Make Our Economic Reasoning Consistent with Intergenerational Justice by timdamon

Hi Jan, Thank you for the valuable feedback and useful links. I agree with the premiss of your second article (link) that the benefits of development in developed countries have not adequately trickled down to developing countries, whose poor citizens will also bear the brunt of future climate costs (and to an extent already are). In regard to my proposal: 1) Indeed, I could do more to explain how this proposal fits the category's goal of empowering youth. This addition will happen soon. Many young people I have presented this topic to have agree we should lower the discount rate, and it is the case that young people have a unique moral authority to argue for such a change because it is our future at stake. 2)I am open to discussion of a positive discount rate that is less than or equal the Stern Review's SDR of 1.4%. While this is not ideally reflective of Intergenerational Justice in my view, it would still be a significant improvement from the status quo. Setting the SDR at 0% would treat each generation equally, with people today acting as though they will be the ones affected later by the consequences of today's policies. Incidentally, today's youth will, in fact, still be alive at that time. Therefore many of us can perceive the value of our future lives as being nearly equal to our lives today (our personal SDR is in effect ~0%). 3) You are correct to say that a negative discount rate would have us placing a higher value on future damage than its realized cost in the future. Is this really paradoxical? Since the symbolic meaning of a negative SDR would be that people today want to leave behind a world of even greater value than what they enjoyed today, I think it follows that the difference in the discounted (NPV) and actual (realized) costs would represent the disutility they would suffer from knowing their present actions inflicted the future harm. In other words, they would suffer a harm in the present from knowing their actions would cause a harm upon their children in the future. I'm not saying this is a feasible SDR to use in policy, but rather theorizing about what percentages of SDR would represent certain values some people hold.

Wow, I never studied economics before to know about this! Sounds like we need to make a change! More of us need to learn about this issue so we can have a good future for our generation.

Hi Tim, In my opinion, discount rates are key to addressing climate change and all issues of inter-generational justice. Jerry Barney

Thank you for the positive comments, everyone. @Martha: For as long as our system uses cost-benefit analysis in decision-making, it will be necessary to ensure that people, the environment ("ecosystem services"), etc are treated with their proper value. That does not at all mean we cannot work toward having a different system, but such a change will not happen very soon I think - it will take a while for people's perceptions/values/priorities to change. In the meantime, we can address problems with the way these values are assigned and used (such as discount rates), which I think helps to move us in the right direction.

Hi Suri, Thank you very much for your comment. You are right to point out that my proposal could elaborate much more on how to actually go about implementing the suggested change to the discount rate. If I get the chance to revise my proposal, I'll definitely give that question a thorough answer, but I am happy to give you a basic outline here. We need to educate the public, especially young people, about the current practices in regard to discounting climate change, because the economists themselves are already aware of this issue; in fact, they have had internal debates previously about the ethical dilemmas involved with discounting the future - not all agree doing so is just. But the general public has never been included in, or even known of, such debates. We need to change that. I have given multiple presentations about discounting to other young people, and each time they have become fired up to change it once they realized its role in discouraging sustainable behaviors and policies. Older people too, who have children and grandchildren whose futures they care very much about, have shared these sentiments; they want our economic models to reflect the value they place on their offspring's future, not for them to be contradictory. This is how we can bring about a lowering of the social discount rate, either to the percentage that Lord Stern already used, or perhaps even closer to zero. Educating enough people will generate enough political will for governments to respond by mandating an appropriate shift in discounting policy. If we can just bring discounting out from behind the technocratic curtains of economics and into a clear and candid public debate, I am confident people will support a change to make our economic practices match their moral values regarding youth and future generations. That's how we begin to get there, and I'm personally quite ready to take on that educational challenge and the ensuing debate of policy and ethics. I'm always willing to speak on this topic, and would certainly consider taking an educational program on tour in the event my proposal won some funding to make such a program feasible for me. Best wishes, Tim

Dear Secretary Uphar, Thank you for your comment and for taking the time to view my proposal. Please let me first draw your attention to my previous comment above, in which I discuss the desire to add content to my proposal regarding programs to educate youth about the economics of climate change. These would, I believe, constitute "youth action" (youth educating other youth). Secondly, my proposal is also suggesting (though it may not be clear from the current version) that youth take action to raise political will in support of its implementation using their unique "moral voice" when discussing climate change and how we value their future. Finally, please consider that this contest is seeking ways to empower young people, and that such empowerment does not necessarily require youth taking action themselves, but rather becoming better able to to so - my proposal includes a section explaining how it would empower youth action, and you are welcome to comment on what you think of that reasoning. For reference, the contest prompt states, in part: "The Elders and CliMates seek innovative ways to empower youth in climate change decision-making and high-impact climate action. This could include changes in education systems, economic models...". My proposal, as currently written, discusses how to change "economic models" in a way that would "empower youth in climate change decision-making". Lowering the discount rate would also be very "high-impact". Thank you again for taking the time to view my proposal. I'm happy to discuss any of the above with you further. Best, Tim

The Judges have advanced this proposal to the Finalists round. Good luck during the voting period!

Hi timdamon, Please consider voting for my proposal, https://www.climatecolab.org/web/guest/plans/-/plans/contestId/1300801/planId/1309001 Good luck with your entry! Asante/Thank-you @conserveaction

Congratulations!!! Please check the "Discusion Section" in the "Community" label... Proposal of activity during the Conference Session of 2014 Winners... https://www.climatecolab.org/web/guest/discussion#discussion%3DpageType%3ATHREAD%2CthreadId%3A1337218