To send content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about sending content to .
To send content items to your Kindle, first ensure firstname.lastname@example.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about sending to your Kindle.
Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
This book is a unique guide to making the world a better place. Experts apply a critical eye to the United Nations' Sustainable Development agenda, also known as the Global Goals, which will affect the flow of $2.5 trillion of development aid up until 2030. Renowned economists, led by Bjorn Lomborg, determine what pursuing different targets will cost and achieve in social, environmental and economic benefits. There are 169 targets, covering every area of international development – from health to education, sanitation to conflict. Together, these analyses make the case for prioritizing the most effective development investments. A panel of Nobel Laureate economists identify a set of 19 phenomenal development targets, and argue that this would achieve as much as quadrupling the global aid budget.
Every four years since 2004, the Copenhagen Consensus Center has organized and hosted a high profile thought experiment about how a hypothetical extra $75 billion of development assistance money might best be spent to solve twelve of the major crises facing the world today. Collated in this specially commissioned book, a group of more than 50 experts make their cases for investment, discussing how to combat problems ranging from armed conflicts, corruption and trade barriers, to natural disasters, hunger, education and climate change. For each case, 'Alternative Perspectives' are also included to provide a critique and make other suggestions for investment. In addition, a panel of senior economists, including four Nobel Laureates, rank the attractiveness of each policy proposal in terms of its anticipated cost-benefit ratio. This thought-provoking book opens up debate, encouraging readers to come up with their own rankings and decide which solutions are smarter than others.
This Challenge Paper consists of four separate contributions, updating key research papers from the 2010 Copenhagen Consensus on Climate Change project:
An Updated Analysis of CO2 Emission Abatement as a Response to Climate Change, Richard S. J. Tol
A Technology-led Climate Policy in a Chan-ging Landscape, Isabel Galiana and Christopher Green
Climate Change: Climate Engineering Research, J. Eric Bickel and Lee Lane
Market and Policy-Driven Adaptation, Francesco Bosello, Carlo Carraro, and Enrica De Cian
In the 2010 Copenhagen Consensus on Climate Change (Lomborg, 2010), reduction of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions received a low priority. This follows from the particularities of the Gedankenexperiment that is at the core of all Copenhagen Consensus exercises: there is a finite budget, that needs to be spent, on a separate project, informed by disjoint CBAs.
Climate policy does not fit in that mold, and CO2 emission reduction fits least of all.
Climate change is a big problem. In order to halt anthropogenic climate change, the atmospheric concentrations of GHGs need to be stabilized. For that, CO2 emissions need to be reduced to zero. This requires a complete overhaul of the energy sector. That is a big job. It should be done as long as the benefits exceed the costs. If it does not fit in the budget of the Copenhagen Consensus, then more money should be raised. Indeed, it would be profitable to borrow money if the BCR is greater than 1.