Helm, Carsten ; Bruckner, Thomas ; Toth, Ferenc (1999)
Value judgments and the choice of climate protection strategies.
In: International Journal of Social Economics, 26 (7/8/9)
Artikel, Bibliographie
Kurzbeschreibung (Abstract)
In this paper, we critically review cost-benefit analysis, cost-effectiveness analysis and the guard-rail approach as decision-support tools for the choice of climate protection strategies. Our main focus is on the central role of value judgments, which arise from the need to value; first, uncertain environmental benefits from climate protection relative to other goods; second, the consumption of the present relative to future generations; and third the consumption of rich relative to poor people. Each of the three approaches analyzed has its shortcomings. Cost-benefit analysis requires a complete and transitive preference ordering, which stands in sharp contrast to scientific uncertainties and valuation problems. Cost-effectiveness analysis suffers from the difficulty of setting an appropriate climate protection target. Finally, the usefulness of the guard-rail approach for decision-makers depends on the extent to which it is possible to limit the choice set.
| Typ des Eintrags: | Artikel |
|---|---|
| Erschienen: | 1999 |
| Autor(en): | Helm, Carsten ; Bruckner, Thomas ; Toth, Ferenc |
| Art des Eintrags: | Bibliographie |
| Titel: | Value judgments and the choice of climate protection strategies |
| Sprache: | Englisch |
| Publikationsjahr: | 1999 |
| Titel der Zeitschrift, Zeitung oder Schriftenreihe: | International Journal of Social Economics |
| Jahrgang/Volume einer Zeitschrift: | 26 |
| (Heft-)Nummer: | 7/8/9 |
| URL / URN: | http://www.emeraldinsight.com/10.1108/03068299910245750 |
| Kurzbeschreibung (Abstract): | In this paper, we critically review cost-benefit analysis, cost-effectiveness analysis and the guard-rail approach as decision-support tools for the choice of climate protection strategies. Our main focus is on the central role of value judgments, which arise from the need to value; first, uncertain environmental benefits from climate protection relative to other goods; second, the consumption of the present relative to future generations; and third the consumption of rich relative to poor people. Each of the three approaches analyzed has its shortcomings. Cost-benefit analysis requires a complete and transitive preference ordering, which stands in sharp contrast to scientific uncertainties and valuation problems. Cost-effectiveness analysis suffers from the difficulty of setting an appropriate climate protection target. Finally, the usefulness of the guard-rail approach for decision-makers depends on the extent to which it is possible to limit the choice set. |
| Fachbereich(e)/-gebiet(e): | 01 Fachbereich Rechts- und Wirtschaftswissenschaften 01 Fachbereich Rechts- und Wirtschaftswissenschaften > Volkswirtschaftliche Fachgebiete 01 Fachbereich Rechts- und Wirtschaftswissenschaften > Volkswirtschaftliche Fachgebiete > Angewandte Mikroökonomik und Institutionenökonomik |
| Hinterlegungsdatum: | 28 Apr 2009 14:05 |
| Letzte Änderung: | 05 Mär 2013 09:19 |
| PPN: | |
| Export: | |
| Suche nach Titel in: | TUfind oder in Google |
 |
Frage zum Eintrag |
Optionen (nur für Redakteure)
 |
Redaktionelle Details anzeigen |
Drucken
Impressum