Next Article in Journal
An Assessment of Psychological Noise Reduction by Landscape Plants
Next Article in Special Issue
Survey Mode Effects on Valuation of Environmental Goods
Previous Article in Journal
Intensity and Inhalation of Smoking in the Aetiology of Laryngeal Cancer
Previous Article in Special Issue
Climate Change and Vector-borne Diseases: An Economic Impact Analysis of Malaria in Africa
Article Menu

Export Article

Open AccessArticle
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2011, 8(4), 985-1031;

A Multidisciplinary, Science-Based Approach to the Economics of Climate Change

Carlin Economics and Science, Fairfax, VA 22031, USA
Received: 4 January 2011 / Revised: 17 March 2011 / Accepted: 21 March 2011 / Published: 1 April 2011
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Advances in Environmental Economics)
Full-Text   |   PDF [1099 KB, uploaded 19 June 2014]


Economic analyses of environmental mitigation and other interdisciplinary public policy issues can be much more useful if they critically examine what other disciplines have to say, insist on using the most relevant observational data and the scientific method, and examine lower cost alternatives to the change proposed. These general principles are illustrated by applying them to the case of climate change mitigation, one of the most interdisciplinary of public policy issues. The analysis shows how use of these principles leads to quite different conclusions than those of most previous such economic analyses, as follows: The economic benefits of reducing CO2 emissions may be about two orders of magnitude less than those estimated by most economists because the climate sensitivity factor (CSF) is much lower than assumed by the United Nations because feedback is negative rather than positive and the effects of CO2 emissions reductions on atmospheric CO2 appear to be short rather than long lasting. The costs of CO2 emissions reductions are very much higher than usually estimated because of technological and implementation problems recently identified. Geoengineering such as solar radiation management is a controversial alternative to CO2 emissions reductions that offers opportunities to greatly decrease these large costs, change global temperatures with far greater assurance of success, and eliminate the possibility of low probability, high consequence risks of rising temperatures, but has been largely ignored by economists. CO2 emissions reductions are economically unattractive since the very modest benefits remaining after the corrections for the above effects are quite unlikely to economically justify the much higher costs unless much lower cost geoengineering is used. The risk of catastrophic anthropogenic global warming appears to be so low that it is not currently worth doing anything to try to control it, including geoengineering. View Full-Text
Keywords: environmental economics; climate change; economic benefits; costs; multidisciplinary; scientific method environmental economics; climate change; economic benefits; costs; multidisciplinary; scientific method
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 3.0).

Share & Cite This Article

MDPI and ACS Style

Carlin, A. A Multidisciplinary, Science-Based Approach to the Economics of Climate Change. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2011, 8, 985-1031.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats

Related Articles

Article Metrics

Article Access Statistics



[Return to top]
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health EISSN 1660-4601 Published by MDPI AG, Basel, Switzerland RSS E-Mail Table of Contents Alert
Back to Top