跳到正文
← 返回论文列表与筛选
阅读说明

本页整理公开书目信息,不生成学术质量评分。AI 解读根据题名及所注明的摘要或原文片段生成,未完成全文核验,可能有误;具体假设、证明与结论请核对原文。摘要保留来源文本,未经模型改写。

DOI 首次登记不等于接收或发表日期。部分更正、评论等条目没有独立摘要;缺少可靠材料时保留待补状态。

本页为预印本版本;arXiv 收录、作者填写的期刊信息以及作者既有发表经历,都不单独证明本篇已接收。作者发表记录按 OpenAlex 身份与完整姓名、本站覆盖期刊 ISSN 及正式卷期核对,只展示已核实例,档案仍可能误合并。

引用量采用 OpenAlex 单条关联记录,不合计多个记录;关联记录可能包含正式发表版本,不等于此版本单独引用。缺失不视为零,引用指标不代表论文质量。

关注作者按书目中的完整姓名匹配,同名和姓名变体需人工辨别。相关论文先按共享细分方向和具体方法排列,再参考通用方法与发表日期。

分类依据与纠错

AI 根据所提供的论文材料归类:摘要属于深度不确定性下的政策决策分析,未明确涉及所列计量领域细分。

反馈分类问题

正在核对关联版本…

代码、数据与补充材料

正在核对对应版本的资源…

关注这篇论文的作者
Stephen J. DeCanio
Charles F. Manski
Alan H. Sanstad

气候模型与代际贴现深度不确定性下的最小最大遗憾气候政策

研究问题
当正确的气候模型与代际贴现率都存在深度不确定性时,如何选择气候政策,使不同可能状态下的最大遗憾最小?
方法与思路
作者在综合评估模型中采用最小最大遗憾准则,以一组贴现率同时表达经验和规范不确定性,比较减排成本与气候损害。
材料陈述的贡献
摘要称分析指向采用 0.02 的较低贴现率;在多数所用成本和损害权重下,政策使最大未来温升低于基准水平以上两度。
阅读关注点
应核对候选模型、贴现率范围与政策集合、遗憾的比较基准,以及温升结果对成本损害权重和不确定性集合的敏感性。
阅读边界
这是 arXiv 预印本,同行评审及期刊接收未核实;摘要未给完整模型及参数范围,政策结论限于所考察的不确定性集合。

原文摘要

Integrated assessment models have become the primary tools for comparing climate policies that seek to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Policy comparisons have often been performed by considering a planner who seeks to make optimal trade-offs between the costs of carbon abatement and the economic damages from climate change. The planning problem has been formalized as one of optimal control, the objective being to minimize the total costs of abatement and damages over a time horizon. Studying climate policy as a control problem presumes that a planner knows enough to make optimization feasible, but physical and economic uncertainties abound. Earlier, Manski, Sanstad, and DeCanio proposed and studied use of the minimax-regret (MMR) decision criterion to account for deep uncertainty in climate modeling. Here we study choice of climate policy that minimizes maximum regret with deep uncertainty regarding both the correct climate model and the appropriate time discount rate to use in intergenerational assessment of policy consequences. The analysis specifies a range of discount rates to express both empirical and normative uncertainty about the appropriate rate. The findings regarding climate policy are novel and informative. The MMR analysis points to use of a relatively low discount rate of 0.02 for climate policy. The MMR decision rule keeps the maximum future temperature increase below 2C above the 1900-10 level for most of the parameter values used to weight costs and damages.

笔记与分组