不确定性的后果：气候敏感度与经济对气候的敏感度
The Consequences of Uncertainty: Climate Sensitivity and Economic Sensitivity to the Climate
Annual Review of Economics · 2018 · [{"name": "John Hassler", "affiliation": ["Center for Economic and Policy Research", "Peterson Institute for International Economics", "Centre for Economic Policy Research", "Carnegie Mellon University", "University of Gothenburg"]}, {"name": "Per Krusell", "affiliation": ["National Institute of Economic Research", "National Bureau of Economic Research", "Centre for Economic Policy Research", "University of Gothenburg"]}, {"name": "Conny Olovsson", "affiliation": ["Swedish National Bank"]}]
中文摘要
我们构建了一个包含多种能源来源——两种化石燃料与绿色能源——的综合评估模型，并用其评估气候敏感度以及经济对气候变化敏感度的合理估计范围。我们并未明确聚焦于不确定性本身，而是考察由现有文献研究所给出的上下限所界定的极端情景。我们将最优政策与自由放任政策进行比较，并指出可能出现的政策失误。迄今为止，最大的政策失误源于气候政策过于消极；而过于激进的气候政策（即在气候变化及其对经济的负面影响非常有限时仍征收高碳税）并不会对经济造成太大损害，因为化石能源与非化石能源之间存在相当强的可替代性。
Abstract
We construct an integrated assessment model with multiple energy sources—two fossil fuels and green energy—and use it to evaluate ranges of plausible estimates for the climate sensitivity, as well as for the sensitivity of the economy to climate change. Rather than focusing explicitly on uncertainty, we look at extreme scenarios defined by the upper and lower limits given in available studies in the literature. We compare optimal policy with laissez faire, and we point out the possible policy errors that could arise. By far the largest policy error arises when the climate policy is overly passive; overly zealous climate policy (i.e., a high carbon tax applied when climate change and its negative impacts on the economy are very limited) does not hurt the economy much as there is considerable substitutability between fossil and nonfossil energy sources.