CFP: EJPS Topical Collection on Philosophical Perspectives on Climate Economics

Call for Papers: EJPS Topical Collection on Philosophical Perspectives on Climate Economics

We invite submissions for a Topical Collection on Philosophical Perspectives on Climate Economics published in the European Journal of Philosophy of Science. The collection aims to bring together perspectives from philosophy of science on the economics of climate change, addressing its methodological challenges, central assumptions, interdisciplinary potential, and its significant role in decision-making and public policy.

Guest editors:Henrik Thorén (Lund University), Lukas Beck (The London School of Economics and Political Science), Dominic Lenzi (University of Twente)

Deadline: 28.02.2025

Description:

Climate economics is a discipline that explores the interactions between economic systems and the climate system, often to inform policies. Toward this aim, scientists construct coupled or integrated models, such as integrated assessment models (IAMs), that connect representations of the economy with models of bio-geophysical systems, such as the climate system.

The discipline is philosophically interesting for several reasons. One is that climate economists seek to address questions of enormous social relevance. With their models, they seek to uncover the limits of mitigation, evaluate alternative policy pathways, and reveal trade-offs and value conflicts. On top of that, climate economics is deeply integrated into climate science broadly construed, for example, by providing conventional climate models with crucial inputs in the form of emission scenarios. Finally, models used by climate economists have come to have a direct, if partial, influence not only on climate policy but also on the public imagination. 

Yet, IAMs remain highly controversial and have been criticized on various grounds. There are concerns with intertemporal discounting, the form and empirical basis of damage functions, how specific policies or processes are represented, and the many adverse effects of climate change that seem to fall outside the scope of these models (Frisch 2018; Winsberg 2018). Moreover, the management (or mismanagement) of uncertainty and its implications for climate economics in its eventual role in policymaking is a recurring concern among philosophers and economists (Pindyck 2018; Stern et al. 2022). These issues are further complicated by the general framework for policy evaluation employed in economics, which rests on several highly idiosyncratic assumptions. The discipline often adheres to a technocratic and centralized vision of policymaking and focuses on human welfare narrowly defined in terms of preference satisfaction (Mattauch et al. 2022; Fabian et. al 2023). Yet, there is doubt about whether this framework and its assumptions are adequate for the case of climate policy evaluation.

In light of this, this topical collection aims to explore the philosophical challenges surrounding climate economics. Thus, it invites contributions that deepen and integrate recent philosophical considerations to address these challenges.

Topics of Interest:

We welcome original contributions that explore philosophical questions related to climate economics, including the following:

• What is the role of values in climate economics? And what are the most central value judgments? Can or should climate economics be value-free?
• How should uncertainties and risks be represented and managed in climate economics?
• What is the appropriate role of climate economics vis á vis other disciplines? What role can it play in supporting policymaking in the climate change domain?
• How and in what ways are climate economic models limited when integrating knowledge and insights from other disciplines, and how should these challenges be addressed?
• What does climate economic knowledge demand of policy- and decision-makers?
• How should we understand the models that climate economists use? What are the central purposes that climate economic models serve? Are there tensions between purposes pursued by different actors involved in building, interpreting, and using the models? How should such tensions be resolved?
• How should we integrate, unify, or curate knowledge from different disciplines to arrive at informative policy advice for climate change mitigation, and what criteria should this advice meet?

How to Submit:

Submissions can be made through the European Journal of Philosophy of Science. For guidelines on formatting and submission, please see here.

For further questions, contact: Henrik Thorén ([email protected]), or Lukas Beck ([email protected])

We look forward to your contributions!

References

Fabian, M., Alexandrova, A., Coyle, D., Agarwala, M., & Felici, M. (2023). Respecting the subject in wellbeing public policy: beyond the social planner perspective. Journal of European Public Policy, 30(8), 1494-1517.

Frisch, M. (2018). Modeling climate policies: The social cost of carbon and uncertainties in climate predictions. In Llyod, E:, and Winsberg E., (eds) Climate modelling: Philosophical and conceptual issues, Springer 413-448.

Mattauch, L., Hepburn, C., Spuler, F., & Stern, N. (2022). The economics of climate change with endogenous preferences. Resource and Energy Economics, 69, 101312.

Pindyck, R. S. (2018). The use and misuse of models for climate policy. Review of Environmental Economics and Policy.

Stern, N., Stiglitz, J., & Taylor, C. (2022). The economics of immense risk, urgent action and radical change: towards new approaches to the economics of climate change. Journal of Economic Methodology, 29(3), 181-216.

Winsberg, E. (2018). Philosophy and climate science. Cambridge University Press.