Uncertainty and climate change: The IPCC approach vs decision theory

IF 1.6 3区 经济学 Q2 ECONOMICS Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics Pub Date : 2024-02-23 DOI:10.1016/j.socec.2024.102188
Anastasios Xepapadeas
{"title":"Uncertainty and climate change: The IPCC approach vs decision theory","authors":"Anastasios Xepapadeas","doi":"10.1016/j.socec.2024.102188","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Uncertainty is one of the most important challenges in the study of climate change and its interactions with the economy. This paper looks at this uncertainty from two different points of view. The first one is the way in which the IPCC deals with uncertainty in its reports, and the way in which that uncertainty is communicated. The IPCC approach is implemented using a combination of quantitative and qualitative methods as well as heuristics. The IPCC studies climate change, its evolution, and its impact in a context which, in terms of the decision-making approach, is akin to analysis under risk. The second point of view is the one adopted by decision theory, which deals with uncertainty in the Knightian sense and, more specifically, with uncertainty that is manifested in multiple probabilistic models or priors. The presence of multiple priors is associated with ambiguity aversion and misspecification concerns that necessitate the use of maxmin optimizing approaches. The IPCC and the decision theory approaches are briefly reviewed and compared, with the objective of finding ways to accommodate the concept of risky parameters or impacts of the IPCC framework within the framework of optimization under uncertainty in multiple probabilistic models.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":51637,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214804324000284/pdfft?md5=ce6ba503028506afd3e52a1e28ff7b7d&pid=1-s2.0-S2214804324000284-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214804324000284","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Uncertainty is one of the most important challenges in the study of climate change and its interactions with the economy. This paper looks at this uncertainty from two different points of view. The first one is the way in which the IPCC deals with uncertainty in its reports, and the way in which that uncertainty is communicated. The IPCC approach is implemented using a combination of quantitative and qualitative methods as well as heuristics. The IPCC studies climate change, its evolution, and its impact in a context which, in terms of the decision-making approach, is akin to analysis under risk. The second point of view is the one adopted by decision theory, which deals with uncertainty in the Knightian sense and, more specifically, with uncertainty that is manifested in multiple probabilistic models or priors. The presence of multiple priors is associated with ambiguity aversion and misspecification concerns that necessitate the use of maxmin optimizing approaches. The IPCC and the decision theory approaches are briefly reviewed and compared, with the objective of finding ways to accommodate the concept of risky parameters or impacts of the IPCC framework within the framework of optimization under uncertainty in multiple probabilistic models.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
不确定性与气候变化:IPCC 方法与决策理论
不确定性是气候变化及其与经济互动研究中最重要的挑战之一。本文从两个不同的角度来探讨这种不确定性。首先是 IPCC 在其报告中处理不确定性的方式,以及传播这种不确定性的方式。IPCC 采用定量、定性和启发式相结合的方法。就决策方法而言,IPCC 在类似于风险分析的背景下研究气候变化、气候变化的演变及其影响。第二种观点是决策理论所采用的观点,决策理论处理奈特意义上的不确定性,更具体地说,处理表现为多重概率模型或先验的不确定性。多重先验的存在与模棱两可的规避和错误规范问题有关,因此必须使用最大最小值优化方法。本文对 IPCC 和决策理论方法进行了简要回顾和比较,目的是在多重概率模型不确定性下的优化框架内找到适应 IPCC 框架的风险参数或影响概念的方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
12.50%
发文量
113
审稿时长
83 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly the Journal of Socio-Economics) welcomes submissions that deal with various economic topics but also involve issues that are related to other social sciences, especially psychology, or use experimental methods of inquiry. Thus, contributions in behavioral economics, experimental economics, economic psychology, and judgment and decision making are especially welcome. The journal is open to different research methodologies, as long as they are relevant to the topic and employed rigorously. Possible methodologies include, for example, experiments, surveys, empirical work, theoretical models, meta-analyses, case studies, and simulation-based analyses. Literature reviews that integrate findings from many studies are also welcome, but they should synthesize the literature in a useful manner and provide substantial contribution beyond what the reader could get by simply reading the abstracts of the cited papers. In empirical work, it is important that the results are not only statistically significant but also economically significant. A high contribution-to-length ratio is expected from published articles and therefore papers should not be unnecessarily long, and short articles are welcome. Articles should be written in a manner that is intelligible to our generalist readership. Book reviews are generally solicited but occasionally unsolicited reviews will also be published. Contact the Book Review Editor for related inquiries.
期刊最新文献
Privacy during pandemics: Attitudes to public use of personal data Understanding inconsistencies in risk attitude elicitation games: Evidence from smallholder farmers in five African countries Inflation expectations in the wake of the war in Ukraine Asking for a friend: Reminders and incentives for crowdfunding college savings ‘Update Bias’: Manipulating past information based on the existing circumstances
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1