The uncertainty about the social cost of carbon: A decomposition analysis using fund

By David Anthoff, Richard S. J. Tol. Climatic Change, 2013

216 citations recorded by the source corpus.

We report the results of an uncertainty decomposition analysis of the social cost of carbon as estimated by FUND, a model that has a more detailed representation of the economic impact of climate change than any other model. Some of the parameters particularly influence impacts in the short run whereas other parameters are important in the long run. Some parameters are influential in some regions only. Some parameters are known reasonably well, but others are not. Ethical values, such as the pure rate of time preference and the rate of risk aversion, therefore affect not only the social cost of carbon, but also the importance of the parameters that determine its value. Some parameters, however, are consistently important: cooling energy demand, migration, climate sensitivity, and agriculture. The last two are subject to a large research effort, but the first two are not.

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

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/e9385ec016f3ec991bcf85e1954d7651b8459026

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

1. Alexander Teytelboym
2. D. V. van Vuuren
3. Bas J. van Ruijven
4. Elmar Kriegler
5. Volker Krey
6. Charlie Wilson
7. Penny Mealy
8. E. Thompson

In Global and Planetary Change

1. Volker Krey
2. J. D. Farmer
3. Alexander Teytelboym
4. Elmar Kriegler
5. Penny Mealy
6. D. V. van Vuuren
7. Cameron Hepburn
8. Bas J. van Ruijven

In Renewable Energy, Sustainability and the Environment

1. Alexander Teytelboym
2. D. V. van Vuuren
3. Elmar Kriegler
4. Volker Krey
5. Bas J. van Ruijven
6. Charlie Wilson
7. E. Thompson
8. J. D. Farmer

Citations in the corpus

• A Simple Formula for the Social Cost of Carbon (2013, unknown): “2 There are various systematic assessments of assumptions in IAMs and their effects on outcomes (Weyant, de la Chesnaye & Blanford, 2006; Hope, 2008; Nordhaus, 2008; Anthoff & Tol, 2013).”
• A Third Wave in the Economics of Climate Change (2015, methodology): “However, several governments have relied upon updated POMs, rather than PEMs, in policymaking, such as the updated versions of RICE (Nordhaus 2010), DICE2013 (Nordhaus and Sztorc 2013), FUND 3.7 (Anthoff and Tol 2013), and PAGE09 (Hope 2013), employed in the Stern Review.”
• Evaluating process-based integrated assessment models of climate change mitigation (2017, background): “Examples of cost-benefit integrated assessment models include DICE (Nordhaus 2013), PAGE (Hope and Hope 2013), and FUND (Anthoff and Tol 2013).”