Time preference in global warming calculations: a proposal for a unified index

114 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

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

Intergenerational discounting: a new intuitive approach (2005, background): “There are many arguments for and against standard discounting in the literature (see for example, Baumol, 1952; Sen, 1961; Marglin, 1963; Arrow, 1979 and Becker, 1980; Nijkamp and Rouwendal, 1988; Burton, 1993; Goulder and Stavins, 2002; Fearnside, 2002).”
Accounting for time in Mitigating Global Warming through land-use change and forestry (2000, methodology): “Fearnside, P.M.: 1997b, ‘Greenhouse gases from deforestation in Brazilian Amazonia: Net committed emissions,’ Climatic Change 35(3), 321-360.”
Moving ahead with REDD: issues, options and implications (2008, background): “Authors proposed the length of this equivalence period to be between 42 and 100 years (Fearnside et al. 2000; Moura Costa and Wilson 2000; Fearnside 2002).”
Greenhouse Gas Emissions from a Hydroelectric Reservoir (Brazil’s Tucuruí Dam) and the Energy Policy Implications (2002, methodology): “…no agreement on these issues has yet been reached, this author has advocated using a time horizon of 100 years in conjunction with discounting at an annual rate of about 1%, or its equivalent under an alternative time-preference weighting system (Fearnside, 2000a, b; Fearnside et al., 2000).”