Evaluating the economic impacts of climate policies is important for designing a response to climate change. One typical approach to assessing mitigation policy options uses integrated climate-economy models to analyze tradeoffs between the costs of reducing greenhouse gas emissions and the benefits of reducing climate damages. However, the uncertainty characterizing these models poses significant challenges for policymakers. We address this difficulty using a robust decision-making framework to evaluate mitigation policy. We show that a shift from a decision framework that maximizes expected outcomes to one that is averse to regret suggests more aggressive emissions reductions. Uncertainties about socioeconomic trajectories and the magnitude and functional form of climate damages create the asymmetric consequences of weak mitigation policy that encourage aggressive emissions reductions and precaution in the face of uncertainty.
🌊
