You are not currently logged in.
Access JSTOR through your library or other institution:
If You Use a Screen ReaderThis content is available through Read Online (Free) program, which relies on page scans. Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
The Economics of Abrupt Climate Change
Philosophical Transactions: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences
Vol. 361, No. 1810, Abrupt Climate Change: Evidence, Mechanisms and Implications (Sep. 15, 2003), pp. 2043-2059
Published by: Royal Society
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3559159
Page Count: 17
You can always find the topics here!Topics: Climate change, Climate change policy, Cost estimates, Economic costs, Climate models, Economic costs and benefits, Economic benefits, Economic uncertainty, Carbon dioxide emissions, Global warming
Were these topics helpful?See something inaccurate? Let us know!
Select the topics that are inaccurate.
Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Preview not available
The US National Research Council defines abrupt climate change as a change of state that is sufficiently rapid and sufficiently widespread in its effects that economies are unprepared or incapable of adapting. This may be too restrictive a definition, but abrupt climate change does have implications for the choice between the main response options: mitigation (which reduces the risks of climate change) and adaptation (which reduces the costs of climate change). The paper argues that by (i) increasing the costs of change and the potential growth of consumption, and (ii) reducing the time to change, abrupt climate change favours mitigation over adaptation. Furthermore, because the implications of change are fundamentally uncertain and potentially very high, it favours a precautionary approach in which mitigation buys time for learning. Adaptation-oriented decision tools, such as scenario planning, are inappropriate in these circumstances. Hence learning implies the use of probabilistic models that include socioeconomic feedbacks.
Philosophical Transactions: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences © 2003 Royal Society