×

An approximate dynamic programming framework for modeling global climate policy under decision-dependent uncertainty. (English) Zbl 1273.90194

Summary: Analyses of global climate policy as a sequential decision under uncertainty have been severely restricted by dimensionality and computational burdens. Therefore, they have limited the number of decision stages, discrete actions, or number and type of uncertainties considered. In particular, two common simplifications are the use of two-stage models to approximate a multi-stage problem and exogenous formulations for inherently endogenous or decision-dependent uncertainties (in which the shock at time \(t+1\) depends on the decision made at time \(t\)). In this paper, we present a stochastic dynamic programming formulation of the Dynamic Integrated Model of Climate and the Economy (DICE), and the application of approximate dynamic programming techniques to numerically solve for the optimal policy under uncertain and decision-dependent technological change in a multi-stage setting. We compare numerical results using two alternative value function approximation approaches, one parametric and one non-parametric. We show that increasing the variance of a symmetric mean-preserving uncertainty in abatement costs leads to higher optimal first-stage emission controls, but the effect is negligible when the uncertainty is exogenous. In contrast, the impact of decision-dependent cost uncertainty, a crude approximation of technology R& D, on optimal control is much larger, leading to higher control rates (lower emissions). Further, we demonstrate that the magnitude of this effect grows with the number of decision stages represented, suggesting that for decision-dependent phenomena, the conventional two-stage approximation will lead to an underestimate of the effect of uncertainty.

MSC:

90C29 Multi-objective and goal programming
91F10 History, political science

Software:

Matlab

References:

[1] Arrow K (1962) The economic implications of learning by doing. Rev Econ Stud 29: 155–173 · doi:10.2307/2295952
[2] Baker E, Solak S (2011) Optimal climate change policy: R&D investments and abatement under uncertainty (under review) · Zbl 1215.91062
[3] Bellman R (2003) Dynamic programming. Dover, New York · Zbl 1029.90076
[4] Bertsekas D (2007) Dynamic programming and optimal control. Athena Scientific, Belmont, MA
[5] Bertsekas D, Tsitsiklis J (1996) Neuro dynamic programming. Athena Scientific, Belmont, MA · Zbl 0924.68163
[6] Crost B, Traeger C (2010) Risk and aversion in the integrated assessment of climate change (2010). CUDARE Working Paper No. 1104
[7] Fasshauer G (2007) Meshfree approximation methods with Matlab. World Scientific, Singapore · Zbl 1123.65001
[8] Gerst M, Howarth R, Borsuk M (2010) Accounting for the risk of extreme outcomes in an integrated assessment of climate change. Energy Policy 38(8): 4540–4548 · doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2010.04.008
[9] Goel V, Grossmann I (2006) A class of stochastic programs with decision dependent uncertainty. Math Program 108(2): 355–394 · Zbl 1130.90375 · doi:10.1007/s10107-006-0715-7
[10] Hammitt JK, Lempert RA, Schlesinger ME (1992) A sequential-decision strategy for abating climate change. Nature 357: 315–318 · doi:10.1038/357315a0
[11] Jaffe A, Newell R, Stevins R (2003) Handbook of environmental economics vol, 1. In: Newell R (ed) Technological change and the environment. North-Holland/Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 461–516
[12] Keefer D, Bodily S (1983) Three-point approximations for continuous random variables. Managt Sci 29(5): 595–609 · Zbl 0511.60018 · doi:10.1287/mnsc.29.5.595
[13] Kelly D, Kolstad C (1999) Bayesian learning, growth, and pollution. J Econ Dyn Control 23: 491–518 · Zbl 0914.90069 · doi:10.1016/S0165-1889(98)00034-7
[14] Kolstad C (1996) Learning and stock effects in environmental regulation: the case of greenhouse gas emissions. J Environ Econ Manag 31: 1–18 · Zbl 0909.90106 · doi:10.1006/jeem.1996.0028
[15] Leach A (2007) The climate change learning curve. J Econ Dyn Control 31: 1728–1752 · Zbl 1201.91149 · doi:10.1016/j.jedc.2006.06.001
[16] Lemoine D, Traeger C (2011) Tipping points and ambiguity in the integrated assessment of climate change. NBER Environmental and Energy Economics Summer Institute 2011 Paper
[17] Manne A, Richels R (1994) The costs of stabilizing global co2 emissions: a probabilistic analysis based on expert judgment. Energy J 15(1): 31–56
[18] Martens P, Rotmans J (2003) Climate change: an integrated perspective. In: Martens P, Rotmans J, Jansen D, Vrieze K (eds) Climate change: an integrated perspective, advances in global change research, vol 1. Springer, Netherlands, pp 1–
[19] McKay MD, Beckman RJ, Conover WJ (1979) A comparison of three methods for selecting values of input variables in the analysis of output from a computer code. Technometrics 21(2): 239–245 · Zbl 0415.62011
[20] Nordhaus W (2007) The challenge of global warming: economic models and environmental policy. Available at: http://nordhaus.econ.yale.edu/ (2007). NBER Working Paper 14832
[21] Nordhaus W, Boyer J (2000) Warming the world: economic modeling of global warming. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA
[22] Nordhaus W, Popp D (1997) What is the value of scientific knowledge? an application to global warming using the price model. Energy J 18(1): 1–45
[23] Parpas P, Webster M (2011) A stochastic minimum principle and a mesh-free method for stochastic optimal control (submitted)
[24] Popp D, Newell R, Jaffe A (2009) Energy, the environment, and technological change. howpublished. NBER Working Paper 14832
[25] Powell W (2007) Approximate dynamic programming: solving the curses of dimensionality, vol 703. Wiley-Blackwell, New York · Zbl 1156.90021
[26] Reilly J, Edmonds J, Gardner R, Brenkert A (1987) Monte carlo analysis of the iea/orau energy/carbon emissions model. Energy J 8(3): 1–29
[27] Scott M, Sands R, Edmonds J, Liebetrau A, Engel D (1999) Uncertainty in integrated assessment models: modeling with minicam 1.0. Energy Policy 27(14): 597–603 · doi:10.1016/S0301-4215(99)00057-9
[28] Webster M (2002) The curious role of learning: should we wait for more data?. Energy J 23: 97–119
[29] Webster M (2008) Incorporating path-dependency into decision analytic methods: an application to global climate change policy. Decis Anal 5(2): 60–75 · doi:10.1287/deca.1080.0114
[30] Webster M, Jakobovits L, Norton J (2008) A class of stochastic programs with decision dependent uncertainty. Clim Change 89(1-2): 67–85 · doi:10.1007/s10584-008-9406-0
[31] Webster M, Paltsev S, Parsons J, Reilly J, Jacoby H (2008) Uncertainty in greenhouse emissions and costs of atmospheric stabilization. Tech rep, MIT JPSPGC, Report No. 165
[32] Webster M, Sokolov A, Reilly J, Forest C, Paltsev S, Schlosser A, Wang C, Kicklighter D, Sarofim M, Melillo J, Prinn R, Jacoby H (2009) Analysis of climate policy targets under uncertainty. Tech. rep, MIT JPSPGC, Report No 180
[33] Weyant J, Davidson O, Dowlabathi H, Edmonds J, Grubb M, Parson E, Richels R, Rotmans J, Shukla P, Tol R, Cline W, Fankhauser S (1996) Integrated assessment of climate change: an overview and comparison of approaches and results. In: Economic and social dimensions of climate change, equity and social considerations. Contribution of Working Group III to the Second Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, chap. Integrated assessment of climate change: an overview and comparison of approaches and results, Cambridge University Press, CAmbridge, pp. 367–396
[34] Wright T (1936) Factors affecting the cost of airplanes. J Aeronaut Sci 3: 122–128 · doi:10.2514/8.155
[35] Wright T (1982) Inside the black box: technology and economics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
[36] Yohe G, Andronova N, Schlesinger M (2004) To hedge or not against an uncertain climate future?. Science 306: 416–417 · doi:10.1126/science.1101170
This reference list is based on information provided by the publisher or from digital mathematics libraries. Its items are heuristically matched to zbMATH identifiers and may contain data conversion errors. In some cases that data have been complemented/enhanced by data from zbMATH Open. This attempts to reflect the references listed in the original paper as accurately as possible without claiming completeness or a perfect matching.