Big new climate paper from @BjornLomborg
Lomborg 2020. Welfare in the 21st century: Increasing development, reducing inequality, the impact of climate change and the cost of climate policies. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 156.
sciencedirect.com/science/articl…
Lomborg 2020. Welfare in the 21st century: Increasing development, reducing inequality, the impact of climate change and the cost of climate policies. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 156.
sciencedirect.com/science/articl…
Lomborg observes, correctly, that differences between pc GDP in scenarios of the IPCC in 2100 is much greater than the projected impacts of climate change on individual scenarios
(Note we have critiqued these scenarios as over-projecting GDP growth: osf.io/preprints/soca…)
(Note we have critiqued these scenarios as over-projecting GDP growth: osf.io/preprints/soca…)
Lomborg's argument that SSP5 is actually a good outcome is why we see the evolution of the SSP3-8.5 "chimera" as we explain in our new paper: papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cf…
The idea that global development pathways carry greater differences than climate policy or not, is not new
Robinson, J. (2003). Future subjunctive: backcasting as social learning. Futures, 35(8), 839-856.
sciencedirect.com/science/articl…
Robinson, J. (2003). Future subjunctive: backcasting as social learning. Futures, 35(8), 839-856.
sciencedirect.com/science/articl…
Or compare Mike Hulme 2020:
"there are some futures beyond 1.5C (or even 2C) that are more desirable than other futures which do not exceed these warming thresholds. We should not mistake one set for the other." onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.100…
"there are some futures beyond 1.5C (or even 2C) that are more desirable than other futures which do not exceed these warming thresholds. We should not mistake one set for the other." onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.100…
Lomborg argues (based on GDP) that we should prefer SSP5 with climate change over SSP1
This math is baked into the logic of the SSP scenarios
I disagree w/ his opposition to climate policies, but agree that we need to focus on total development paths & not just the climate part
This math is baked into the logic of the SSP scenarios
I disagree w/ his opposition to climate policies, but agree that we need to focus on total development paths & not just the climate part
The SSP scenarios have difficulty handling climate change, as there are inconsistencies and unincorporated feedbacks, as @matthewgburgess highlights here (remember, scenarios are not predictions):
Bottom line: @BjornLomborg has produced a well-argued, peer-reviewed critique of climate policy, based on the work of the IPCC. I don't agree with everything but I do hope people will take his arguments on their merits -- a good debate makes us all smarter.
