, F. (1928). A mathematical theory of savings. Economic Journal, 38, 59–543.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schneider, M., Traeger, C., & Winkler, R. (2012). Trading off generations: Equity, efficiency and climate change. European Economic Review, 56, 1621–1644.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stern, N. (2007). The economics of climate change. Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weitzman, M. (2009). On modeling and interpreting the economics of catastrophic climate change. Review of Economics and Statistics, 91(1), 1–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Larry Karp .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Appendix 1

Appendix 1

If society pays the premium, thus eliminating risk, the present discounted stream of utility is

$$\begin{aligned} \left. \begin{array}{c} R\left( X;\Delta ,g,\eta \right) \equiv \int _{0}^{\infty }e^{-\rho t}\frac{ (e^{gt}(1-\Delta X))^{1-\eta }-1}{1-\eta }dt= \\ \int _{0}^{\infty }\frac{e^{-\left( \rho +\left( \eta -1\right) g\right) t}((1-\Delta X))^{1-\eta }-e^{-\rho t}}{1-\eta }dt=\frac{1}{1-\eta }\left( \frac{((1-\Delta X))^{1-\eta }}{\left( \rho +\left( \eta -1\right) g\right) }- \frac{1}{\rho }\right) \end{array} \right. \end{aligned}$$

If society does not pay the insurance premium, and the event occurs at time T, the payoff is

$$\begin{aligned} \left. \begin{array}{c} P\left( T;\Delta ,g,\eta \right) \equiv \int _{0}^{T}e^{-\rho t}\frac{ (e^{gt})^{1-\eta }-1}{1-\eta }d\tau +\int _{T}^{\infty }e^{-\rho t}\frac{ (e^{gt}(1-\Delta ))^{1-\eta }-1}{1-\eta }d\tau \\ =\int _{0}^{T}e^{-\rho t}\frac{\left( (e^{gt})^{1-\eta }-1-\left( (e^{gt}(1-\Delta ))^{1-\eta }-1\right) \right) }{1-\eta }d\tau +\int _{0}^{ \infty }e^{-\rho t}\frac{(e^{gt}(1-\Delta ))^{1-\eta }-1}{1-\eta }d\tau \\ =\int _{0}^{T}e^{-\rho t}\frac{e^{-g\left( \eta -1\right) t}\left( 1-\left( 1-\Delta \right) ^{1-\eta }\right) }{1-\eta }d\tau +\int _{0}^{\infty }e^{-\rho t}\frac{(e^{gt}(1-\Delta ))^{1-\eta }-1}{1-\eta }d\tau \\ =\frac{\left( 1-\left( 1-\Delta \right) ^{1-\eta }\right) }{1-\eta } \frac{1-e^{-\left( \rho +\left( \eta -1\right) g\right) T}}{\left( \rho +\left( \eta -1\right) g\right) }+\frac{1}{1-\eta }\left( \frac{\left( 1-\Delta \right) ^{1-\eta }}{\left( \rho +\left( \eta -1\right) g\right) }-\frac{1}{\rho }\right) \end{array} \right. \end{aligned}$$

If the event time T is exponentially distributed with hazard h, then

$$\begin{aligned} Ee^{-\left( \rho +\left( \eta -1\right) g\right) T}=\int _{0}^{\infty }e^{-\left( \rho +\left( \eta -1\right) g\right) t}he^{-ht}dt=\frac{h}{\left( \rho +g\eta -g+h\right) }. \end{aligned}$$
(7)

Using this formula, we have

$$\begin{aligned} EP\left( T;\Delta ,g,\eta \right) =\frac{\left( 1-\left( 1-\Delta \right) ^{1-\eta }\right) }{1-\eta }\frac{1-\frac{h}{\left( \rho +g\eta -g+h\right) }}{\left( \rho +\left( \eta -1\right) g\right) }+\frac{1}{ 1-\eta }\left( \frac{\left( 1-\Delta \right) ^{1-\eta }}{\left( \rho +\left( \eta -1\right) g\right) }-\frac{1}{\rho }\right) \end{aligned}$$
Fig. 11
figure 11

Maximum premium (as a percent of cost of event) as a function of \( \eta \), under certain event time (solid) and random event time (dashed) for \(T=200=\frac{1}{h}\), \(\Delta =0.4\), \(g=0.01\) and \(\rho =0.01\)

Fig. 12
figure 12

Maximum premium (as a percent of cost of event) as a function of growth, under certain event time (solid) and random event time (dashed) for \( T=200=\frac{1}{h}\), \(\Delta =0.4\), \(\eta =2\) and \(\rho =0.01\)

For the certain event time, with \(T=\frac{1}{h}\), the maximum premium society would pay, X, is the solution to

$$\begin{aligned} R\left( X;\Delta ,g,\eta \right) =P\left( T;\Delta ,g,\eta \right) \end{aligned}$$

or

$$\begin{aligned} \left. \begin{array}{c} \frac{1}{1-\eta }\left( \frac{((1-\Delta X))^{1-\eta }}{\left( \rho +\left( \eta -1\right) g\right) }-\frac{1}{\rho }\right) = \\ \frac{\left( 1-\left( 1-\Delta \right) ^{1-\eta }\right) }{1-\eta } \frac{1-e^{-\left( \rho +\left( \eta -1\right) g\right) T}}{\left( \rho +\left( \eta -1\right) g\right) }+\frac{1}{1-\eta }\left( \frac{\left( 1-\Delta \right) ^{1-\eta }}{\left( \rho +\left( \eta -1\right) g\right) }-\frac{1}{\rho }\right) . \end{array} \right. \end{aligned}$$

Solving for X

$$\begin{aligned} \left. \begin{array}{c} \left( \frac{((1-\Delta X))^{1-\eta }}{\left( \rho +\left( \eta -1\right) g\right) }\right) =\left( 1-\left( 1-\Delta \right) ^{1-\eta }\right) \frac{1-e^{-\left( \rho +\left( \eta -1\right) g\right) T}}{\left( \rho +\left( \eta -1\right) g\right) }+\left( \frac{\left( 1-\Delta \right) ^{1-\eta }}{\left( \rho +\left( \eta -1\right) g\right) } \right) \Rightarrow \\ (1-\Delta X)=\left( \left( 1-\left( 1-\Delta \right) ^{1-\eta }\right) \left( 1-e^{-\frac{\left( \rho +\left( \eta -1\right) g\right) }{h}}\right) +\left( 1-\Delta \right) ^{1-\eta }\right) ^{\frac{1}{1-\eta }}\Rightarrow \end{array} \right. \end{aligned}$$

Solving for X and setting \(y=100X\) gives Eq. 1. I obtain Eq. 2 by taking expectations with respect to T, using Eq. 7, and repeating the steps used to obtain Eq. 1 (Figs. 11 and 12).

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Karp, L. (2016). Discounting Utility and the Evaluation of Climate Policy. In: Chichilnisky, G., Rezai, A. (eds) The Economics of the Global Environment. Studies in Economic Theory, vol 29. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-31943-8_19

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics