Comparison of Ethical Frameworks in Stern's and Nordhaus's Discount Rates
The fundamental difference between the discount rates of Stern and Nordhaus stems from their opposing ethical frameworks for valuing future generations. Stern's approach is egalitarian, treating the wellbeing of all generations as equally important. In contrast, Nordhaus's model reflects the perspective of the current generation by discounting the welfare of future generations, drawing a parallel to how individuals' intrinsic impatience leads them to value their own present consumption more than their future consumption. This ethical divergence is the basis for their disagreement on including a discount for 'intrinsic impatience' or pure time preference in the intergenerational discount rate; Stern excludes it, while Nordhaus incorporates it.
0
1
Tags
SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19)
Biomedical Sciences
Economics
Economy
Introduction to Microeconomics Course
Social Science
Empirical Science
Science
CORE Econ
Ch.9 Lenders and borrowers and differences in wealth - The Economy 2.0 Microeconomics @ CORE Econ
Related
Comparison of Policy Implications: Stern vs. Nordhaus Discount Rates
Comparison of Ethical Frameworks in Stern's and Nordhaus's Discount Rates
Illustrating Scales of Economic Focus
A government is evaluating a climate change policy that requires a substantial immediate investment to prevent an estimated $50 trillion in environmental damages 150 years from now. An economist who agrees with the main criticisms leveled against the 2006 Stern Review's approach to valuing future outcomes is asked for their assessment. Which of the following conclusions is most consistent with that economist's perspective?
An economist argues that when evaluating long-term climate change policies, the well-being of future generations should be valued less than the well-being of the current generation. Based on this ethical stance, this economist would likely conclude that the 2006 Stern Review's recommendations for immediate, large-scale investment in climate mitigation were appropriate.
An economist argues that when evaluating long-term climate change policies, the well-being of future generations should be valued less than the well-being of the current generation. Based on this ethical stance, this economist would likely conclude that the 2006 Stern Review's recommendations for immediate, large-scale investment in climate mitigation were appropriate.
Critique of the Stern Review's Discounting Method
Evaluating Long-Term Infrastructure Investment
Critics of the 2006 Stern Review, such as William Nordhaus, argued for using a higher social discount rate. What is the direct analytical consequence of applying a higher discount rate when calculating the present value of long-term climate change damages?
Match each economic perspective on valuing future climate change impacts with its corresponding characteristic or implication.
Discount Rates and Policy Urgency
An economist critiques a major climate change report for using a very low social discount rate (e.g., 1.4%) to evaluate the costs and benefits of mitigation policies over centuries. Which of the following statements best articulates the fundamental economic objection to using such a low rate in this context?
Learn After
Nordhaus's Method for Quantifying Intrinsic Impatience
Two economists are debating how to value future climate change damages within a cost-benefit analysis.
-
Economist A argues: 'The well-being of a person living 100 years from now is just as intrinsically valuable as the well-being of a person living today. Our calculations should not devalue future welfare simply because it occurs later in time.'
-
Economist B argues: 'Policy should reflect human nature. Individuals are inherently impatient, preferring benefits now rather than later. This same preference should be applied to society as a whole, meaning we should give less weight to the well-being of generations that are far in the future.'
What is the fundamental ethical disagreement that distinguishes these two positions?
-
The Ethical Core of Discounting
Ethical Frameworks in Project Evaluation
An economist argues that when evaluating long-term policies, such as those addressing climate change, it is necessary to apply a discount rate that reflects the 'intrinsic impatience' observed in human behavior, where individuals value present consumption more than future consumption. Which of the following statements represents an ethical viewpoint that this economist would necessarily reject?
Match each ethical framework or principle related to intergenerational discounting with its corresponding description.
Ethical Assumptions in Long-Term Policy
A policymaker evaluating a long-term environmental project states: 'From an ethical standpoint, the well-being of a person born 100 years from now is as important as the well-being of a person today. We should not systematically devalue their welfare simply due to the passage of time.' Which of the following approaches to calculating the project's net present value is most consistent with this ethical principle?
An economic advisor suggests that when a government evaluates a 200-year infrastructure project, it should use a discount rate that includes a component for 'pure time preference.' What is the most likely ethical justification for this recommendation?
Contrasting Ethical Views on Intergenerational Value