TU Darmstadt / ULB / TUbiblio

Value judgments and the choice of climate protection strategies

Helm, Carsten and Bruckner, Thomas and Toth, Ferenc (1999):
Value judgments and the choice of climate protection strategies.
In: International Journal of Social Economics, (7/8/9), 26. pp. 974 - 1021, [Online-Edition: http://www.emeraldinsight.com/10.1108/03068299910245750],
[Article]

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.

Item Type: Article
Erschienen: 1999
Creators: Helm, Carsten and Bruckner, Thomas and Toth, Ferenc
Title: Value judgments and the choice of climate protection strategies
Language: English
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.

Journal or Publication Title: International Journal of Social Economics
Journal volume: 26
Number: 7/8/9
Divisions: 01 Department of Law and Economics
01 Department of Law and Economics > Volkswirtschaftliche Fachgebiete
01 Department of Law and Economics > Volkswirtschaftliche Fachgebiete > Angewandte Mikroökonomik und Institutionenökonomik
Date Deposited: 28 Apr 2009 14:05
Official URL: http://www.emeraldinsight.com/10.1108/03068299910245750
Export:
Suche nach Titel in: TUfind oder in Google
Send an inquiry Send an inquiry

Options (only for editors)
Show editorial Details Show editorial Details