Francesco Bosello

Climate Policy and the Optimal Balance between Mitigation, Adaptation and Unavoided Damage

It has become commonly accepted that a successful climate strategy should compound mitigation and adaptation. The accurate combination between adaptation and mitigation that can best address climate change is still an open question. This paper proposes a framework that integrates mitigation, adaptation, and climate change residual damages into an optimisation model. This set-up is used to provide some insights on the welfare maximising resource allocation between mitigation and adaptation, on their optimal timing, and on their marginal contribution to reducing vulnerability to climate change. The optimal mix between three different adaptation modes (reactive adaptation, anticipatory adaptation, and investment in innovation for adaptation purposes) within the adaptation bundle is also identified. Results suggest that the joint implementation of mitigation and adaptation is welfare improving. Mitigation should start immediately, whereas adaptation somewhat later. It is also shown that in a world where the probability of climate-related catastrophic events is small and where decision makers have a high discount rate, adaptation is unambiguously the preferred option. Adaptation needs, both in developed and developing countries, will be massive, especially during the second half of the century. Most of the adaptation burden will be on developing countries. International cooperation is thus required to equally distribute the costs of adaptation.

Economic impacts of climate change in Europe: sea-level rise

This paper uses two models to examine the direct and indirect costs of sea-level rise for Europe for a range of sea-level rise scenarios for the 2020s and 2080s: (1) the DIVA model to estimate the physical impacts of sea-level rise and the direct economic cost, including adaptation, and (2) the GTAP-EF model to assess the indirect economic implications. Without adaptation, impacts are quite significant with a large land loss and increase in the incidence of coastal flooding. By the end of the century Malta has the largest relative land loss at 12% of its total surface area, followed by Greece at 3.5% land loss. Economic losses are however larger in Poland and Germany (

Climate change impacts in Europe. Final report of the PESETA research project

483 and

An analysis of adaptation as a response to climate change.

391 million, respectively). Coastal protection is very effective in reducing these impacts and optimally undertaken leads to protection levels that are higher than 85% in the majority of European states. While the direct economic impact of sea-level rise is always negative, the final impact on countries’ economic performances estimated with the GTAP-EF model may be positive or negative. This is because factor substitution, international trade, and changes in investment patterns interact with possible positive implications. The policy insights are (1) while sea-level rise has negative and huge direct economic effects, overall effects on GDP are quite small (max −0.046% in Poland); (2) the impact of sea-level rise is not confined to the coastal zone and sea-level rise indirectly affects landlocked countries as well (Austria for instance loses −0.003% of its GDP); and (3) adaptation is crucial to keep the negative impacts of sea-level rise at an acceptable level.

Assessing Climate Change Impacts: Agriculture

The PESETA research project integrates a set of high-resolution climate change projections and physical models into an economic modelling framework to quantify the impacts of climate change on vulnerable aspects of Europe. Four market impact categories are considered (agriculture, river floods, coastal systems, and tourism) and one non-market category (human health). Considering the market impacts, without public adaptation and if the climate of the 2080s occurred today, the EU annual welfare loss would be in the range of 0.2% to 1%, depending on the climate scenario. However, there is large variation across different climate futures, EU regions and impact categories. Scenarios with warmer temperatures and higher sea level rise result in more severe economic damage for the EU. Southern Europe, the British Isles and Central Europe North appear to be the most sensitive regions to climate change. Northern Europe is the only region with net economic benefits, mainly driven by the positive effects in agriculture. Concerning the contribution to the overall effects, coastal systems, agriculture and river flooding are the most important ones.

Assessing direct and indirect economic impacts of a flood event through the integration of spatial and computable general equilibrium modelling

Climate change is likely to have relevant effects on our future socio-economic systems. It is therefore important to identify how markets and policy jointly react to expected climate change to protect our societies and well-being. This study addresses this issue by carrying out an integrated analysis of both optimal mitigation and adaptation at the global and regional level. Adaptation responses are disentangled into three different modes: reactive adaptation, proactive (or anticipatory) adaptation, and investments in innovation for adaptation purposes. The size, the timing, the relative contribution to total climate-related damage reduction, and the benefit-cost ratios of each of these strategies are assessed for the world as a whole, and for developed and developing countries in both a cooperative and a non-cooperative setting. The study also takes into account the role of price signals and markets in inducing and diffusing adaptation. This leads to two scenarios: A pessimistic one, in which policy-driven adaptation bears the burden, together with mitigation, of reducing climate damage; and an optimistic one, in which markets also autonomously contribute to reducing some damages by modifying sectoral structure, international trade flows, capital distribution and land allocation. For all scenarios, the costs and benefits of adaptation are assessed using WITCH, an integrated assessment, intertemporal optimization, forward-looking model. Extensive sensitivity analysis with respect to the size of climate damages and of the discount rate has also been carried out.

CLIMATE POLICY AND THE OPTIMAL BALANCE BETWEEN MITIGATION, ADAPTATION AND UNAVOIDED DAMAGE

The economy-wide implications of climate change on agricultural sectors in 2050 are estimated using a static computable general equilibrium model. Peculiar to this exercise is the coupling of the economic model with a climatic model forecasting temperature increase in the relevant year and with a crop-growth model estimating climate change impact on cereal productivity. The main results of the study point out on the one hand the limited influence of climate change on world food supply and welfare; on the other hand its important distributional consequences as the stronger negative effects are concentrated on developing countries. The simulation exercise is introduced by a survey of the relevant literature.

The Economic and Environmental Effects of an EU Ban on Illegal Logging Imports: Insights from a CGE Assessment

In this paper we developed and tested an integrated methodology for assessing direct and indirect economic impacts of flooding. The methodology combines a spatial analysis of the damage to the physical stock with a general economic equilibrium approach using a regionally-calibrated (to Italy) version of a Computable General Equilibrium (CGE) global model. We applied the model to the 2000 Po river flood in Northern Italy. To account for the uncertainty in the induced effects on regional economies, we explored three disruption and two recovery scenarios. The results highlight that: i) the flood event produces indirect losses in the national economic system, which are a significant share of the direct losses, and ii) the methodology is able to capture both positive and negative economic effects of the disaster in different areas of the same country. The assessment of indirect impacts, in particular, is essential for a full understanding of the economic outcomes of natural disasters. Rarely the accounting of flood losses includes indirect economic impacts.The proposed method integrates spatial and computable general equilibrium modelling for the estimation of indirect impacts.We analyse a flood event in Northern Italy, reporting indirect economic impacts as around 20 percent of direct impacts.Economic benefits arise in non-flooded sub-regions of Italy.

Energy Demand and Temperature: A Dynamic Panel Analysis

It has become commonly accepted that a successful climate strategy should compound mitigation and adaptation. The accurate combination between adaptation and mitigation that can best address climate change is still an open question. This paper proposes a framework that integrates mitigation, adaptation, and climate change residual damages into an optimisation model. This set-up is used to provide some insights on the welfare maximising resource allocation between mitigation and adaptation, on their optimal timing, and on their marginal contribution to reducing vulnerability to climate change. The optimal mix between three different adaptation modes (reactive adaptation, anticipatory adaptation, and investment in innovation for adaptation purposes) within the adaptation bundle is also identified. Results suggest that the joint implementation of mitigation and adaptation is welfare improving. Mitigation should start immediately, whereas adaptation somewhat later. It is also shown that in a world where the probability of climate-related catastrophic events is small and where decision makers have a high discount rate, adaptation is unambiguously the preferred option. Adaptation needs, both in developed and developing countries, will be massive, especially during the second half of the century. Most of the adaptation burden will be on developing countries. International cooperation is thus required to equally distribute the costs of adaptation.

Adaptation can help mitigation: an integrated approach to post-2012 climate policy

Illegal logging is widely recognized as a major economic problem and one of the causes of environmental degradation. Increasing awareness of its negative effects has fostered a wide range of proposals to combat it by major international conservation groups and political organizations. Following the 2008 US legislation which prohibits the import of illegally harvested wood and wood products, the European Union (EU) is now discussing a legislation proposal which would ban illegal timber from the EU market. In this study we use the ICES computable general equilibrium model to estimate the reallocation of global demand and timber imports following the pending EU legislation. With this exercise our final objective is to assess the economic impacts and measure the potential emission reduction resulting from the introduction of this type of policy. Results show that while the EU ban does not seem particularly effective in reducing illegal logging activities, its main effect will be the removal of illegal logs from the international markets. In addition, the unilateral EU ban on illegal logs increases secondary wood production in illegal logging countries as their exports become relatively more competitive. Through this mechanism, part of the banned, illegal timber will re-enter the international trade flows, but it will be “hidden” as processed wood. This effect is, however, limited. Finally, given the limited effect on overall economic activity, effects on GHG emissions are also limited. Direct carbon emissions from logging activities can decrease from 2.5 to 0.6 million tons per year.