1932

Abstract

In this review, we attempt to describe the evolution of integrated assessment modeling research since the pioneering work of William Nordhaus in 1994, highlighting a number of challenges and suggestions for moving the field forward. The field has evolved from global aggregate models focused on cost-benefit analysis to detailed process models used to generate emissions scenarios and to coupled model frameworks for impact analyses. The increased demand for higher sectoral, temporal, and spatial resolution to conduct impact analyses has led to a number of challenges both computationally and conceptually. Overcoming these challenges and moving the field forward will require not only greater efforts in model coupling software and translational tools, the incorporation of empirical findings into integrated assessment models, and intermethod comparisons but also the expansion and better coordination of multidisciplinary researchers in this field through better training of the next generation of integrated assessment scholars and expanding the community of practice.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-resource-110119-030314
2020-10-06
2024-05-30
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/resource/12/1/annurev-resource-110119-030314.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-resource-110119-030314&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

Literature Cited

  1. Alcamo J, Shaw R, Hordijk L 1990. The RAINS Model of Acidification: Science and Strategies in Europe Dordrecht, Neth: Kluwer
  2. Burke M, Craxton M, Kolstad CD, Onda C, Allcott H et al. 2016a. Opportunities for advances in climate change economics. Science 352:6283292–93
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Burke M, Craxton M, Kolstad CD, Onda C 2016b. Some research challenges in the economics of climate change. Clim. Change Econ. 7:21650002
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Calvin K, Fisher-Vanden K. 2017. Climate change impacts on agriculture: the role of integrated assessment models. Environ. Res. Lett. 12:115004
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Ciscar JC, Feyen L, Soria A, Lavalle C, Raes F et al. 2014. Climate impacts in Europe. The JRC PESETA II Project. JRC Sci. Policy Rep. EUR 26586EN, Eur. Comm Luxembourg: http://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/handle/JRC87011
  6. Ciscar JC, Fisher-Vanden K, Lobell D 2018. Synthesis and review: an inter-method comparison of climate change impacts on agriculture. Environ. Res. Lett. 13:070104
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Clarke L, Nichols L, Vallario R, Hejazi M, Horing J et al. 2018. Sector interactions, multiple stressors, and complex systems. Impacts, Risks, and Adaptation in the United States: Fourth National Climate Assessment Vol 2 DR Reidmiller, CV Avery, DR Easterling, KE Kunkel, KLM Lewis et al.638–68 Washington, DC: US Glob. Change Res. Prog https://nca2018.globalchange.gov/downloads/NCA4_Ch17_Complex-Systems_Full.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Dasgupta P. 1997. Environmental and Resource Economics in the World of the Poor Washington, DC: Resour. Future
  9. Dennig F, Budolfson MB, Fleurbaey M, Siebert A, Socolow RH 2015. Inequality, climate impacts on the future poor, and carbon prices. PNAS 112:5215827–32
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Diffenbaugh NS, Hertel TW, Scherer M, Verma M 2012. Response of corn markets to climate volatility under alternative energy futures. Nat. Clim. Change 2:514–18
    [Google Scholar]
  11. EPA (US Environ. Prot. Agency) 2017. Multi-model framework for quantitative sectoral impacts analysis: a technical report for the fourth national climate assessment Rep. EPA 430-R-17-001, EPA Washington, DC:
  12. Fisher-Vanden K, Popp D, Sue Wing I 2014. Energy Econ46
  13. Grogan DS, Zhang F, Prusevich A, Lammers RB, Wisser SD et al. 2015. Quantifying the link between crop production and mined groundwater irrigation in China. Sci. Total Environ. 511:161–75
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Hejazi M, Edmonds J, Clarke L, Kyle P, Davies E et al. 2014. Integrated assessment of water scarcity over the 21st century under multiple climate change mitigation policies. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 18:2859–83
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Hope C. 2006. The marginal impacts of CO2 from PAGE2002: an integrated assessment model incorporating the IPCC's five reasons for concern. Integr. Assess. 6:119–56
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Houser T, Hsiang S, Kopp R, Larsen K, Delgado M et al. 2015. Economic Risks of Climate Change: An American Prospectus New York: Columbia Univ. Press
  17. InterAcademy Council 2010. Climate Change Assessments. Review of the Processes and Procedures of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Committee to Review Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Amsterdam: InterAcademy Council
  18. IPCC (Intergov. Panel Clim. Change) 2001. Climate Change 2001: Synthesis Report. A Contribution of Working Groups I, II, and III to the Third Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change RT Watson, Core Writing Team Cambridge, UK/New York: Cambridge Univ. Press
  19. IPCC (Intergov. Panel Clim. Change) 2007. Climate ​Change 2007: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change RK Pachauri, Core Writing Team Geneva: IPCC
  20. IPCC (Intergov. Panel Clim. Change) 2014. Climate Change 2014: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Core Writing Team, RK Pachauri, L Meyer Geneva: IPCC
  21. Kling CL, Arritt RW, Calhoun G, Keiser DA 2017. Integrated assessment models of the food, energy, and water nexus: a review and an outline of research needs. Annu. Rev. Resour. Econ. 9:143–63
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Kraucunas I, Clarke L, Dirks J, Hathaway J, Hejazi M et al. 2015. Investigating the nexus of climate, energy, water, and land at decision-relevant scales: the platform for regional integrated modeling and analysis (PRIMA). Clim. Change 129:3–4573–88
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Merrick JH, Weyant JP. 2019. On choosing the resolution of normative models. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 279:2511–23
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Moss RH, Fisher-Vanden K, Delgado A, Backhaus S, Barrett CL et al. 2016. Understanding dynamics and resilience in complex interdependent systems: prospects for a multi-model framework and community of practice Rep., US Glob. Change Res. Prog., US Dep. Energy Washington, DC:
  25. Muller NZ, Mendelsohn RO. 2007. Measuring the damages due to air pollution in the United States. J. Environ. Econ. Manag. 54:1–14
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Nordhaus WD. 1994. Managing the Global Commons: The Economics of Climate Change Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
  27. Parson EA, Fisher-Vanden KK. 1997. Integrated assessment models of global climate change. Annu. Rev. Energy Environ. 22:589–628
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Pindyck RS. 2013. Climate change policy: What do the models tell us. ? J. Econ. Lit. 51:3860–72
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Pindyck RS. 2017. The use and misuse of models for climate policy. Rev. Environ. Econ. Policy 11:1100–14
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Reilly J, Paltsev S, Strzepek K, Selin N, Cai H-M Y. et al. 2012. Valuing climate impacts in integrated assessment models: the MIT IGSM. Clim. Change 117:561–73
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Rotmans J. 1990. Image: An Integrated Model to Assess the Greenhouse Effect Dordrecht: Kluwer
  32. Savage SL. 2012. The Flaw of Averages: Why We Underestimate Risk in the Face of Uncertainty Hoboken, NJ: Wiley
  33. Schellnhuber HJ, Frieler K, Kabat P 2014. Global climate impacts: a cross-sector, multi-model assessment special feature. PNAS 111:93225–97
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Tol R. 2002. Estimates of the damage costs of climate change, part I: benchmark estimates. Environ. Resour. Econ. 22:47–73
    [Google Scholar]
  35. UNFCCC (UN Framew. Conv. Clim. Change) 2015. Paris Agreement UNFCCC Bonn, Ger: https://unfccc.int/files/meetings/paris_nov_2015/application/pdf/paris_agreement_english_.pdf
  36. US DOE (US Dep. Energy) 2020. Multisector dynamics Off. Sci., US Dep. Energy Washington, DC: https://climatemodeling.science.energy.gov/program/multisector-dynamics
  37. Weyant JP. 2017. Some contributions of integrated assessment models of global climate change. Rev. Environ. Econ. Policy 11:1115–37
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Weyant JP, Davidson O, Dowlatabadi H, Edmonds J, Grubb M et al. 1996. Integrated assessment of climate change: an overview and comparison of approaches and results. Climate Change 1995: Economic and Social Dimensions. Contribution of Working Group III to the Second Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change JP Bruce, H Lee, EF Haite 367–96 Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  39. World Bank 2010. World Development Report 2010: Development and Climate Change Washington, DC: World Bank https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/4387
  40. Zaveri E, Grogan DS, Fisher-Vanden K, Frolking S, Lammers RB et al. 2016. Invisible water, visible impact: groundwater use and Indian agriculture under climate change. Environ. Res. Lett. 11:084005
    [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-resource-110119-030314
Loading
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-resource-110119-030314
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Review Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error