A Question of Balance: Weighing the Options on Global Warming Policies

By S. Sneeringer. 2009

482 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/5be04d3e95101678a5276d9993a7bd53b38ad512

How researchers see this paper

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

Citations in the corpus

Optimal climate change mitigation under long-term growth uncertainty: Stochastic integrated assessment and analytic findings (2014, unknown): “It is based on the widespread DICE model by Nordhaus (2008) and its stochastic dynamic programming implementation following Kelly & Kolstad (1999) and Traeger (2012).”
Ecosystem services: From eye-opening metaphor to complexity blinder (2010, background): “…and Schneider, 2004; Baer and Mastrandrea, 2006; Hansen et al., 2008) are advocating much more aggressive climate mitigation than most economists (Nordhaus, 2008) or even economists making more effort to address risk and future people (Stern, 2007) have been talking about because of the new…”
Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Sustainability (2011, background): “Clearly, many issues remain unresolved in the field of environmental sustainability as well (Ambec & Lanoie, 2008; Nordhaus, 2008).”
Growth Theory and "Green Growth" (2014, unknown): “…more abundant fish stocks, lower costs of water treatment), or tourism income if tourists are attracted by natural amenities.7 The DICE model that Nordhaus (1994, 2008) has developed to study the economics of climate change polices relies on a very similar assumption, since in this Ramsey-type…”
The problem of the commons: still unsettled after 100 years. (2010, unknown): “The best estimates of marginal damages of emissions (by mid-century) are in the range of $75 to $175 per ton of CO 2 , in today’s dollars (Nordhaus 2008; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 2008).”
Targets for global climate policy: an overview (2013, background): “Nordhaus (1994a) interviewed a limited number of experts.”
What Do We Learn from the Weather? The New Climate-Economy Literature (2014, background): “…drive the well-known disparity in the social cost of carbon between the Stern Report (Stern 2007), which uses a discount rate of 1.4 percent and argues for an SCC of over $200, and calculations by Nordhaus (2008), who uses a discount rate of ≈5.5 percent and finds an SCC of around $20 or less.”
Developing a Social Cost of Carbon for US Regulatory Analysis: A Methodology and Interpretation (2013, methodology): “…reflect the complexity of the science, they do not link physical impacts to economic damages, an essential step for estimating the SCC. DICE, PAGE, and FUND all take highly simplified (i.e., reduced-form) approaches to estimate the SCC (see National Resource Council [NRC] 2009; Nordhaus 2008).”
Are Building Codes Effective at Saving Energy? Evidence from Residential Billing Data in Florida (2013, unknown): “…low estimates specifically for Alachua County, Florida, based on Muller and Mendelsohn’s (2007) Air Pollution Emission Experiments and Policy (APEEP) analysis model.19 For CO2 emissions, we use low and high estimates of the social cost of carbon from Stern (2007) and Nordhaus (2008), respectively.”
Cost-effectiveness assessment of CO2 reducing measures in shipping (2009, background): “Nordhaus [34] argues an optimal social cost of carbon at $7 per ton”