Why Economic Analysis Supports Strong Action on Climate Change: A Response to the Stern Review's Critics

By Simon Dietz, N. Stern. Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, 2008

114 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Economics and Econometrics, Global and Planetary Change, Renewable Energy, Sustainability and the Environment

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/2b545a712b878a55dcd4f0adb6d8f787d45f3a9a

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Economics and Econometrics

In Global and Planetary Change

In Renewable Energy, Sustainability and the Environment

Citations in the corpus

The behavioural economics of climate change (2008, background): “8 However, as pointed out by Dietz and Stern (in press), most cost-benefit analyses do not use welfare weights at all, corresponding to a σ=0. 9 Based on the GDP per capita of $27 700 from OECD (2005), together with the conservative assumption that consumption constitutes 60% of GDP.”
The Stern Review and its critics: economics at work in an interdisciplinary setting (2011, background): “Some of the arguments in Stern (2008) are the same as in Dietz and Stern (2008), but there are some other interesting passages.”
On Welfare Frameworks and Catastrophic Climate Risks (2013, background): “It has been widely argued (Ellsberg, 1961; Gilboa, 2009; Gilboa et al, 2009) that the normative application of expected utility theory is only appropriate in situations of risk (where probabilities are known), rather than uncertainty (where probabilities are unknown), a distinction going back at lea”
Uncertain Outcomes and Climate Change Policy (2012, background): “Using instead the 4.5% midpoint of the 1% to 8% range of lost GDP for ∆T = 5◦C from Dietz and Stern (2008), we would have γ̄ = .000165.”
Recent advances in the valuation of ecosystem services and biodiversity (2012, background): “For example, the debate that has ensued since the Stern Review (e.g. Weitzman, 2007; Dietz and Stern, 2008) has thrown new light on the choice of the social discount rate in the context of climate change.”
THE CHOICE OF DISCOUNT RATE FOR CLIMATE CHANGE POLICY EVALUATION (2012, unknown): “6These arguments are in Nordhaus (2007) and Dietz and Stern (2008). The views are sharply contrasted in Dasgupta (2008). The Choice of Discount Rate”