This setting lets you change the way you view articles. You can choose to have articles open in a dialog window, a new tab, or directly in the same window.
Open in Dialog
Open in New Tab
Open in same window
Open in New Tab
Open in same window

Journal of Economic Literature: Vol. 45 No. 3 (September 2007)
JEL Volume. 45, Issue 3 |
Previous ArticleNext Article
Sign up for Email Alerts Follow us on Twitter Subscription Information
(Institutional Administrator Access)
JEL Forthcoming Articles
JEL Indexes (Members Only)
Full-text Article
Previous ArticleNext Article
Expand
Quick Tools:
Print Article Summary Email Link to this Article Export CitationSign up for Email Alerts Follow us on Twitter Subscription Information
(Institutional Administrator Access)
Explore:
JEL Forthcoming Articles
JEL Indexes (Members Only)A Review of the Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change
Article Citation
Weitzman, Martin L. 2007. "A Review of the Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change."
Journal of Economic Literature,
45(3): 703-724.
DOI: 10.1257/jel.45.3.703
DOI: 10.1257/jel.45.3.703
Abstract
The Stern Review calls for immediate decisive action to stabilize greenhouse gases
because "the benefits of strong, early action on climate change outweighs the costs."
The economic analysis supporting this conclusion consists mostly of two basic strands.
The first strand is a formal aggregative model that relies for its conclusions primarily
upon imposing a very low discount rate. Concerning this discount-rate aspect, I am
skeptical of the Review's formal analysis, but this essay points out that we are actually
a lot less sure about what interest rate should be used for discounting climate
change than is commonly acknowledged. The Review's second basic strand is a more
intuitive argument that it might be very important to avoid possibly large uncertainties
that are difficult to quantify. Concerning this uncertainty aspect, I argue that it
might be recast into sound analytical reasoning that might justify some of the
Review's conclusions. The basic issue here is that spending money to slow global
warming should perhaps not be conceptualized primarily as being about consumption
smoothing as much as being about how much insurance to buy to offset the small
change of a ruinous catastrophe that is difficult to compensate by ordinary savings.
Article Full-Text Access
Full-text Article
Authors
Weitzman, Martin L.

