The Good, the Bad and the Populist: A Model of Political Agency with Emotional Voters

This paper attempts to extend existing models of political agency to an environment in which voting may be divided between informed and instrumental, informed and ‘expressive’ (Brennan and Lomasky (1993)) and uninformed due to ‘rational irrationality’ (Caplan (2007)). It constructs a model where politicians may be good, bad or populist. Populists are more willing than good politicians to pander to voters who may choose inferior policies in a large-group electoral setting because their vote is insignificant compared with those that voters would choose were their vote decisive in determining the electoral outcome. Bad politicians would ideally like to extract tax revenue for their own ends. Initially we assume the existence of only good and populist politicians. The paper investigates the incentives for good politicians to pool with or separate from populists and focuses on three key issues – (1) how far the majority of voter’s preferences are from those held by the better informed incumbent politician (2) the extent to which the population exhibits rational irrationality and expressiveness (jointly labelled as emotional) and (3) the cost involved in persuading uninformed voters to change their views in terms of composing messages and spreading them. This paper goes on to consider how the inclusion of bad politicians may affect the behaviour of good politicians and suggests that a small amount of potential corruption may be socially useful. It is also argued that where bad politicians have an incentive to mimic the behaviour of good and populist politicians, the latter types of politician may have an incentive to separate from bad politicians by investing in costly public education signals. The paper also discusses the implications of the model for whether fiscal restraints should be soft or hard.

Optimal Climate Change Policies When Governments Cannot Commit

This paper examines the optimal design of climate change policies in the context where governments want to encourage the private sector to undertake significant immediate investment in developing cleaner technologies, but the carbon taxes and other environmental policies that could in principle stimulate such investment will be imposed over a very long future. The conventional claim by environmental economists is that environmental policies alone are sufficient to induce firms to undertake optimal investment. However this argument requires governments to be able to commit to these future taxes, and it is far from clear that governments have this degree of commitment. We assume instead that governments cannot commit, and so both they and the private sector have to contemplate the possibility of there being governments in power in the future that give different (relative) weights to the environment. We show that this lack of commitment has a significant asymmetric effect. Compared to the situation where governments can commit it increases the incentive of the current government to have the investment undertaken, but reduces the incentive of the private sector to invest. Consequently governments may need to use additional policy instruments – such as R&D subsidies – to stimulate the required investment.

Future of the Clean Development Mechanism in Tackling Climate Change

Using a theoretical framework, we explain the impact of the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) on emissions in Annex I and non-Annex I countries. We show that on one hand, emissions in the non-Annex I country decline because of abatement sponsored by the Annex I country under the CDM; on the other hand, emissions may increase because (i) the Annex I country increases emissions in its own country, and (ii) the non-Annex I country crowds out the bene ts from the CDM projects by increasing its domestic emissions. For the CDM to be e¤ective in reducing global emissions, we show that partial Certi ed Emissions Reduction credits should be given to the Annex I country that sponsors CDM projects in the non-Annex I country. We also suggest that the CDM Executive Board should not allow the CDM projects to be hosted by non-Annex I countries that are too conscious about their emission levels.

Time is Running Out: The 2°C Target and Optimal Climate Policies

The quintessence of recent natural science studies is that the 2 degrees C target can only be achieved with massive emission reductions in the next few years. The central twist of this paper is the addition of this limited time to act into a non-perpetual real options framework analysing optimal climate policy under uncertainty. The window-of-opportunity modelling setup shows that the limited time to act may spark a trend reversal in the direction of low-carbon alternatives. However, the implementation of a climate policy is evaded by high uncertainty about possible climate pathways.

Dark Clouds or Silver Linings? Knightian Uncertainty and Climate Change

This paper examines the impact of Knightian uncertainty upon optimal climate policy through the prism of a continuous-time real option modelling framework. We analytically determine optimal intertemporal climate policies under ambiguous assessments of climate damages. Additionally, numerical simulations are provided to illustrate the properties of the model. The results indicate that increasing Knightian uncertainty accelerates climate policy, i.e. policy makers become more reluctant to postpone the timing of climate policies into the future.

A balance of questions: what can we ask of climate change economics?

The standard approach to the economics of climate change, which has its best known implementation in Nordhaus's DICE and RICE models (well described in Nordhaus's 2008 book, A Question of Balance) is not well equipped to deal with the possibility of catastrophe, since we are unable to evaluate a risk averse representative agent's expected utility when there is any signi cant probability of zero consumption. Whilst other authors attempt to develop new tools with which to address these problems, the simple solution proposed in this paper is to ask a question that the currently available tools of climate change economics are capable of answering. Rather than having agents optimally choosing a path (that differs from the recommendations of climate scientists) within models which cannot capture the essential features of the problem, I argue that economic models should be used to determine the savings and investment paths which implement climate targets that have been suggested in the physical science literature.

Temper and Temperature: The Missing Link of Climate on Armed Conflicts

We investigate the causes of a conflict by adding ambient climate factors to the existing bundle of most significant variables. It turns out that – controlling for possible associations – temperature could actually induce a conflict. We emphasise that temperature could not be a dominant reason in starting a conflict; however, it could escalate the chances when other factors are present. This paper references some of the related psychological studies to support this claim. We also show that grievance factors could actually be rightfully effective in starting an internal conflict alongside greed based reasons. In the end, we believe that it could be informative to study ambient factors more often in economics.

The Committee on Climate Change: A policy analysis

Domestic action on climate change is increasingly important in the light of the difficulties with international agreements and requires a combination of solutions, in terms of institutions and policy instruments. One way of achieving government carbon policy goals may be the creation of an independent body to advise, set or monitor policy. This paper critically assesses the Committee on Climate Change (CCC), which was created in 2008 as an independent body to help move the UK towards a low carbon economy. We look at the motivation for its creation in terms of: information provision, advice, monitoring, or policy delegation. In particular we consider its ability to overcome a time inconsistency problem by comparing and contrasting it with another independent body, the Monetary Policy Committee of the Bank of England. In practice the Committee on Climate Change appears to be the ‘inverse’ of the Monetary Policy Committee, in that it advises on what the policy goal should be rather than being responsible for achieving it. The CCC incorporates both advisory and monitoring functions to inform government and achieve a credible carbon policy over a long time frame. This is a similar framework to that adopted by Stern (2006), but the CCC operates on a continuing basis. We therefore believe the CCC is best viewed as a "Rolling Stern plus" body. There are also concerns as to how binding the budgets actually are and how the budgets interact with other energy policy goals and instruments, such as Renewable Obligation Contracts and the EU Emissions Trading Scheme. The CCC could potentially be reformed to include: an explicit information provision role; consumption-based accounting of emissions and control of a policy instrument such as a balanced-budget carbon tax.

Global Warming and Fat Tailed-uncertainty: Rethinking the Timing and Intensity of Climate Policy

The possibility of low-probability extreme natural events has reignited the debate over the optimal intensity and timing of climate policy. In this paper, we contribute to the literature by assessing the implications of low-probability extreme events on environmental policy in a continuous-time real options model with “tail risk”. In a nutshell, our results indicate the importance of tail risk and call for foresighted pre-emptive climate policies.