Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-25wd4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-28T13:31:53.777Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

12 - Values and cost–benefit analysis: economic efficiency criteria in adaptation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 August 2009

W. Neil Adger
Affiliation:
University of East Anglia
Irene Lorenzoni
Affiliation:
University of East Anglia
Karen L. O'Brien
Affiliation:
Universitetet i Oslo
Get access

Summary

Introduction

In this chapter we explore the extent to which the measures of value incorporated in cost–benefit analysis (CBA) can be utilised to guide decision-making in adapting to climate change. Our motivation derives from the fact that whilst CBA is now a key element in the project and policy appraisal process in a number of European sectoral contexts (for example air quality in Europe: Holland et al., 2005), the timescales over which climate change adaptation considerations range are beyond those normally considered in such appraisals. As a result, the assumption normally made that unit monetary values utilised in CBA should be based on current preferences and resource scarcity patterns is questionable. Using stated preference techniques Layton and Brown (2000) begin to explore this issue in the context of greenhouse gas mitigation. This chapter pursues this further in the context of adaptation to climate change. Adaptation is understood here to include the spectrum from specific actions, or options, designed to mitigate specific climate risks, to the socio-economic and cultural conditions (i.e. adaptive capacity), that facilitate adaptation to the full range of identified climate change risks. Decisions relating to the adaptation to climate change risks can then be seen to include both sectoral-specific responses and those that shape social and economic development more generally.

The chapter addresses three aspects of CBA related to preference revelation that are applicable to the long time horizons relevant to decisions related to adaptation but which have not been discussed in this context to date.

Type
Chapter
Information
Adapting to Climate Change
Thresholds, Values, Governance
, pp. 197 - 211
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adger, W. N., Dessai, S., Goulden, M., Hulme, M., Lorenzoni, I., Nelson, D., Naess, L.-O., Wolf, J. and Wreford, A. 2009. ‘Limits and barriers to adaptation’, Climatic Change 93: 335–354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alberini, A., Hunt, A. and Markandya, A. 2006. ‘Willingness to pay to reduce mortality risks: evidence from a three-country contingent valuation study’, Environmental and Resource Economics 33: 251–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arrow, K. J., Cline, W. R., Maler, K. G., Munasinghe, M., Squitieri, R. and Stiglitz, J. E. 1996. ‘Intertemporal equity, discounting and economic efficiency’, in Bruce, J. P., Lee, H. and Haites, E. F. (eds.) Climate Change 1995: Economic and Social Dimensions of Climate Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 129–144.Google Scholar
Ben-Haim, Y. 2001. Information Gap Decision Theory. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Berkhout, F., Hertin, J. and Jordan, A. 2002. ‘Socio-economic futures in climate change impact assessment: using scenarios as learning machines’, Global Environmental Change 12: 83–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Broome, J. 1992. Counting the Cost of Global Warming. Cambridge: White Horse Press.Google Scholar
Downing, A. D., Butterfield, R., Ceronsky, M., Grubb, M., Guo, J., Hepburn, C., Hope, C., Hunt, A., Li, A., Markandya, A., Nyong, A., Tol, R. S. J. and Watkiss, P. 2005. Scoping Uncertainty in the Social Cost of Carbon, Final project report: Social Cost of Carbon: A Closer Look at Uncertainty. London: Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs.Google Scholar
,Eftec. 2005. Valuation of the Historic Environment. London: English Heritage, the Heritage Lottery Fund and Department of Transport.Google Scholar
Fischhoff, B., Slovic, P., Lichtenstein, S., Read, S. and Coombs, B. 1978. ‘How safe is safe enough? A psychometric study of attitudes towards technological risks and benefits’, Policy Sciences 9: 127–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garrod, G. and Willis, K. 2002. ‘Northumbria castles, cathedrals and towns’ in Navrud, S. and Ready, R. (eds.) Valuing Cultural Heritage: Applying Environmental Valuation Techniques to Historic Buildings. Cheltenham: Elgar, pp. 40–52.Google Scholar
Holland, M., Hunt, A., Hurley, F., Navrud, S. and Watkiss, P. 2005. Methodology for the Cost–Benefit Analysis for CAFE, Vol. 1, Overview of Methodology. Available at http://ec.europa.eu/environment/air/cafe/pdf/cba_methodology_vol1.pdf
Hope, C. 2003. The Marginal Impacts of CO2, CH4 and SF6 Emissions, Research Paper No. 2003/10. Cambridge: Judge Institute of Management.Google Scholar
Howarth, R. B. 1995. ‘Sustainability under uncertainty: a deontologist approach’, Land Economics 71: 417–427.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hulme, M., Jenkins, G. J., Lu, X., Turnpenny, J. R., Mitchell, T. D., Jones, R. G., Lowe., J., Murphy, J. M., Hassell, D., Boorman, P., McDonald, R. and Hill, S. 2002. Climate Change Scenarios for the United Kingdom: The UKCIP02 Scientific Report. Norwich: Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research, School of Environmental Sciences, University of East Anglia.Google Scholar
Hunt, A. and Taylor, T. 2006. ‘Buildings’, in Metroeconomica, (ed.) Project E: Quantify the Cost of Future Impacts. London: Defra.Google Scholar
Kilbourne, W., Grünhagen, M. and Foley, J. 2005. ‘A cross-cultural examination of the relationship between materialism and individual values’, Journal of Economic Psychology 26: 624–641.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kovats, R. S. and Ebi, K. 2006. ‘Heatwaves and public health in Europe’, European Journal of Public Health 16: 592–599.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Layton, D. and Brown, G. 2000. ‘Heterogeneous preferences regarding global climate change’, Review of Economics and Statistics 82: 616–624.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maddison, D. 2006. Further Comments on the Stern Review. Birmingham: Department of Economics, University of Birmingham. Available at www.economics.bham.ac.uk/maddison/Stern%20Comments.pdfGoogle Scholar
Nakicenovic, N. and Swart, R. (eds.) 2000. Emissions Scenarios 2000: Special Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Navrud, S. and Ready, R. (eds.) 2002. Valuing Cultural Heritage: Applying Environmental Valuation Techniques to Historic Buildings. Cheltenham: Elgar.CrossRef
,NHS. 2007. Heat Wave Plan for England. London: Department of Health.Google Scholar
Norton, B. G. and Toman, M. 1997. ‘Sustainability: ecological and economic perspectives’, Land Economics 73: 553–568.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pollicino, M. and Maddison, D. 2002. ‘Valuing the impacts of air pollution on Lincoln Cathedral’ in Navrud, S. and Ready, R. (eds.) Valuing Cultural Heritage: Applying Environmental Valuation Techniques to Historic Buildings. Cheltenham: Elgar.Google Scholar
Ramsey, F. P. 1928. ‘A mathematical theory of saving’, Economic Journal 38: 543–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Savage, L. 1951. ‘The theory of statistical decisions’, Journal of the American Statistical Association 46: 55–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sen, A. K. 1982. ‘Approaches to the choice of discount for social benefit–cost analysis’, in Lind, R. C. (ed.) Discounting for Time and Risk in Energy Policy. Washington, DC: Resources for the Future, pp. 325–353.Google Scholar
Stern, N. 2006. Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change. London: HM Treasury and Cabinet Office.Google Scholar
Tol, R. and Yohe, G. 2006. ‘A review of the Stern Review’, World Economics 7: 233–250.Google Scholar
Toman, M. 2006. ‘Values in the economics of climate change’, Environmental Values 15: 365–379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yohe, G. W., Lasco, R. D., Ahmad, Q. K., Arnell, N. W., Cohen, S. J., Hope, C, Janetos, A. C. and Perez, R. T. 2007. ‘Perspectives on climate change and sustainability’, in Parry, M. L., Canziani, O. F., Palutikof, J. P., Linden, P. J. and Hanson, C. E. (eds.) 2007. Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 811–841.Google Scholar
Weitzman, M. L. 2007. ‘A review of the Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change’, Journal of Economic Literature 45: 703–724.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×