DOCSLIB.ORG

Climate Change a Risk Assessment

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Climate Change a Risk Assessment CLIMATE CHANGE A RISK ASSESSMENT David King, Daniel Schrag, Zhou Dadi, Qi Ye and Arunabha Ghosh Project Manager: Simon Sharpe Edited by James Hynard and Tom Rodger, Centre for Science and Policy NASA Earth Observatory image by Jesse Allen and Robert Simmon, using data from NASA/GSFC/METI/ ERSDAC/JAROS, and U.S./JapanASTER Science Team. Hosts of the project workshops Sponsors China National Expert Committee on Climate Change ABOUT THE AUTHORS Sir David King is the UK Foreign Secretary’s Special Representative for Climate Change, and was formerly the UK Government’s Chief Scientific Adviser. He has authored over 500 papers on chemical physics and on science and policy, and his university positions have included Professor of Physical Chemistry at Cambridge University, and Founding Director of the Smith School of Enterprise and the Environment at Oxford University. Professor Daniel P. Schrag is Director of the Harvard University Center for the Environment, and serves on the US President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology. He is the Sturgis Hooper Professor of Geology and Professor of Environmental Science and Engineering, and studies energy technology and policy as well as geochemistry and climatology. He has received several honors including a MacArthur Fellowship. Professor Zhou Dadi is a member of the China National Expert Committee on Climate Change, and was formerly Director General of the Energy Research Institute of the National Development and Reform Commission of the Government of China. He is a specialist in energy economics and energy systems analysis, sustainable energy strategy, energy conservation, and climate change policy. Professor Qi Ye is Director of the Brookings-Tsinghua Centre for Public Policy at the School of Public Policy and Management, Tsinghua University, and a Senior Fellow of the Brookings Institution. He is an expert on China’s policies on climate change, the environment, energy, natural resources, biodiversity, and on the theory and practice of sustainable development. CLIMATE CHANGE Dr Arunabha Ghosh is the CEO of the Council on Energy, Environment and Water (CEEW), one of India’s top-ranked climate think-tanks. He is an expert in climate, energy, water and environment policy, economics and governance, has presented to parliaments including those of India, Europe and Brazil, and to heads of state, and has previously worked at Princeton and Oxford Universities, United Nations Development Programme and World Trade Organization. He is a A RISK ASSESSMENT founding Board member of the Clean Energy Access Network and on the Board of the International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development. This report was edited and produced by the Centre for Science and Policy (CSaP) at the University of Cambridge. CSaP’s mission is to promote the use of expertise and evidence in public policy by convening its unique network of academics David King, Daniel Schrag, Zhou Dadi, and policy makers. Qi Ye and Arunabha Ghosh STATUS OF THIS REPORT Project Manager: Simon Sharpe Edited by James Hynard and Tom Rodger, Sir David King led this project in his official capacity as the UK Foreign Secretary’s Special Representative for Climate Change. The Foreign and Commonwealth Office commissioned this report as an independent contribution to the climate Centre for Science and Policy change debate. Its contents represent the views of the authors, and should not be taken to represent the views of the UK Government. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The authors wish to thank all of those who contributed their time and expertise to this project, including the contributing authors to this report, and also those participants in our meetings whose names are not listed here, but whose valuable insights have contributed to our analysis. We wish to thank the sponsors of the project, including the UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office, the China National Expert Committee on Climate Change, the UK Government Office for Science, the Skoll Global Threats Fund, the UK Institute and Faculty of Actuaries, and Willis Research Network, for their generous support. Special thanks are also due to the UK Department of Energy and Climate Change Science team, China Meteorological Administration, the CNA Corporation, and the Climate Change Science Institute at Oak Ridge National Laboratory, for their support to specific aspects of the project. We also wish to thank all the following individuals for their practical, intellectual and moral support, which has made this project possible: James Ballantyne, Oliver Bettis, Steven Bickers, Shourjomoy Chattopadhyay, Vaibhav Chaturvedi, Partha Hosts of the project workshops Dasgupta, Hem Himanshu Dholakia, John Edwards, Vaibhav Gupta, Pradyot C. Haldar, Frances Hooper, Paulette Hunter Okulo, Anil Jain, Aarti Katyal, Sindhushree Khullar, Anthony W. King, Sylvia Lee, Stephan Lewandowsky, Amy Luers, Luo Yong, Lisa Matthews, Bessma Mourad, Chris Nicholson, Harriet O’Brien, Dennis Pamlin, Bob Phillipson, Benjamin L. Preston, Aditya Ramji, Sudatta Ray, Denise Sadler, Sayantan Sarkar, Mihir Shah, Surbhi Singhvi, Morgan Slebos, Wang Mengni, Nicola Willey, Ken Wright, Zhang Jiansong, Zheng Qi, Zhu Songli. Sponsors China National Expert Committee on Climate Change CONTENTS MINISTERIAL FOREWORD 6 16 GLOBAL SEA LEVEL RISE 99 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 8 17 LARGE-SCALE ABRUPT OR IRREVERSIBLE CHANGES 103 1 INTRODUCTION 14 18 CONCLUDING COMMENTS 107 2 PRINCIPLES AND SCOPE OF THIS RISK ASSESSMENT 18 RISK ASSESSMENT PART 3: SYSTEMIC RISKS 109 RISK ASSESSMENT PART 1: EMISSIONS 28 19 INTRODUCTION 110 3 HISTORY AND PURPOSE OF THE IPCC SCENARIOS 29 20 EXTREME WEATHER AND RESILIENCE OF THE GLOBAL FOOD SYSTEM 113 4 TOWARDS A RISK-BASED PERSPECTIVE ON EMISSIONS SCENARIOS 31 21 CLIMATE CHANGE RISKS TO NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL SECURITY 120 5 THE IMPLICATIONS OF CURRENT POLICIES AND PLANS FOR 32 SHORT-TERM EMISSIONS RISK ASSESSMENT PART 4: VALUE 130 6 TECHNOLOGICAL CHALLENGES THAT WILL DETERMINE FUTURE 37 22 ECONOMICS 131 GLOBAL EMISSIONS 23 ETHICS 134 7 CONCLUSIONS 42 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CONTINUING RISK 137 RISK ASSESSMENT PART 2: DIRECT RISKS 44 ASSESSMENT 8 INTRODUCTION: A LONG-TERM RISK ASSESSMENT APPROACH TO 45 CLIMATE SCIENCE RISK REDUCTION: ELEMENTS OF A PROPORTIONATE 140 9 GLOBAL TEMPERATURE INCREASE 50 RESPONSE 10 THE RISK OF HEAT STRESS TO PEOPLE 57 24 TECHNOLOGY 141 11 THE RISKS OF CLIMATE CHANGE FOR CROP PRODUCTION 65 25 FINANCE 143 12 THE RISK OF WATER STRESS 74 26 POLITICS 146 13 THE RISK OF DROUGHT 84 27 CLOSING THOUGHTS 148 14 THE RISK OF RIVER FLOODING 88 15 THE RISKS OF SEA LEVEL RISE FOR COASTAL CITIES 94 ANNEXES 150 6 CLIMATE CHANGE: A RISK ASSESSMENT CLIMATE CHANGE: A RISK ASSESSMENT 7 MINISTERIAL FOREWORD Just as our assessment of the risk needs to be holistic, so too does our response. Responding to the risk of climate change will demand technological innovation, financial investment and political leadership. Each of these elements must be brought together to produce a response that is both proportionate and effective. We are beginning to see some positive progress. Technological innovation has dramatically cut the costs of The Rt Hon. Baroness Anelay of St Johns renewable energy, increasing its share of global energy investment. In turn, more and more countries are Minister of State, UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office taking policy steps to reduce their emissions and the Paris conference at the end of this year presents an opportunity to scale up our global response. However, lest we become complacent, we must remember that in one way, climate change differs from any other subject of diplomatic negotiation: it is governed by a physical process. A process where the risk increases over time, and will continue to do so until we have entirely dealt with its cause. That is why one of us should be in any doubt that climate change poses a great risk. Indeed, it is leadership is so important – to forge ahead, to drive momentum and to show the way for others to follow. remarkable that even in the run-up to a general election, the leaders of the UK’s three largest N Former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher showed just that kind of leadership in her early recognition political parties came together to say that “Climate change is one of the most serious threats of the nature and scale of the risks of climate change. In 1989, she told the UN General Assembly that rather facing the world today. It is not just a threat to the environment, but also to our national and than being the lords of all we survey, “we are the Lord’s creatures, the trustees of this planet, charged global security, to poverty eradication and economic prosperity.” today with preserving life itself – preserving life with all its mystery and all its wonder. May we all be equal to that task.” In assessing the risk of climate change, the immediate questions for any country anywhere in the world are: I am delighted that experts from the UK, US, China and India have worked together to produce this report, How serious is the threat? How urgent is it? How should we prioritise our response, when we have so many which makes those risks even clearer. As we consider its findings, let us remember those words from a other pressing, national objectives - from encouraging economic recovery to protecting our people around quarter-century ago. Let us determine to be both proportionate and effective in our response. Let us show the world? These are all important questions, and we can only truly answer them if we assess the risk in full. that we are, indeed, equal to the task before us. In the past, when assessing the risk of climate change, we have tended to take an approach that is, perhaps, too narrow - or incomplete. In public debate, we have sometimes treated it as an issue of prediction, as if it were a long-term weather forecast.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Climate Change: Answers to Common Questions
    Climate change: Answers to common questions Cameron Hepburn Moritz Schwarz December 2020 Oxford Smith School of Enterprise and the Environment Smith School of Enterprise and Institute for New Economic the Environment / Institute Thinking at the Oxford Martin for New Economic Thinking, School (INET Oxford) University of Oxford The Institute for New Economic Thinking The Smith School of Enterprise and the at the Oxford Martin School (INET Environment (SSEE) was established Oxford) is a multi­disciplinary research with a benefaction by the Smith family centre dedicated to applying leading­ in 2008 to tackle major environmental edge thinking from the social and challenges by bringing public and physical sciences to global economic private enterprise together with the Uni­ challenges. versity of Oxford’s world­leading INET Oxford has over 75 affili ated teaching and research. scholars from disciplines that include Research at the Smith School shapes economics, mathematics, computer business practices, gov ernment policy science, physics, biology, ecology, geo­ and strategies to achieve net­zero graphy, psychology, sociology, anthro­ emissions and sustainable development. pology, philosophy, history, political We offer innovative evidence­based science, public policy, business, and law solutions to the environmental challenges working on its various programmes. facing humanity over the coming INET Oxford is a research centre within decades. We apply expertise in eco­ the University of Oxford’s Martin nomics, finance, business and law School, a community of over 300 scholars to tackle environmental and social chal­ working on the major challenges of lenges in six areas: water, climate, the 21st century. It has partnerships energy, bio diversity, food and the cir­ with nine academic departments cular economy.
    [Show full text]
  • Social Cost of Carbon: a Closer Look at Uncertainty
    SEI Oxford Office 266 Banbury Road, Suite 193 Oxford OX2 7DL Tel: 01865 426316 Fax: 01865 421898 [email protected] Social Cost of Carbon: A Closer Look at Uncertainty Final project report November 2005 Final revision August 2005 Authors Thomas E Downing Stockholm Environment Institute, Oxford Office David Anthoff Environmental Change Institute, Oxford Ruth Butterfield Stockholm Environment Institute Megan Ceronsky Environmental Change Institute, Oxford Michael Grubb Imperial College Jiehan Guo Environmental Change Institute, Oxford Cameron Hepburn University of Oxford Chris Hope University of Cambridge Alistair Hunt Metroeconomica, Bath Ada Li Environmental Change Institute, Oxford Anil Markandya Metroeconomica, Bath Scott Moss Centre for Policy Modelling, MMU Anthony Nyong University of Jos Richard S.J. Tol University of Hamburg Paul Watkiss AEA Technology Environment Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Nobel House 17 Smith Square London SW1P 3JR Telephone 020 7238 6000 Website: www.defra.gov.uk © Queen’s Printer and Controller of HMSO 2005 This document/publication is value added. If you wish to re-use, please apply for a Click-Use Licence for value added material at http://www.opsi.gov.uk/click-use/system/online/pLogin.asp. Alternatively applications can be sent to: Office of Public Sector Information Information Policy Team St Clements House 2-16 Colegate Norwich NR3 1BQ Fax: 01603 723000 e-mail: [email protected] Information about this publication and further copies are available from: Environment Policy Economics Defra Ashdown House 123 Victoria Street London SW1E 6DE Tel: 020 7082 8593 This document is also available on the Defra website.
    [Show full text]
  • World Energy Outlook 2020
    Acknowledgements This study was prepared by the World Energy Outlook (WEO) team in the Directorate of Sustainability, Technology and Outlooks (STO) in co-operation with other directorates and offices of the International Energy Agency. The study was designed and directed by Laura Cozzi, Chief Energy Modeller and Head of Division for Energy Demand Outlook, and Tim Gould, Head of Division for Energy Supply and Investment Outlooks. Stéphanie Bouckaert led on end-use modelling and analysis. Daniel Crow co-led the climate and environment analysis and led the behaviour analysis. Tae-Yoon Kim co-led the fuel supply analysis. Christophe McGlade co-led the climate and environment analysis, and the analysis of fuel supply. Paweł Olejarnik co-ordinated the oil, natural gas and coal supply modelling. Brent Wanner led the power sector modelling and analysis. Daniel Wetzel co- led the energy demand analysis. Key contributions from across the WEO team were from: Zakia Adam (lead on data management, contributed to fossil fuel subsidies), Lucila Arboleya Sarazola (investment and finance), Yasmine Arsalane (lead economic outlook, power), Simon Bennett (energy technology), Arthur Contejean (lead on energy access and developing countries), Davide D'Ambrosio (lead on data science, power), Amrita Dasgupta (energy access, climate and environment), Thibault Deletombe (industry), John Connor Donovan (power and data management), Musa Erdogan (industry and data management), Eric Fabozzi (power and electricity networks), Pablo Gonzalez (investment and finance),
    [Show full text]
  • Linus Mattauch
    Linus Mattauch Robert Bosch Juniorprofessor for Sustainable Use of Natural Resources, Technical University of Berlin and FutureLab Leader \Inequality, Human Well-Being and Development", Potsdam-Institute for Climate Impact Research. Sekretariat H 51, Straße des 17. Juni, D-10623 Berlin, Germany [email protected] • +49 (0) 30 314 25 466 • https://www.linusmattauch.info/ Education 2010-2015 PhD in Economics Technical University of Berlin, Fak. VI, Department \Economics of Climate Change", Mercator Research Institute on Global Commons and Climate Change (MCC) and Potsdam-Institute of Climate Impact Research (PIK) Advisors: Prof. Dr. Ottmar Edenhofer, Dr. Felix Creutzig Title of Dissertation: \Rent and Redistribution. The welfare implications of financing low-carbon public investment", summa cum laude 2009{2010 Pre-doctoral studies Technical University of Berlin 2008{2009 Visiting Student in Mathematics Ecole Normale Sup´erieure, Paris Courses in advanced probability theory and mathematical methods for economics 2004{2008 Master of Mathematics and Philosophy (MMathPhil) St. Hugh's College, University of Oxford. Specialisations: Probability theory, stochastic analysis, measure theory, philosophy of mathematics. Undergraduate dissertation: \The Brownian web" Overall grade of all parts of the Final Examinations and of the Honorary Moderations: \First class" 2003 Abitur [German A-level equivalent] Gymnasium Martino-Katharineum, Braunschweig Mathematics, French, Biology, History (1,0) Professional Experience since 4/2021 Technical University
    [Show full text]
  • Oxford Energy and Environment Comment November 2008
    Oxford Energy and Environment Comment November 2008 The Reality of Official Climate Aid by J. Timmons Roberts,1 Kara Starr,2 Thomas Jones,2 and Dinah Abdel-Fattah2 Summary Recent contributions to the Ad Hoc Working Group on Long-Term Cooperative Action of the UNFCCC call for “predictability, stability and timeliness of funding” that is additional to existing flows of Official Development Assistance. Much has been said about the need for financing, but little systematic research exists about what has actually been done: this paper provides preliminary findings on trends in climate aid from the world's major donor nations from 2000 to 2006 based on individual categorization of over 115,000 aid projects randomly selected from the OECD/CRS database. After five years of hovering around US$ one billion a year through 2004, mitigation funding increased sharply in 2005 and 2006, reaching an estimated $10 billion by 2006. Most of the increase in mitigation funding is accounted for by major hydroelectric stations, a point of contention among many climate change activists and experts. Adaptation funding is miniscule by comparison, and is mostly spent on disaster planning and management as opposed to explicit adaptation to the demands of a changing climate. We document who the largest bilateral and multilateral donors of official climate aid in these seven years are, and which nations and regions receive the most of these funds; this independent categorization of significance in fighting and adapting to climate change as project aid paints a very different picture than the OECD/CRS' voluntary self-reporting by donors under its Rio Markers system.
    [Show full text]
  • The Economic Analysis of Biodiversity: an Assessment
    Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Volume 28, Number 1, 2012, pp. 1–21 The economic analysis of biodiversity: an assessment Dieter Helm* and Cameron Hepburn** Downloaded from Abstract Biodiversity is complex, difficult to define, difficult to measure, and often involves inter- national and intergenerational considerations. Biodiversity loss presents significant economic chal- lenges. A great deal of economics is required to understand the issues, but a simple and important http://oxrep.oxfordjournals.org/ observation is that most species and ecosystems are not traded in markets, so prices are often absent and biodiversity is under-provided. Despite the formidable obstacles to high-quality eco- nomic analysis, economics has plenty to offer to biodiversity policy. First, economic valuation techniques can be employed to roughly estimate the value of the benefits provided by biodiversity and ecosystems. Second, assessing the ‘optimum’ amount of biodiversity involves recognizing that the conversion of natural capital into manufactured and human capital has so far generated vast amounts of wealth. While there may have been ‘too much biodiversity’ in the past, economic analy- sis suggests that this is a difficult position to hold now. Third, econometric techniques and carefully designed policy studies can assist in determining what policies are most suited to different contexts to cost-effectively reduce biodiversity loss. Fourth, political economy is helpful because interna- by guest on October 5, 2012 tional coordination is often required—ecosystems do not respect national borders and many biodi- verse ecosystems are in poorer countries. This paper synthesizes the issues and proposes a research agenda, which includes improving the measurement and accounting of natural capital, improving valuation techniques and theory to provide greater guidance as to the ‘optimum’ biodiversity, and developing our understanding of the merits of different alternatives for government intervention to reduce biodiversity loss.
    [Show full text]
  • SARASIN CLIMATE ACTIVE FUND a Paris-Aligned Investment Solution for Charities
    SARASIN CLIMATE ACTIVE FUND A Paris-aligned investment solution for Charities 2020 Sarasin Climate Active Q1 2020 | 1 CONTENTS BACKGROUND 04 THE CLIMATE ACTIVE ADVISORY PANEL 06 THE CLIMATE ACTIVE ADVISORY COMMITTEE 07 KEY INFORMATION - THE SARASIN CLIMATE ACTIVE ENDOWMENTS FUND 08 COMPANY ENGAGEMENT IN MORE DETAIL 11 CHANGING THE SYSTEM TO PROTECT OUR CLIMATE 12 KEY ACTIVITIES SINCE LAUNCH 13 IN SUMMARY 15 2 | Q1 2020 Sarasin Climate Active WHY MIGHT CLIMATE ACTIVE SUIT YOU? Climate change poses potentially catastrophic risks to our way of life. It is also driving government policy that is set to transform how we produce and consume energy, and how businesses operate within society. The world has set itself a target to keep temperature increases well below 2°C, and ideally 1.5°C (the Paris Climate Accord goals), which means we must collectively ensure net carbon emissions come down to zero between 2050 and 2070. The investment community must play its part in accelerating change, to align our long-term financial risks with the long- term sustainability of our planet. The Sarasin & Partners Climate Active Strategy is designed for investors who are seeking to promote change, in alignment with the goals of the Paris Climate Accord. Charities can access the strategy in one of two ways: • the Sarasin Climate Active Endowments; a diversified multi asset fund designed to achieve a total return of CPI +4% over the longer term. • a segregated equity only portfolio; where trustees wish to only allocate to equities, or a bespoke asset mix, or require additional ethical exclusions Climate Active is appropriate for those who accept the material risks generated by climate change, and wish to play a collaborative role in driving transformation.
    [Show full text]
  • Submission to the Hoc Standing Committee on Finance (PDF)
    Prospects for a green COVID-19 recovery in Canada Submission to the House of Commons Standing Committee on Finance Prepared by Brian O’Callaghan and Cameron Hepburn 09 June 2020 Oxford Smith School of Enterprise and the Environment [email protected] | [email protected] +44 (0)1865 614963 1 Submitting Organisation Smith School of Enterprise and the Environment (SSEE) was established with a benefaction by the Smith family in 2008 to tackle major environmental challenges by bringing public and private enterprise together with the University of Oxford’s world-leading teaching and research. Research at the Smith School shapes business practices, government policy and strategies to achieve net-zero emissions and sustainable development. We offer innovative evidence- based solutions to the environmental challenges facing humanity. We apply expertise in economics, finance, business and law to tackle environmental and social challenges in six areas: water, climate, energy, biodiversity, food and the circular economy. SSEE has several significant external research partnerships and Business Fellows, bringing experts from industry, consulting firms, and related enterprises who seek to address major environmental challenges to the University of Oxford. We offer a variety of open enrolment and custom Executive Education programmes that cater to participants from all over the world. We also provide independent research and advice on environmental strategy, corporate governance, public policy and long-term innovation. For more information on SSEE please visit: http://www.smithschool.ox.ac.uk The views expressed in this paper represent those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of the Smith School or other institution or funder.
    [Show full text]
  • Global Meeting Emerging Markets Forum
    OCTOBER 11 - 13, 2010 AIRLIE CENTER,VIRGINIA, USA GLOBAL MEETING EMERGING MARKETS FORUM Should Emerging The Emerging Markets Forum was created by the Centennial Group as a not-for-prot Market Economies initiative to bring together high-level government and corporate leaders from around the Act on Climate world to engage in dialogue on the key economic, nancial and social issues facing Change, or Wait? emerging market countries (EMCs). Cameron Hepburn The Forum is focused on some 70 emerging market economies in East and South Asia, and John Ward Eurasia, Latin America and Africa that share prospects of superior economic performance, already have or seek to create a conducive business environment and are of near-term interest to private investors, both domestic and international. We expect our current list of EMCs to evolve over time, as countries’ policies and prospects change. Further details on the Forum and its meetings may be seen on our website at http://www.emergingmarketsforum.org Emerging The Watergate Oce Building, 2600 Virginia Avenue, NW, Suite 201 Markets Forum Washington, DC 20037, USA. Tel:(1) 202 393 6663 Fax: (1) 202 393 6556 A nonprofit initiative of the Centennial Group Email: [email protected] Bringing people together to accelerate growth and well-being in emerging markets Contents Page number v Acknowledgements 1 Executive Summary 3 Introduction 4 The economic and social impact of climate change on GEMs 15 Accelerating the transition 21 Annex 1: A key influence on global emissions 25 Annex 2: The MAGICC model
    [Show full text]
  • The Sarasin & Partners Climate Active Endowment Fund
    The Sarasin & Partners Climate Active Endowment Fund A Charity Authorised Investment Fund February 2018 Contents Why might ‘Climate Active’ suit you? 3 The Advisory Panel 4 The Climate Active Investment Philosophy 5 Company engagement in more detail 6 Changing the System to protect our Climate 7 Key Facts 8 Appendix 10 2 The Sarasin & Partners Climate Active Endowment Fund Why might ‘Climate Active’ suit you? Climate change poses risks to our way of life. It is also driving Government policy that is set to transform how we produce and consume energy. The Sarasin & Partners Climate Active Endowment Fund is a multi-asset portfolio, designed for trustees who are seeking attractive and sustainable long-term investment returns against a back drop of increasing climate related risks. Governments from around the world set out their determination Our Climate Active process also considers the investor obligations to limit climate change to well below 2°C in a landmark climate within the ‘Principles on Climate Obligations of Enterprises’ drawn accord drawn up in Paris in December 2015. up by international lawyers and judges to define how companies and investors should uphold the Paris Climate Accord. The Sarasin & Partners Climate Active Endowment Fund (the Fund) offers a timely multi-asset investment solution for charities that: The portfolio is an evolution of the core Sarasin Endowments Model, which has produced a ‘real’ return of +4.4% per annum • are concerned by increased climate risk, the actions to since its launch in December 2005 and an
    [Show full text]
  • My Job Market CV
    Updated: 8 November 2016 -1- Alexander Teytelboym www.teytelboym.com [email protected] University of Oxford Placement Director: Vincent Crawford [email protected] +44 1865 279339 Placement Director: Johannes Abeler [email protected] +44 1865 281440 Graduate Administrator: Julie Minns [email protected] +44 1865 281162 Contact Information Institute for New Economic Thinking (INET) Eagle House, Walton Well Road Oxford, OX2 6ED, United Kingdom Tel: +44 (0) 1865-288-895 Mobile: +44 (0) 7732-868-200 Employment Otto Poon Research Fellow, Institute for New Economic Thinking, University of Oxford, 2014-present Postdoctoral Fellow, Laboratory for Information and Decision Systems, MIT, 2013-2014 Affiliations Associate Member, Nuffield College, University of Oxford, 2014-present Fellow, Smith School for Enterprise and the Environment, University of Oxford, 2014-present Member of the Common Room, All Souls College, University of Oxford, 2015-2016 Education DPhil, Economics, University of Oxford, 2013 MPhil, Economics, University of Oxford, 2010 BSc, Economics, London School of Economics, 2008 References Professor Vincent Crawford Professor Asuman Ozdaglar Department of Economics Laboratory for Information and Decision Systems University of Oxford Massachusetts Institute of Technology [email protected] [email protected] +44 1865 279339 +1 617 3240058 Professor Cameron Hepburn Dr Scott Duke Kominers Institute for New Economic Thinking Society of Fellows University of Oxford
    [Show full text]
  • Towards Carbon Neutrality and China's 14Th Five-Year Plan (PDF)
    Towards carbon neutrality and China’s 14th Five-Year Plan: Green COVID-19 recovery, sustainable urban development and clean energy transition Cameron Hepburn, Ye Qi, Nicholas Stern, Bob Ward, Chunping Xie and Dimitri Zenghelis Policy insight February 2021 The Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment was established in 2008 at the London School of Economics and Political Science. The Institute brings together international expertise on economics, as well as finance, geography, the environment, international development and political economy to establish a world-leading centre for policy-relevant research, teaching and training in climate change and the environment. It is funded by the Grantham Foundation for the Protection of the Environment, which also funds the Grantham Institute – Climate Change and the Environment at Imperial College London. www.lse.ac.uk/GranthamInstitute Energy Foundation China is a professional grant-making charitable organisation registered in California, United States. It started working in China in 1999 and is dedicated to China’s sustainable energy development. The foundation’s China representative office is registered with the Beijing Municipal Public Security Bureau and supervised by the National Development and Reform Commission of China. Its vision is to achieve prosperity and a safe climate through sustainable energy. www.efchina.org/Front-Page-en About the authors Cameron Hepburn is Director of the Smith School of Enterprise and the Environment at Oxford University. Ye Qi is Professor of Public Policy at Hong Kong University of Science and Technology and Tsinghua University. Nicholas Stern is IG Patel Professor for Economics and Government, and Chair of the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment, London School of Economics and Political Science.
    [Show full text]