World Economics - Insight , Analysis and Data
World Economics Journal
Crime & corruption
Economic indicators and forecasting
Gross Domestic Product (GDP)
Savings and debt
Exchange Rate Policy
Labour Market Reform
Law and Justice
Food and Agriculture
Media, Sport and Entertainment
Retail and Consumer Goods
World Economics Journal Archive
Browse the complete World Economics Journal archive.
World Economics Authors
Biographies and contact details for all authors.
Full list of executive editors and our advisory board
Submit an Article
Details and notes for authors regarding journal submissions.
Journal Subscription Information
Subscribe to the journal online.
About World Economics
History and information about the site.
Useful numbers and contact details.
Terms & Conditions
Right for the Right Reasons
World Economics, June 2007
Four authors of the Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change, and Dennis Anderson who provided advice and background papers for the Review, make a final rejoinder on the debate about the Review that has occupied recent issues of this journal. They respond to comments in the present issue by Carter
., by Henderson, and by Tol and Yohe. Carter
. continue to argue against a growing body of scientific evidence and a growing consensus on that same evidence. The source of their critique is, first, a distinctly partisan, and increasingly untenable, position on the broad range of available scientific evidence and, second, a mistrust of the international consensus-building exercise centred on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Henderson is also largely preoccupied with the latter, procedural issues. Tol and Yohe focus on economic arguments. Their critique is rather narrower in focus and concerns the way in which abatement costs were calculated in the supporting work carried out by Dennis Anderson. It rests on basic confusions and misconceptions, many of which were explained in previous contributions. However, readers of
might be more interested in a broader reflection: how would the Stern team, following the debate of the last eight months, assess the approach, policies and arguments set out in the Review? Their view is that their analyses and policy proposals, and the arguments in support, are sound and have stood up well to scrutiny. In other words, they were right and for the right reasons. Central to many critiques of the Review is a fundamental misunderstanding of the role of formal, highly aggregated economic modelling. Nevertheless, the Stern team have argued strongly and in their view convincingly that,
within the confines of formal economic modelling, the concerns raised by a small group of commentators do not overturn their basic conclusion that the cost of action is much less than the cost of inaction. The critics here fall short by failing to
afford the necessary importance to issues of
Are There Limits to Green Growth?
Edward B. Barbier
World Economics, September 2015
Measuring Natural Capital
World Economics, December 2014
How to Reduce Carbon Emissions Equitably
World Economics, March 2014
Keep updated with:
Posts from Facebook
Tweets from Twitter
Groups on LinkedIn
Alerts from RSS feed
Copyright World Economics Ltd. 2017