Opinion: The Case for Mitigating Greenhouse Gas Emissions

Kenneth J. Arrow

Journals

Abstract: Critics of the Stern Review do not think serious action to limit CO2 emissions is justified, because there remains substantial uncertainty about the extent of the costs of global climate change, and because these costs will be incurred far in the future. However, this author thinks Stern’s fundamental conclusion is justified: we are much better off reducing Co2 emissions substantially than risking the consequences of failing to act, even if, unlike Stern, one heavily discounts uncertainty and the future. [Real-world economics review, issue no. 45]

Keywords: Stern Review; greenhouse gas emissions; Co2 emissions; environmental economics; global climate change (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2008

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.eSocialSciences.com/data/articles/Document1173200890.1389276.pdf

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: http://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:ess:journl:id:1431

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Journals from esocialsciences.com
Series data maintained by Padma Prakash ().