|Title||Simulation of long-term social behavior towards collective policy objectives: Issues in the design of climate change policy frameworks|
|Collaborators||Hadi Dowlatabadi (CMU)|
|Keywords||climate change, climate policy, integrated assessment modeling, greenhouse gas emissions|
With greater certainty in anthropogenic influence on observed changes in climate there is pressure for agreements to abate emissions of greenhouse gases. These agreements are often formulated in terms of emission targets that need to be met according to a timetable. In ICAM (Integrated Climate change Assessment Model) we have developed a realistic representation of the stochastic features of and uncertainties in natural systems and socio-economic activities. This representation is then used to evaluate the relative strengths and weaknesses of different climate policy frameworks.
In this simulation environment target frameworks are specified
and artificial adaptive agents used to prospectively meet prior
agreements on abatement targets. Unlike optimization frameworks,
these targets are not specified as constraints, and if the prospective
search towards the target is poorly executed by the agent, the
objective is not met. The uncertainties and stochastic nature
of the natural and human systems make prospective policy tuning
difficult and targets are rarely met. Hence, the traditional
measure of a "better policy" being the least cost strategy
to the target is not applicable for two reasons:
Therefore, a new paradigm of "better policy" is being developed to differentiate between alternative frameworks for definition of climate change mitigation objectives.
In an initial search, I have defined three objectives for
good policy design reflecting my understanding of the political
economy policy design. These objectives are that the policy
In devising climate policy we are interested in reducing the impacts of climate change. Emission levels, atmospheric concentrations of GHGs, and global average temperature change are examples of proxy measures often used to indicate the potential level of impacts. However, none are representative of actual impacts. Responding to the impacts is likely to occur, but in terms of revisions to previously stated targets in terms of these proxy measures. Therefore, a key question is which of these or other proxy measures of climate change offer us the best opportunity of meeting the three objective of good policy outlined above?