World Scientific
  • Search
Skip main navigation

Cookies Notification

We use cookies on this site to enhance your user experience. By continuing to browse the site, you consent to the use of our cookies. Learn More

System Upgrade on Tue, May 28th, 2024 at 2am (EDT)

Existing users will be able to log into the site and access content. However, E-commerce and registration of new users may not be available for up to 12 hours.
For online purchase, please visit us again. Contact us at [email protected] for any enquiries.


    Climate change impacts are stochastic and highly uncertain and moreover heterogeneous across regions. That is, there is a potential to sharing this risk ex-ante across regions and hence to reduce the welfare-economic costs of these risks. We analyze how climate risks could be reduced via an insurance scheme at the global scale across regions and quantify the potential welfare gains. We introduce risk sharing of global climate risk represented by the equilibrium climate sensitivity, and introduce an asset-based insurance scheme to allow for risk sharing across regions. We estimate that such risk sharing scheme could lead to welfare gains reducing the global costs of climate change by up to 15%. Such a scheme implies transfers of about USD 200 billion per year and faces important implementation challenges. The results provide a motivation for the loss and damage mechanism related negotiations about sharing risks of climate change at the global level.

    JEL: Q54, D81, D63


    • Ackerman, F and C Munitz [2012] Climate damages in the FUND model: A disaggregated analysis. Ecological Economics, 77, 219–224. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • Ackerman, F, EA Stanton and R Bueno [2013] Epstein–Zin utility in DICE: Is risk aversion irrelevant to climate policy? Environmental and Resource Economics, 56, 73–84. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • Anthoff, D and RSJ Tol [2009] The impact of climate change on the balanced growth equivalent: An application of FUND. Environmental and Resource Economics, 43, 351–367. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • Arrow, KJ [1964] The role of securities in the optimal allocation of risk-bearing. Review of Economic Studies, 31, 91–96. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • Baxter, M [2011] International risk sharing in the short run and in the long run. The Canadian Journal of Economics, 45 (2), 376–393. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • Bosello, F, E De Cian and L Ferranna (2013). Advancement report on adaptation and damage functions in the WITCH model and test runs, CMCC Research Paper 197, CMCC, Lecce, Italy. Google Scholar
    • Burke, M, SM Hsiang and E Miguel [2015] Global non-linear effect of temperature on economic production. Nature, 527, 235–239. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • Cai, Y, TM Lenton and TS Lontzek [2016] Risk of multiple interacting tipping points should encourage rapid CO2 emission reduction. Nature Climate Change, 6, 520–525. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • Calliari, E [2018] Loss and damage: A critical discourse analysis of parties’ positions in climate change negotiations. Journal of Risk Research, 21 (6), 725–747, CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • CPI (2013). The global landscape of climate finance 2013. Technical report, Climate Policy Initiative. Google Scholar
    • Crost, B and CP Traeger [2014] Optimal CO2 mitigation under damage risk valuation. Nature Climate Change, 4, 631–636. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • Dennig, F, MB Budolfson, M Fleurbaey, A Siebert and RH Socolow [2015] Inequality, climate impacts on the future poor, and carbon prices. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 112, 15827–15832. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • Emmerling, J, L Drouet, LA Reis, M Bevione, L Berger, V Bosetti, S Carrara, E De Cian, G De Maere D’Aertrycke, T Longden, M Malpede, G Marangoni, F Sferra, M Tavoni, J Witajewski-Baltvilks and P Havlik (2016). The WITCH 2016 Model — Documentation and Implementation of the Shared Socioeconomic Pathways, Working Paper 2016.42, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei. Google Scholar
    • Ferranna, M (2013). Collective risk management: Prevention and risk sharing. Mimeo. Google Scholar
    • Fleurbaey, M [2018] Welfare economics, risk and uncertainty. Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue Canadienne d’Économique, 51, 5–40. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • Fleurbaey, M and S Zuber [2013] Inequality aversion and separability in social risk evaluation. Economic Theory, 54, 675–692. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • Gollier, C [2005] Some aspects of the economics of catastrophe risk insurance. In Policy Issues in Insurance. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Publishing, Paris, pp. 13–30. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • Hirshleifer, J [1971] The private and social value of information and the reward to inventive activity. The American Economic Review, 61, 561–574. Google Scholar
    • Hope, C [2008] Discount rates, equity weights and the social cost of carbon. Energy Economics, 30, 1011–1019. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • Kunreuther, H, R Hogarth and J Meszaros [1993] Insurer ambiguity and market failure. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 7, 71–87. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • Ligon, E [1998] Risk sharing and information in village economies. The Review of Economic Studies, 65, 847–864. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • Mathew, LM and S Akter [2017] Loss and damage associated with climate change impacts. In Handbook of Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation, W-Y ChenT SuzukiM Lackner (eds.), Cham: Springer, pp. 17–45. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • MCII (2013). Climate risk adaptation and insurance: Reducing vulnerability and sustaining the livelihoods of low-income communities. Technical Report No. 13, Munich Climate Insurance Initiative, UNU-EHS, Bonn. Google Scholar
    • Millner, A, S Dietz and G Heal [2013] Scientific ambiguity and climate policy. Environmental and Resource Economics, 55, 21–46. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • Mills, E [2005] Insurance in a climate of change. Science, 309, 1040–1044. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • Mills, E (2009). From risk to opportunity insurer responses to climate change. Technical report. Google Scholar
    • Miranda, M and DV Vedenov [2001] Innovations in agricultural and natural disaster insurance. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 83, 650–655. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • Mirrlees, JA and NH Stern [1972] Fairly good plans. Journal of Economic Theory, 4, 268–288. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • Murphy, JM, DMH Sexton, DN Barnett, GS Jones, MJ Webb, M Collins and DA Stainforth [2004] Quantification of modelling uncertainties in a large ensemble of climate change simulations. Nature, 430, 768–772. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • Nordhaus, WD [2017] Revisiting the social cost of carbon. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 114, 1518–1523. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • Obstfeld, M (1994). Are industrial-country consumption risks globally diversified? National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper Series, Vol. 4308. Google Scholar
    • Pindyck, RS [2017] The use and misuse of models for climate policy, Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, 11, 100–114. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • Roe, GH and MB Baker [2007] Why is climate sensitivity so unpredictable? Science, 318, 629–632. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • Schmidt, MGW, H Held, E Kriegler and A Lorenz [2012] Climate policy under uncertain and heterogeneous climate damages. Environmental and Resource Economics, 54, 79–99. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • Traeger, CP [2009] Recent developments in the intertemporal modeling of uncertainty. Annual Review of Resource Economics, 1, 261–286. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    Remember to check out the Most Cited Articles!

    Be inspired by these New titles in Energy, Resource & Environmental Economics today.
    Featuring authors from Princeton, Columbia University, Imperial College Business School and many more!