2015
DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.2568368
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Limits to Substitution between Ecosystem Services and Manufactured Goods and Implications for Social Discounting

Abstract: This paper examines implications of limits to substitution for estimating substitutability between ecosystem services and manufactured goods and for social discounting. Based on a model that accounts for a subsistence requirement in the consumption of ecosystem services, we provide empirical evidence on substitution elasticities. We nd an initial mean elasticity of substitution of two, which declines over time towards complementarity. We subsequently extend the theory of dual discounting by introducing a subsi… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
30
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 16 publications
(30 citation statements)
references
References 61 publications
0
30
0
Order By: Relevance
“…49 [1.13, 1.33, 1.23] σ F Standard values for extractive sectors used in GTAP 50 [0.1, 1, 0.2] σ T Standard values for extractive sectors used in GTAP 50 [0.1, 1, 0.2] Drawn from estimates of substitutability derived from ref. 51 [1.5, 2.1, 1.8] σ A Ref. 26 [1.1, 1.24, 1.14] σ P Literature suggests high complementarity, see e.g., 52 [0.05, 0.3, 0.2] Assumed based on reading of the literature [0.25, 0.75, 0.5] Ref.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…49 [1.13, 1.33, 1.23] σ F Standard values for extractive sectors used in GTAP 50 [0.1, 1, 0.2] σ T Standard values for extractive sectors used in GTAP 50 [0.1, 1, 0.2] Drawn from estimates of substitutability derived from ref. 51 [1.5, 2.1, 1.8] σ A Ref. 26 [1.1, 1.24, 1.14] σ P Literature suggests high complementarity, see e.g., 52 [0.05, 0.3, 0.2] Assumed based on reading of the literature [0.25, 0.75, 0.5] Ref.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…How biodiversity and natural capital should be measured, which societal, political and economic values underlie different measures and valuation and how ecological and economical tradeoffs should be dealt with are big challenges left for future research. In order to address these issues, not only do we need to develop appropriate assessment methods, but we also need to disclose the theoretical basics of this assessment and which trade-offs go hand in hand with different assessments (Brei et al 2020;Antoci et al 2019;Drupp 2018). Completely new issues for the valuation of biodiversity and natural capital arise with the development of new technologies.…”
Section: Deep Decarbonization and Climate Neutralitymentioning
confidence: 99%
“… 2020 ; Antoci et al. 2019 ; Drupp 2018 ). Completely new issues for the valuation of biodiversity and natural capital arise with the development of new technologies.…”
Section: Twenty Challengesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Empirical work suggests that the discount rate for ecosystem services is about 1%-point smaller than that for consumption (e.g. Drupp, 2018). Zhu et al (2019) use a Ramsey growth framework with different growth rates for the economy and ecosystem services, so that valuation of environmental benefits relative to consumption goods changes over time and relative prices are not constant over time.…”
Section: Dual Discount Rates Relative Scarcity and The Endowment Effectmentioning
confidence: 99%