Estimating Economic Damage from Climate Change in the United States: Assignment Sample

Table of Contents


Climate change estimates are key to climate policy design. In this context, a scalable damage computation architecture incorporating climate science, econometric analysis and process models is created. We use the methodology to establish explicit and probabilistic projections of economic loss caused by climate change in the United States, spatially and empirically. In evaluated industries – agriculture, terrorism, coastal floods, electricity, human loss and labour – the aggregate consumer and non-market damage rises quadratically in the global average temperature, costing an average of about +1% of Gross Domestic Product. Importantly, the threats are unequally spread around areas, which creates a significant value shift to the north and west that raises income disparity (Auffhammer, 2018)


The cost of lowering greenhouse gas emissions must be balanced against the advantages of economically rational control of global climate (or, conversely, the costs of not doing so). This dilemma has been examined in a broad literature that includes recognizing, amongst other things, the optimum timing of investment, the role of insecurity, the value of future adaptation, the role of exchange and the possible effect of unexpected tips (Diaz and Moore, 2017). Governments use advanced evaluation methods to quantify the social costs of climate change, which in turn advise greenhouse gas policy design, as important for the benefit of the decline of greenhouse gases. However, it is conceptually and computationally difficult to construct the projected advantages in the reduction of greenhouse gas –or the “damages” from climate change. This challenge has allowed previous studies to rely on harsh projections, theoretical results or selective models of processes at continental or broader scales, without rigorous calibration to observed interactions between the human and atmosphere. In order to achieve empirical understanding of these relationships, technological advances along with data access and computational resources have been driving rapid growth since the initial development of these models.

Our discoveries incorporate a probabilistic public harm highlight dependent on spatially disaggregated, observational, longitudinal environment sway appraisals and accessible worldwide environment models, however it isn’t the last computation. Since we utilize exacting sifting rules for observational examination, there are some settled areas of the US economy for which there are no fitting investigations and subsequently were barred from this investigation [e.g., horribleness impacts, specialist proficiency, or biodiversity loss]. The SEAGLAS configuration is centered around the reason that future thorough investigations will quantify environmental impacts in these “missing fields,” and that these effects ought to be remembered for future assessments.

Subsequently, our technique takes into consideration future updates dependent on new econometric discoveries or environment model expectations, and our discoveries can be seen as existing best gauges that can be powerfully changed as ecological science advances. We need to feature that the gauges introduced here are centered around a counterfactual benchmark monetary pattern that is questionable and will change because of various reasons random to environmental change. This pattern direction, as planned, isn’t required for assessing the relative first-request impact forced by environmental change. We ought to anticipate that people should react to environmental change in various manners.

A few practices, for example, utilizing cooling, are probably going to moderate the impacts of environmental change, while others, like common distress, are probably going to strengthen them. Our harm evaluations catch different methods of transformation to the extent that populaces have verifiably utilized them, and the observational discoveries we use portray how populaces have commonly responded to climatic conditions before. Our perceptions, for instance, would get the effect of ranchers changing their planting conditions dependent on quantifiable precipitation.

Our outcomes may change if there are patterns in adjusted perspectives, beforehand unseen variation “tipping focuses,” or subjective enhancements in transformation related innovation. We disclosed how to utilize observational techniques to anticipate versatile standards of conduct and recomputed impacts in specific areas in past work, however there isn’t yet sufficient proof to measure these outcomes in any of the areas we cover here.

Notwithstanding, in circumstances where enough proof is accessible to reproduce these variations, the net effect of this remedy is restricted in contrast with the critical fluctuation brought about by such adjustments because of the great vulnerability in existing figures for transformation designs. As recently expressed, populaces could relocate across space because of changing environment conditions.

This response would have little impact on our nearby gauges, however it will permit our expectations to over-or underpredict internationally totaled impacts, in view of the geographic covariance between segment changes and neighborhood financial misfortunes because of environmental change. This change would be a second request in contrast with the prompt effect of environmental change; notwithstanding, representing this change is a zone that will be researched further later on. Another possible answer for environmental change is for the economy to redistribute nonlabor capital, mostly changing modern movement zones to manage the changes.

By planning a processable general harmony (CGE) model that redistributes capital through areas and enterprises in light of the capital and profitability misfortunes referenced above over each pattern of a very long term joining, we consider how much this reaction could alter the direct financial harms that we characterize above (SM segment L). Hypothetically, these redistributions can either limit or increment harms, contingent upon whether assembling moves from brutal conditions, or they can expand harms, contingent upon whether misfortunes in a single locale impact financial decisions in different areas or potentially later occasions by influencing markets through costs.

Distribution of costs and benefits

The average impacts for large regions (e.g., North America) and for the entire globe are defined as normal approaches to estimating climate harm. Yet the examination of the effects of the county level shows significant impacts on those industries not captured by the geographic or global average of climate change redistributions. The median average fuel-intensive fossil-fuel-intensive economic growth effect of RCP 8.5 on each nation for the period from 2090 to 2099 due to climate changes. If temperature responses are non-linear, the current county atmosphere can influence whether additional temperatures produce advantages, have minimal effects or introduce costs. In cold northern counties, for example, warming decreases and increases mortality in heat southern counties. Sectors with roughly linear answers, such as violent crime, have more uniform local consequences. Cyclone intensification and average sea level (MSL) are the worst casualties in the Atlantic Coast Counties. South and Midwest populations suffer the worst casualties (except for violence and some coastal damage) while North and Western populations have smaller or even negligible damages, which are a net profit from predicted climate change (Neumann et al.,  2020).

Combination of business impacts shows that warming leads to a net shift of value to the North West Pacific, the Great Lakes and New England from the South, Central and Mid Atlantic areas. In certain countries, median losses exceed 20% of GCP, while median losses often exceed 10% of GCP. Because of the greatest decline in still impoverished countries, climate change in the United States threatens to worsen pre-existing deprivation. This sub-national transformation of the US economy is not captured by nationally averaged results used in previous evaluations (Suhina et al.,  2018).


From this study it’s clear that, The U.S. economy would have indirect impacts on the U.S. by trade, migration and probably other networks, but most losses from climate change are to be incurred outside of the United States. Researchers are extending SEAGLAS in continuous activities to include the whole economy, taking into consideration other areas, such as social unrest, in order to build an important global damage function to estimate global social costs of carbon and to develop rationsome global climate policies.


Hsiang, S., Kopp, R., Jina, A., Rising, J., Delgado, M., Mohan, S., Rasmussen, D.J., Muir-Wood, R., Wilson, P., Oppenheimer, M. and Larsen, K., 2017. Estimating economic damage from climate change in the United States. Science, 356(6345), pp.1362-1369.

Ivantsova, E.D., Pyzhev, A.I. and Zander, E.V., 2019. Economic consequences of insect pests outbreaks in boreal forests: A literature review. Журнал Сибирского федерального университета. Гуманитарные науки, 12(4).

Olaniyi, O.N. and Szulczyk, K.R., 2020. Estimating the economic damage and treatment cost of basal stem rot striking the Malaysian oil palms. Forest Policy and Economics, 116, p.102163.

Olaniyi, O.N. and Szulczyk, K.R., 2020. Estimating the economic damage and treatment cost of basal stem rot striking the Malaysian oil palms. Forest Policy and Economics, 116, p.102163.

Auffhammer, M., 2018. Quantifying economic damages from climate change. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 32(4), pp.33-52.

Diaz, D. and Moore, F., 2017. Quantifying the economic risks of climate change. Nature Climate Change, 7(11), pp.774-782.

Neumann, J.E., Willwerth, J., Martinich, J., McFarland, J., Sarofim, M.C. and Yohe, G., 2020. Climate damage functions for estimating the economic impacts of climate change in the United States. Review of environmental economics and policy, 14(1), pp.25-43.

Suhina, O., Ulyts’ kyi, O., Razovskiy, Y. and Plakhotnii, S., 2018. ALTERNATIVE ESTIMATION OF ECONOMIC DAMAGE FROM LOSS OF ASSIMILATIVE CAPACITY OF AIR ECOSYSTEM-FOR PREVENTION OF CLIMATE CHANGE. In Synthesis of science and society in solving global problems (pp. 48-53).


Get more ideas for assignment help from UniqueSubmission’s Assignment Samples.

Know more about UniqueSubmission’s other writing services:

Assignment Writing Help

Essay Writing Help

Dissertation Writing Help

Case Studies Writing Help

MYOB Perdisco Assignment Help

Presentation Assignment Help

Proofreading & Editing Help

Leave a Comment