Home Page Research Newspaper Articles Global Warming

|  Search

Newspaper Articles

Delegates to the Third Conference of Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change meeting in Kyoto, Japan will vote on limiting worldwide greenhouse gas emissions, hoping to slow the rate of global warming. The principle behind g lobal warming is simple. The greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, mainly carbon dioxide, allow sunlight to pass through but trap a portion of the reflected infrared radiation. This raises the temperature of the earth's surface and makes it habitable; the earth would be 55 degrees Fahrenheit cooler with no greenhouse gases. The carbon dioxide content of the atmosphere has increased by 20 percent since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution and 8 percent in the last 30 years. The major source of carb on emissions is the combustion of fossil fuels - first coal, and later oil and natural gas. This much is not in dispute.

The dispute centers around the magnitude of global warming over the next century and its impact on human welfare. The scientific consensus is a rise in surface temperature of about 4 degrees Fahrenheit over the next century. You would experience a far more dramatic climate change simply traveling from Wilkes-Barre to Disney World over Christmas than is expected to occur in Wilkes-Barre during the coming century. Climate change will not be uniform around the globe. A general rise in sea levels is expected as the polar regions will warm faster than equatorial zones, and the centers of continents will become drier than the peripheries. However, there is a great amount of scientific uncertainty because small changes in meteorological models greatly change the conclusions and unforeseen events such as the 1991 Mount Pinatubo eruption and other man-made factors can upset the phenomenon.

The economic effects of global warming will not be uniform around the globe. The impact on the United States and the other industrial countries will be negligible because climate is immaterial to manufacturing and most service industries. However, since outdoor activities such as agriculture and forestry constitute a significant proportion of the economic activity in underdeveloped countries, it is the world's poor nations that are vulnerable to the effects of global warming. But, these countries see economic growth as a more pressing concern than global warming. The developing nations are also more susceptible to the possible adverse health consequences of a warmer climate. Numerous diseases are sensitive to the climate. A warmer climate may, for example, benefit malaria-carrying mosquitoes. Hence, an important political truth: the industrial countries including the United States have no self-interest in spending a lot to reduce greenhouse gas emissions while the poor countries cannot afford to do so.

Effective policies to address global warming will have to be international in scope. Carbon dioxide emission reductions by one country are a perfect substitute for emission reductions elsewhere. This is because greenhouse gas emissions are equally damaging irrespective of where they are emitted. Emission reductions then are an international public good. A public good provides benefits that are available to everyone, even if they did not contribute anything to the cost of its provision. No country has an incentive to go it alone. Furthermore, the greater the cut in emissions by other countries the less incentive there is for a country to cut its own emissions. The optimal policy for most countries is to act as free riders on other countries' emissi on reductions. A free rider consumes a public good without paying for it.

A worldwide agreement to reduce greenhouse gas emissions would overcome the free rider problem but would present enforcement problems. Self-monitoring by individual countries is the only practical solution as governments are unlikely to permit international monitoring efforts, but penalizing countries that exceed their emission quota would be difficult. There is no international police force to ensure compliance and sanction violators. The only enforcement tools available are moral suasion and trade sanctions.

Indeed, a case can be made for doing nothing to combat global warming. It has been estimated that it would take a sacrifice of 2 percent of world GDP in perpetuity to effectively slow global warming. This amounts to around $400 billion a year. The brunt of these costs will have to be borne by the industrial countries; the primary beneficiaries will be the world's poor nations but the benefits will not be felt for 50 or 100 years. If the developed countries were prepared to invest $400 billion a year in greenhouse gas abatement to benefit the developing world 100 years from now, a case can be made that the world's poor would be better off in 2097 if the $40 trillion invested in carbon abatement had been invested in their economic development. Anyway, population growth is a more pressing problem in the Third World. Slowing the rate of population growth would aid in their economic development and also help slow global warming. More people means more carbon dioxide emissions. Also, the most likely adverse impact of global warming is on food production. A slowdown in population growth would reduce the strain on food supplies.

Wilkes-Barre has little to fear from global warming. We may actually benefit from a hotter climate. Our senior citizens would no longer have to head to Florida for the winter.

David A. Latzko, Assistant Professor of Economics, Wilkes University

David A. Latzko Business and Economics Division Pennsylvania State University, York Campus office: 13 Main Classroom Building phone: (717) 771-4115 fax: (717) 771-4062 DXL31@psu.edu www.yk.psu.edu/~dxl31