Gateway to Think Tanks
来源类型 | Policy Advice |
规范类型 | 论文 |
Preliminary Benefit-Cost Assessment for 11th Session OWG Goals | |
Anil Markandya; Anke Hoeffler; Carolyn Fischer; Edward Glaeser; George Psacharopoulos; Guy Hutton; Hans-Peter Kohler; Irma Clots Figueras; Isabel Galiana; John Gibson; Keith Maskus; Kym Anderson; Laurence Chandy; Mark Rosegrant; Mary Hilderbrand; Morten Jerven; Prabhat Jha | |
语种 | 英语 |
概述 | Some of the world’s top economists have assessed the targets from the 11th session Open Working Group document into one of five categories, based on economic evidence: Phenomenal, Good, Fair, Poor and Uncertain. |
摘要 | Preliminary Benefit-Cost Assessment for 11th Session OWG GoalsIn a world of limited resources, we can’t do everything, so which goals should we prioritize? The Copenhagen Consensus Center provides information on which targets will do the most social good (measured in dollars, but also incorporating e.g. welfare, health and environmental protection), relative to their costs. Some of the world’s top economists have assessed the targets from the 11th session Open Working Group document into one of five categories, based on economic evidence: PHENOMENAL – Robust evidence for benefits more than 15 times higher than costs This document was put together over two weeks after the draft of the targets for consideration of the 11th session of the OWG were released on Friday 18 April 2014. Given the short turnaround, the assessments should be considered preliminary, and much nuance explaining the rationales has been omitted. Nevertheless, we hope that the assessments are informative and will help focus the Open Working Group on the targets that will yield the most social benefit relative to cost. The decision on choosing goals will rest on a number of factors, not just economics – but knowing the costs and benefits provides an important piece of information. The Copenhagen Consensus will present full, peer-reviewed economic evidence over the coming half year.
The assessments were put together by interviewing 16 of the world’s top economists in their respective fields. They were asked to consider the economic costs and benefits associated with the strategies that would be available to implement the targets. As much as possible non-economic considerations such as rights based arguments and political considerations were ignored. This is not to imply that these other considerations are not important – only that the intention of this document is to focus purely on the costs and benefits. In many cases, the targets were not specific enough to assess a benefit and a cost, however we urged the economists to err on the side of providing a recommendation, even if it would not normally reach the very high confidence required of academic articles. It should be noted that the benefits and costs do NOT solely reflect money. In line with standard welfare economics principles, all benefits and costs have been considered (such as improved health, environmental impacts) – which have subsequently been converted into a dollar value. |
主题 | Climate Change & Energy ; Hunger and Malnutrition ; Health ; Conflicts and Terrorism ; Trade and Migration ; Education ; Inequality ; Water & Sanitation ; Environment ; Governance ; Natural Disasters ; Population Growth ; Infrastructure ; Finance and Economy ; Technology & Data |
URL | https://www.copenhagenconsensus.com/publication/preliminary-benefit-cost-assessment-11th-session-owg-goals |
来源智库 | Copenhagen Consensus Center (Denmark) |
资源类型 | 智库出版物 |
条目标识符 | http://119.78.100.153/handle/2XGU8XDN/47681 |
推荐引用方式 GB/T 7714 | Anil Markandya,Anke Hoeffler,Carolyn Fischer,et al. Preliminary Benefit-Cost Assessment for 11th Session OWG Goals. |
条目包含的文件 | ||||||
文件名称/大小 | 资源类型 | 版本类型 | 开放类型 | 使用许可 | ||
final_un_ccc_2015.pd(297KB) | 智库出版物 | 限制开放 | CC BY-NC-SA | 浏览 |
除非特别说明,本系统中所有内容都受版权保护,并保留所有权利。