An improved shadow price for CO2

Haraden, John

doi:10.1016/0360-5442(92)90081-a

Cited by 15 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Hope 2006Nordhaus & Sztorc (2014) Ayres & Walter 1991Hope 2008a Nordhaus (1991) Weitzman (2013) Haraden (1992) Nordhaus (1993) Notes: The last study was added on August 1, 2014.…”

Section: Appendix: Included Studies and Summary Statisticsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Selective reporting and the social cost of carbon

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. We examine potential selective reporting in the literature on the social cost of carbon (SCC) by conducting a meta-analysis of 809 estimates of the SCC reported in 101 studies. Our results indicate that estimates for which the 95% con_dence interval includes zero are less likely to be reported than estimates excluding negative values of the SCC, which creates an upward bias in the literature. The evidence for selective reporting is stronger for studies published in peer-reviewed journals than for unpublished papers. We show that the _ndings are not driven by the asymmetry of con_dence intervals surrounding the SCC nd are robust to controlling for various characteristics of study design and to alternative de_nitions of con_dence intervals. Our estimates of the mean reported SCC corrected for the selective reporting bias are imprecise and range between 0 and 130 USD per ton of carbon in 2010 prices for emission year 2015. Terms of use: Documents in

show abstract

“…Hope 2006Nordhaus & Sztorc (2014) Ayres & Walter 1991Hope 2008a Nordhaus (1991) Weitzman (2013) Haraden (1992) Nordhaus (1993) Notes: The last study was added on August 1, 2014.…”

Section: Appendix: Included Studies and Summary Statisticsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Selective reporting and the social cost of carbon

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Computing the annual growth rates, we find that the average of the 22 estimates is an increase of 2.3% per year, 1 with a standard deviation of 0.9%. 2 The highest estimate (4.1%) is due to (Haraden 1992) and the lowest estimate (0.9%) to (Roughgarden and Schneider 1999). 3 These papers all present the time evolution of the social cost of carbon without much comment on the underlying drivers of the change in SCC over time.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There are over 300 estimates of the social cost of carbon (Tol 2009), but only a minority of studies present estimates for marginal impacts at different points in time (Clarkson and Deyes 2002;Cline 1993;Fankhauser 1995;Haraden 1992;Haraden 1993;Hope 2008;Maddison 1995;Nordhaus 1993;Nordhaus 1994;Nordhaus 2008;Nordhaus and Boyer 2000;Nordhaus and Popp 1997;Nordhaus and Yang 1996;Peck and Teisberg 1993;Roughgarden and Schneider 1999;Sohngen 2009;Tol 1999;Wahba and Hope 2006). Evidence about the shape or growth rate of the marginal damages from the existing literature is somewhat contradictory.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Time Evolution of the Social Cost of Carbon: An Application of Fund

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in EconStor may Abstract:We estimate the growth rate of the social cost of carbon. This is an indication of the optimal rate of acceleration of greenhouse gas emission reduction policy over time. We find that the social cost of carbon increases by 1.3% to 3.9% per year, with a central estimate of 2.2%. Previous studies found an average rate of 2.3% and a range of 0.9-4.1%. The rate of increase of the social carbon depends on a range of factors, including the pure rate of time preference, the rate of risk aversion, equity weighting, the socio-economic and emission scenarios, the climate sensitivity, dynamic vulnerability, and the curvature of the impact functions.

show abstract

“…A number of new studies have appeared since (Ceronsky et al, 2005;Downing et al, 2005;Guo et al, 2006;Hope, 2006;Wahba and Hope, 2006) -all in response to a faux pas of HM Treasury (Clarkson and Deyes, 2002). 11 Tol (2005a) also overlooked the older studies of Nordhaus (1982) and Haraden (1992;, and the papers of Cline (2004), Hohmeyer (2004), Hope (2003, Link and Tol (2004), Manne (2004), Stern et al (2006), Uzawa (2003) have since appeared or only recently came to my attention. There are now 211 estimates from 50 studies.…”

Section: Marginal Costsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Why Worry about Climate Change? A Research Agenda

Tol¹

2008

Environmental Values

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Estimates of the marginal damage costs of carbon dioxide emissions suggest that, although climate change is a problem and some emission reduction is justified, very stringent abatement does not pass the cost-benefit test. However, current estimates of the economic impact of climate change are incomplete. Some of the missing impacts are likely to be positive and others negative, but overall the uncertainty seems to concentrate on the downside risks and current estimates of the damage costs may have a negative bias. The research effort on the economic impacts of climate change is minute, and should be strengthened, with a particular focus on the quantification of uncertainties; estimating missing impacts, interactions between impacts and higherorder effects; the valuation of biodiversity loss; the implications of extreme climate scenarios and violent conflict; and climate change in the very long term.

show abstract

An improved shadow price for CO2

Cited by 15 publications

References 6 publications

Selective reporting and the social cost of carbon

Selective reporting and the social cost of carbon

The Time Evolution of the Social Cost of Carbon: An Application of Fund

Why Worry about Climate Change? A Research Agenda

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About