A lower bound to the social cost of CO2 emissions


Many studies have estimated the social cost of carbon (SCC). We critically evaluate SCC estimates, focusing on omitted cost categories, discounting, uncertainties about damage costs and risk aversion. This allows for the calculation of a lower bound to the SCC. Dominant SCC values turn out to be gross underestimates, notably, but not only, for a low discount rate. The validity of this lower bound is supported by a precautionary approach to reflect risk aversion against extreme climate change. The results justify a more stringent climate policy than is suggested by most influential past studies.

Access options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.


All prices are NET prices.


  1. 1

    Stern, N. The Economics of Climate Change: The Stern Review (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2007).

    Google Scholar 

  2. 2

    Tol, R. S. J. The economic impact of climate change. J. Econ. Persp. 23, 29–51 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. 3

    Pearce, D. W. The social cost of carbon and its policy implications. Oxford Rev. Econ. Pol. 19, 362–384 (2003).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. 4

    Nordhaus, W. D. Integrated Economic and Climate Modeling (Cowles Foundation for Research, 2011).

    Google Scholar 

  5. 5

    US Department of Energy Final Rule Technical Support Document (TSD): Energy Efficiency Program for Commercial and Industrial Equipment: Small Electric Motors, Appendix 15A (US Government, 2010).

  6. 6

    Ayres, R. U. & Walters, J. Greenhouse effects: Damages, costs and abatement. Environ. Res. Econ. 1, 237–270 (1991).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 7

    Daily, G. C., Ehrlich, P. R., Mooney, H. A. & Ehrlich, A. H. Greenhouse economics: learn before you leap. Ecol. Econ. 4, 1–10 (1991).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8

    Broome, J. Counting the Cost of Global Warming (White House Press, 1992).

    Google Scholar 

  9. 9

    Barker, T. A review of Managing the global commons: the economics of global change by W. D. Nordhaus. Energy Environ. 7, 85–88 (1996).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10

    Azar, C. Are optimal CO2 emissions really optimal? Four critical issues for economists in the greenhouse. Environ. Res. Econ. 11, 301–315 (1998).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 11

    Neumayer, E. Global warming: discounting is not the issue, but substitutability is. Energy Policy 27, 33–43 (1999).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12

    Spash, C. L. Greenhouse Economics (Routledge, 2002).

    Google Scholar 

  13. 13

    DeCanio, S. J. Economic Models of Climate Change: A Critique (Palgrave-Macmillan, 2003).

    Google Scholar 

  14. 14

    van den Bergh, J. C. J. M. Optimal climate policy is a utopia: from quantitative to qualitative cost-benefit analysis. Ecol. Econ. 48, 385–393 (2004).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15

    Padilla, E. Climate change, economic analysis and sustainable development. Environ.Values 13, 523–544 (2004).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 16

    Ackerman F. & Finlayson, I. J. The economics of inaction on climate change: a sensitivity analysis. Clim. Policy 6, 509–526 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. 17

    Maréchal, K. The economics of climate change and the change of climate in economics. Energy Policy 35, 5181–5194 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. 18

    Gowdy, J. M. Behavioral economics and climate change policy. J. Behav. Econ. Organ. 68, 632–644 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. 19

    Tol, R. S. J. The social cost of carbon: Trends, outliers and catastrophes. Economics 2, 1–22 (2008).

    Google Scholar 

  20. 20

    Ackerman, F., DeCanio. S. J., Howarth, R. B. & Sheeran, K. Limitations of integrated assessment models of climate change. Climatic Change 95, 297–315 (2009).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  21. 21

    Ackerman, F., Stanton, E. A. & Bueno, R. Fat tails, exponents, extreme uncertainty: Simulating catastrophe in DICE. Ecol. Econ. 69, 1657–1665 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. 22

    van den Bergh, J. C. J. M. Safe climate policy is affordable — 12 reasons. Climatic Change 101, 339–385 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. 23

    Ackerman, F. & Munitz, C. Climate damages in the FUND model: A disaggregated analysis. Ecol. Econ. 77, 219–224 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. 24

    Tol, R. S. J. On the uncertainty about the total economic impact of climate change. Environ. Res. Econ. 53, 97–116 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. 25

    Nordhaus, W. D. A Question of Balance: Weighting the Options of Global Warming Policies (Yale Univ. Press, 2008).

    Google Scholar 

  26. 26

    Anthoff, D., Rose, S., Tol, R. S. J. & Waldhoff, S. The time evolution of the social cost of carbon: An application of FUND Economics Discussion Papers 2011–44 (Kiel Institute for the World Economy, 2011).

    Google Scholar 

  27. 27

    Hope, C. The marginal impact of CO2 from PAGE2002: an integrated assessment model incorporating the IPCC's five reasons for concern. Integrat. Assess. J. 6, 19–56 (2006).

    Google Scholar 

  28. 28

    Waldhoff, S., Anthoff, D., Rose, S. & Tol, R. S. J. The marginal damage costs of different greenhouse gases: An application of FUND. Economics 2011–43 (2011).

  29. 29

    Hope, C. The social cost of CO2 from the PAGE09 model. Economics 2011–39 (2011).

  30. 30

    Interagency Working Group on Social Cost of Carbon Technical Update of the Social Cost of Carbon for Regulatory Impact Analysis under Executive Order 12866 (US Government, 2013). http://go.nature.com/9ZtMyu

  31. 31

    Johnson, L. T. & Hope, C. The social cost of carbon in U.S. regulatory impact analyses: An introduction and critique. J. Environ. Stud. Sci. 2, 205–221 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. 32

    Marten, A. L. & Newbold, S. C. Estimating the social cost of non-CO2 GHG emissions: Methane and nitrous oxide. Energy Policy 51, 957–972 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. 33

    Demeritt, D. & Rothman, D. Figuring the costs of climate change: an assessment and critique. Environ. Plan. A 31, 389–408 (1999).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. 34

    Tol, R. S. J. The marginal damage costs of carbon dioxide emissions: an assessment of the uncertainties. Energy Policy 33, 2064–2074 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. 35

    Stern, N. The structure of economic modeling of the potential impacts of climate change: grafting gross underestimation of risk onto already narrow science models. J. Econ. Lit. 51, 838–859 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. 36

    Cline, W. R. The Economics of Global Warming (Institute for International Economics, 1992).

    Google Scholar 

  37. 37

    Roemer, J. E. The ethics of intertemporal distribution in a warming planet. Environ. Res. Econ. 48, 363–390 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. 38

    Nordhaus, W. D. A review of the Stern review on the economics of climate change. J. Econ. Lit. XLV, 686–702 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. 39

    Dasgupta, P. Discounting climate change. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 37, 141–169 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. 40

    Howarth, R. B. & Norgaard, R. B. in Handbook of Environmental Economics (ed. Bromley, D.) 111–138 (Blackwell, 1995).

    Google Scholar 

  41. 41

    Brekke, K. A. & Johansson-Stenman, O. The behavioural economics of climate change. Oxford Rev. Econ. Pol. 24, 280–297 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. 42

    Cline, W. R. Yale Symposium on the Stern Review Ch. 6 (Yale Center for the Study of Globalization, 2007); http://go.nature.com/95uCm5

    Google Scholar 

  43. 43

    Hueting, R. Why environmental sustainability can most probably not be attained with growing production. J. Clean. Prod. 18, 525–530 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. 44

    Gollier, C. Ecological discounting. J. Econ. Theory 145, 812–829 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. 45

    Conceição, P., Zhang, Y. & Bandura, R. in Human Development Report 2007/2008, Fighting Climate Change: Human Solidarity in a Divided World Occasional Paper 2007/19 (Human Development Report Office, 2007).

    Google Scholar 

  46. 46

    Cline, W. R. The Economics of Global Warming (Institute for International Economics, 1992).

    Google Scholar 

  47. 47

    Stern, N. & Richard T. Ely lecture: The economics of climate change. Am. Econ. Rev. 98, 1–37 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. 48

    Arrow, K. et al. Determining benefits and costs for future generations. Science 341, 349–350 (2013).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  49. 49

    Botzen, W. J. W. Managing Extreme Climate Change Risks through Insurance (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2013).

    Google Scholar 

  50. 50

    IPCC Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. (eds Solomon, S. et al.) (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2007).

  51. 51

    Field, C. B. et al. (eds) Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation. (IPCC, Cambridge Univ. Press, 2012).

    Google Scholar 

  52. 52

    Hope, C. The marginal impact of CO2 from PAGE2002: An Integrated Assessment Model incorporating the IPCC's five reasons for concern. Integrat. Assess. J. 6, 19–56 (2006).

    Google Scholar 

  53. 53

    Weitzman, M. L. On modeling and interpreting the economics of catastrophic climate change. Rev. Econ. Stats. 91, 1–19 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. 54

    Weitzman, M. L. GHG Targets as Insurance Against Catastrophic Climate Damages Working Paper 16136 (National Bureau of Economic Research, 2010).

    Google Scholar 

  55. 55

    Weitzman, M. L. Risk-adjusted gamma discounting. J. Environ. Econ. Manage. 60, 1–13 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. 56

    Botzen, W. J. W. & van den Bergh, J. C. J. M. How sensitive is Nordhaus to Weitzman? Climate policy in DICE with an alternative damage function. Econ. Lett. 117, 372–374 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. 57

    Pycroft, J., Vergano, J., Hope, C., Paci, D. & Ciscar, J. C. A tale of tails: Uncertainty and the social costs of carbon dioxide. Economics 5, 1–29 (2011).

    Google Scholar 

  58. 58

    Ceronsky, M., Anthoff, D., Hepburn, C. & Tol, R. S. J. Checking the Price Tag on Catastrophe: The Social Cost of Carbon under Non-Linear Climate Response. Working Paper 392 (ESRI, 2011).

    Google Scholar 

  59. 59

    Dietz, S. High impact, low probability? An empirical analysis of risk in the economics of climate change. Climatic Change 108, 519–541 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. 60

    Ackerman, F. & Stanton, E. A. Climate risks and carbon prices: Revising the social cost of carbon. Economics 6, 1–25 (2012).

    Google Scholar 

  61. 61

    Hanemann, W. M. What is the Economic Cost of Climate Change? (eScholarship, 2008).

    Google Scholar 

  62. 62

    Kousky, C., Kopp, R. E. & Cooke, R. Risk premia and the social cost of carbon: A review. Economics 5, 1–24 (2011).

    Google Scholar 

  63. 63

    Botzen, W. J. W. & van den Bergh, J. C. J. M. Bounded rationality, climate risks and insurance: Is there a market for natural disasters? Land Econ. 85, 266–279 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. 64

    Hope, C. Discount rates, equity weights and the social cost of carbon. Energy Econ. 30, 1011–1019 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. 65

    Dietz, S., Hepburn, C. & Stern, N. in Arguments for a Better World: Essays in Honour of Amartya Sen. (eds Basu, K. & Kanbur, R.) Ch. 19 (Oxford Univ. Press, 2009).

    Google Scholar 

  66. 66

    Carlsson, F., D. Daruvala & Johansson-Stenman, O. Are people inequality-averse, or just risk averse? Economica 72, 375–396 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. 67

    Beckerman, W. & Hepburn, C. J. Ethics of the discount rate in the Stern Review. World Econ. 8, 187–210 (2007).

    Google Scholar 

  68. 68

    Anthoff, D., Tol, R. S. J. & Yohe, G. W. Risk aversion, time preference, and the social cost of carbon. Environ. Res. Lett. 4, 1–7 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. 69

    Crost, B. & Traeger, C. Risk and Aversion in Integrated Assessment of Climate Change Working paper 1104R (CUDARE, 2011).

    Google Scholar 

  70. 70

    Froyn, C. B. Decision criteria, scientific uncertainty, and the global warming controversy. Mitig. Adapt. Strat. Glob. Change 10, 183–211 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. 71

    Anthoff, D. & Tol, R. S. J. Climate policy under fat-tailed risk: An application of FUND. Ann. Op. Res. (in the press).

  72. 72

    Loulou, R. & Kanudia, A. Minimax regret strategies for greenhouse gas abatement: Methodology and application. Op. Res. Lett. 25, 219–230 (1999).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. 73

    Iverson, T. Communicating trade-offs amid controversial science: Decision support for climate policy. Ecol. Econ. 77, 74–90 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. 74

    Randall, A. We already have risk management – Do we really need the precautionary principle? Int. Rev. Environ. Resource Econ. 3, 39–74 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. 75

    Randall, A. Risk and Precaution (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2011).

    Google Scholar 

  76. 76

    Iverson, T. & Perrings, C. Precaution and proportionality in the management of global environmental change. Glob. Environ. Change 22, 161–177 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  77. 77

    Sunstein, C. R. Laws of Fear: Beyond the Precautionary Principle. The Seeley Lectures (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2005).

    Google Scholar 

  78. 78

    Quiggin, J. Complexity, climate change and the precautionary principle. Environ. Health 7, 15–21 (2007).

    Google Scholar 

Download references


We are grateful to five reviewers for comments and suggestions. JvdB received financial support from the European Commission through the FP7 project WWW.forEUrope (grant agreement nr. 290647). WB received financial support from a VENI grant from the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (NWO) and from the European Commission through the FP7 project ENHANCE (grant agreement nr. 308438).

Author information




J.vdB. and W.B. wrote the paper jointly.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to W. J. W. Botzen.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

van den Bergh, J., Botzen, W. A lower bound to the social cost of CO2 emissions. Nature Clim Change 4, 253–258 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2135

Download citation

Further reading