Suchergebnisse

AbstractAn extensive climate policy literature provides various recommendations for mitigating climate change, but these recommendations are not supported democratically, since the models employed consider either infinitely-lived individuals or normative social objectives (or both). In contrast, the present paper provides policy recommendations capable of incorporating democratic processes. I develop an overlapping generation model with political process micro-foundations and show how democratic climate policies are interconnected with other democratic policies. Time inconsistent social objectives combined with commitment issues lead to an inefficient tax on capital accumulation and a climate policy below the efficient level; while suppressing the tax on capital accumulation generates a climate policy even further below the efficient level. I derive a novel politico-economic Keynes–Ramsey rule for the market interest rate, which is useful for calculating the climate policy level. I show that individual pure time preference, individual altruism toward descendants, and young generation political power are key determinants of democratic climate policy ambition.

Cities located in regions prone to natural hazards such as flooding are not uniformly exposed to risks because of sub-city local characteristics (e.g. topography). Spatial heterogeneity thus raises the issue of how these cities have spread and should continue to develop. The current paper investigates these questions by using an urban model in which each location is characterized by a transport cost to the city center and a risk exposure. Riskier areas are developed nearer to the city center than further away. Investment in building resilience leads to more compact cities. At a given distance to the city center, riskier areas have lower land prices and get lower household density and higher building resilience. Actuarially fair insurance generates optimal density and resilience. An increase of insurance subsidization leads to an increase of density in the riskiest areas and a general decrease of resilience. In this case density restrictions and building codes have to be enforced to limit risk over-exposure.

Cities located in regions prone to natural hazards such as flooding are not uniformly exposed to risks because of sub-city local characteristics (e.g. topography). Spatial heterogeneity thus raises the issue of how these cities have spread and should continue to develop. The current paper investigates these questions by using an urban model in which each location is characterized by a transport cost to the city center and a risk exposure. Riskier areas are developed nearer to the city center than further away. Investment in building resilience leads to more compact cities. At a given distance to the city center, riskier areas have lower land prices and get lower household density and higher building resilience. Actuarially fair insurance generates optimal density and resilience. An increase of insurance subsidization leads to an increase of density in the riskiest areas and a general decrease of resilience. In this case density restrictions and building codes have to be enforced to limit risk over-exposure.

Cities located in regions prone to natural hazards such as flooding are not uniformly exposed to risks because of sub-city local characteristics (e.g. topography). Spatial heterogeneity thus raises the issue of how these cities have spread and should continue to develop. The current paper investigates these questions by using an urban model in which each location is characterized by a transport cost to the city center and a risk exposure. Riskier areas are developed nearer to the city center than further away. Investment in building resilience leads to more compact cities. At a given distance to the city center, riskier areas have lower land prices and get lower household density and higher building resilience. Actuarially fair insurance generates optimal density and resilience. An increase of insurance subsidization leads to an increase of density in the riskiest areas and a general decrease of resilience. In this case density restrictions and building codes have to be enforced to limit risk over-exposure.

AbstractThis paper considers one altruistic developed country and several heterogeneous developing countries. We demonstrate that the lack of coordination between countries in tackling climate change finds an optimal solution if developing countries can expect to receive development aid transfers from the developed country. The mechanism requires a sufficiently high level of altruism and specific timing, but a global coalition is not necessary. We also show that the developed country may democratically assign a delegate who is more altruistic than its median voter in order to benefit from the efficiency gain generated by positive development aid transfers.