Abstract
Economic cost-benefit analysis of the costs of greenhouse gas emission abatement and climate change often points towards limited abatement. This note elucidates one reason why this result is obtained: the way in which the intangible damages are treated and the utility function is specified. On the basis of the DICE model, it is shown that by putting the intangible damages directly into the utility function, and by assuming them to grow with per capita income, the optimal reduction increases, and in the second case more than triples, compared to Nordhaus's original results.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
