Climate policy as social policy? A comprehensive assessment of the economic impact of climate action in the UK
-
Published:2024-07-05
Issue:
Volume:
Page:
-
ISSN:2190-6483
-
Container-title:Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences
-
language:en
-
Short-container-title:J Environ Stud Sci
Author:
Sudmant AndrewORCID, Boyle Dom, Higgins‐Lavery Ruaidhri, Gouldson Andy, Boyle Andy, Fulker James, Brogan Jamie
Abstract
AbstractCo-benefits are central to the case for climate action but are side-lined in many economic analyses. This paper presents an evaluation of three dimensions of the costs and benefits of climate change interventions in six urban regions of the UK. Findings indicate that meeting the UK’s 2033–2037 climate targets could yield £164 billion in total benefits. Notably, only 13% of these benefits are financial, in contrast to the 79% of which are social benefits. These social benefits include improvements in public health, reduced traffic congestion, and increased thermal comfort in homes. These results underscore the need for economic evaluations to expand their scope and move beyond the narrow financial cost–benefit analysis that predominates. Moreover, the magnitude of the social benefits underscores the need for integrating social and climate challenges in policymaking. Concurrently, the results demonstrate the sensitivity of the social benefits of climate actions to the normative aspects of empirical analysis. Determining whether emissions reductions in the transport sector, for example, should be achieved through the deployment of electric cars, expansion of public transport, and/or increases in walking and cycling requires both technical analysis and value-based decision making. Ensuring that decision-making processes are deliberate and transparent in empirical analysis is therefore critical. We conclude by suggesting that institutions such as the UK Climate Change Committee and Scottish Climate Intelligence Service should take the opportunity to be more explicit in the normative decisions embedded in their empirical work to demonstrate best practice for the wider research community.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference68 articles.
1. Akkerman SF, Bakker A (2011) Boundary crossing and boundary objects. Rev Educ Res 81(2):132–169. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654311404435 2. Bain PG, Milfont TL, Kashima Y, Bilewicz M, Doron G, Garðarsdóttir RB, Gouveia VV, Guan Y, Johansson L-O, Pasquali C, Corral-Verdugo V, Aragones JI, Utsugi A, Demarque C, Otto S, Park J, Soland M, Steg L, González R, Saviolidis NM (2016) Co-benefits of addressing climate change can motivate action around the world. Nat Clim Chang 6(2):154–157. https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2814 3. Beatty C, Fothergill S (1996) Labour market adjustment in areas of chronic industrial decline: the case of the UK Coalfields. Reg Stud 30(7):627–640. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343409612331349928 4. Bergquist P, Mildenberger M, Stokes LC (2020) Combining climate, economic, and social policy builds public support for climate action in the US. Environ Res Lett 15(5):054019. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ab81c1 5. Boehm S, L Jeffery, J Hecke, C Schumer, J Jaeger, C Fyson, K Levin, A Nilsson, S Naimoli, E Daly, J Thwaites, K Lebling, R Waite, J Collis, M Sims, N Singh, E Grier, W Lamb, S Castellanos, A Lee, M Geffray, R Santo, M. Balehegn, M Petroni, M. Masterson (2023) State of Climate Action 2023. Berlin and Cologne, Germany, San Francisco, CA, and Washington, DC: Bezos Earth Fund, Climate Action Tracker, Climate Analytics, ClimateWorks Foundation, NewClimate Institute, the United Nations Climate Change High-Level Champions, and World Resources Institute. https://doi.org/10.46830/wrirpt.23.00010.
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
|
|