Question A:
US regulation of greenhouse gases – including carbon dioxide from motor vehicles and power plants, and methane from oil and gas wells – rests on the Clean Air Act. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) recently announced its rescission of the greenhouse gas endangerment finding and motor vehicle greenhouse gas emission standards: https://www.epa.gov/regulations-emissions-vehicles-and-engines/final-rule-rescission-greenhouse-gas-endangerment. The President of the National Academy of Sciences subsequently wrote to the organization's members, noting that 'the EPA justified its decision on legal, economic, and regulatory opinions, and not on the science’.
The weight of economic analysis and evidence supports the conclusion that some form of regulation of greenhouse gas emissions is warranted.
Responses
Responses weighted by each expert's confidence
Question B:
For US consumers and firms, the health and environmental benefits of greenhouse gas emission standards outweigh the costs, making the EPA rescission substantially net negative for American society.
Responses
Responses weighted by each expert's confidence
Question C:
Since the environmental costs of greenhouse gas emissions are globally distributed, some form of collective international regulation is warranted.
Responses
Responses weighted by each expert's confidence
Question A Participant Responses
| Participant | University | Vote | Confidence | Bio/Vote History |
|---|---|---|---|---|
 Daron Acemoglu |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Agree but with caveats. First, some of those regulations are worse ways of dealing with emissions than carbon taxes, and the US equilibrium where regulations proliferate instead of carbon taxes is highly inefficient. Second, some regulations may unnecessarily slow down investment
|
||||
 Mark Aguiar |
Princeton | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Joseph Altonji |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Alan Auerbach |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 David Autor |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Abhijit Banerjee |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Dirk Bergemann |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Marianne Bertrand |
Chicago | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Markus Brunnermeier |
Princeton | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Judith Chevalier |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 David Cutler |
Harvard | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
All textbooks teach about externalities.
|
||||
 Darrell Duffie |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Science: (1) global warming increases with greenhouse gas, (2) extreme weather risk rises with global warming. The welfare cost could be small or big. Should we take the chance it's small? From a risk-management perspective, no. There's only one Earth, and probably no re-dos.
|
||||
 Aaron Edlin |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Barry Eichengreen |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Liran Einav |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Ray Fair |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Edward Glaeser |
Harvard | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Pinelopi Goldberg |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Michael Greenstone |
University of Chicago | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
||||
 Oliver Hart |
Harvard | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Caroline Hoxby |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Hilary Hoynes |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Erik Hurst |
Chicago Booth | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Kenneth Judd |
Stanford | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
||||
 Steven Kaplan |
Chicago Booth | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
uncertain becuase the costs and benefits of implementation are uncertain. In fact, in some places implementation has been heavy handed and counterproductive. It has cost Germany and the UK dearly.
|
||||
 Anil Kashyap |
Chicago Booth | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
what form?
|
||||
 Pete Klenow |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
 Jonathan Levin |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Eric Maskin |
Harvard | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
||||
 William Nordhaus |
Yale | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
||||
 Maurice Obstfeld |
Peterson Institute for International Economics | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Parag Pathak |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Larry Samuelson |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Greenhouse gasses are a classic externality.
|
||||
 José Scheinkman |
Columbia University | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Richard Schmalensee |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Fiona Scott Morton |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Carl Shapiro |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Robert Shimer |
University of Chicago | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Some taxation is warranted. I'm not sure that taxation is a type of regulation.
|
||||
 Stefanie Stantcheva |
Harvard | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
||||
 James Stock |
Harvard | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
There is deep and robust evidence that anthropogenic GHG emissions cause climate change, climate change causes monetary damages, and many regulations have cost will below estimates of damages.
|
||||
 Nancy Stokey |
University of Chicago | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Chad Syverson |
Chicago Booth | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
The negative externality in this case is clear enough. All the argument should be about how large it actually is and the best way to correct it.
|
||||
 Richard Thaler |
Chicago Booth | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Ideally a carbon tax.
|
||||
 Christopher Udry |
Northwestern | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Ivan Werning |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Scientific consensus is clear. The Economics is as well: externalities should be taxed or regulated to achieve efficiency. (The global world nature of the issue is a difficult challenge.)
|
||||
Question B Participant Responses
| Participant | University | Vote | Confidence | Bio/Vote History |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Daron Acemoglu |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Mark Aguiar |
Princeton | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Joseph Altonji |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Alan Auerbach |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
David Autor |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
It's not greenhouse gases but all of the many public health harms that come with burning fossil fuels. Transitioning sooner to wind, solar, and nuclear will save lives, accelerate growth, and enable America to cede _less_ of the future to China.
|
||||
|
Abhijit Banerjee |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
The point is not whether the current implementation of the text is Ideal. This move removes the basis for a whole class of tax and transfer policies. And when we measure the well being of Americans we should include their concerns about the rest of the world
|
||||
|
Dirk Bergemann |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Marianne Bertrand |
Chicago | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Markus Brunnermeier |
Princeton | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Judith Chevalier |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Agree even though costs disproportionately borne elsewhere.
|
||||
|
David Cutler |
Harvard | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
The health impacts alone are enormous and outweigh the costs of the regulation.
|
||||
|
Darrell Duffie |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Aaron Edlin |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Barry Eichengreen |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Liran Einav |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Ray Fair |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Edward Glaeser |
Harvard | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Pinelopi Goldberg |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Michael Greenstone |
University of Chicago | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
||||
|
Oliver Hart |
Harvard | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Caroline Hoxby |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Hilary Hoynes |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Erik Hurst |
Chicago Booth | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Kenneth Judd |
Stanford | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
||||
|
Steven Kaplan |
Chicago Booth | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
I am confident that the the implementation in the U.S. has imposed costs that outweigh the benefits because the EPA overweighted benefits and underweighted costs.
|
||||
|
Anil Kashyap |
Chicago Booth | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Pete Klenow |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Jonathan Levin |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Eric Maskin |
Harvard | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
||||
|
William Nordhaus |
Yale | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
||||
|
Maurice Obstfeld |
Peterson Institute for International Economics | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Parag Pathak |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Larry Samuelson |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
José Scheinkman |
Columbia University | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
New studies that try to account for the effect of climate disasters show that the impact of global temperature increases on the US economic performance is very large.
-see background information here |
||||
|
Richard Schmalensee |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
This is true only if one takes into account the impact of the rescission on emissions reductions elsewhere. US controls by themselves have small benefits for US citizens.
|
||||
|
Fiona Scott Morton |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Carl Shapiro |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Robert Shimer |
University of Chicago | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
For Americans, the benefit of American greenhouse gas emissions standards is likely smaller than the cost of the standards. Much of the benefits of the standards are borne by people in other countries.
|
||||
|
Stefanie Stantcheva |
Harvard | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
||||
|
James Stock |
Harvard | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
A nitpick about wording: not all regulations pass a CB test but many do. The auto tailpipe standards are among those that do. Power sector proposed regulations typically strongly pass a CB test. But some regulations (use biodiesel per the RFS) do not.
|
||||
|
Nancy Stokey |
University of Chicago | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Chad Syverson |
Chicago Booth | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Reducing neg externality on the margin creates social gain, though for greenhouse gases this is worldwide. Question is what share applies to the US. My sense of estimates (plus greenhouse gases often accompany other pollutants) is US-only gains share probably larger than cost.
|
||||
|
Richard Thaler |
Chicago Booth | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Christopher Udry |
Northwestern | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
This is pretty clear. It's a global externality, but the US is a big player, and our action will be essential in any global negotiation.
|
||||
|
Ivan Werning |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Uncertain only insofar as the question suggests an uncoordinated unilateral selfish perspective to evaluate US policy in isolation.
At the world level or taking US policy as coordinating or shaping world policy, I believe the net effects are negative.
|
||||
Question C Participant Responses
| Participant | University | Vote | Confidence | Bio/Vote History |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Daron Acemoglu |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Mark Aguiar |
Princeton | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Joseph Altonji |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Alan Auerbach |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
David Autor |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Abhijit Banerjee |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Dirk Bergemann |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Marianne Bertrand |
Chicago | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Markus Brunnermeier |
Princeton | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Judith Chevalier |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
David Cutler |
Harvard | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Darrell Duffie |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Warranted, but very hard to coordinate this,
|
||||
|
Aaron Edlin |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Barry Eichengreen |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Liran Einav |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Ray Fair |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Edward Glaeser |
Harvard | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Pinelopi Goldberg |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Agree, with one caveat: International coordination efforts need to include the big emitter countries (US, China, India, EU countries). Coordination among smaller countries in the rest of the world is meaningless without the big players.
|
||||
|
Michael Greenstone |
University of Chicago | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
||||
|
Oliver Hart |
Harvard | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Caroline Hoxby |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
The question conditions on a premise that is uncertain. Therefore, the question cannot be answered. Obviously, IF any global harm is established, the remedy would need to be international. This is just first principles of internalizing public costs for economic efficiency.
|
||||
|
Hilary Hoynes |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Erik Hurst |
Chicago Booth | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Kenneth Judd |
Stanford | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
||||
|
Steven Kaplan |
Chicago Booth | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Would prefer to wait until we have more info about engineering solutions that are much less costly and likely to get much better in the age of AI.
|
||||
|
Anil Kashyap |
Chicago Booth | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Pete Klenow |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Jonathan Levin |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Eric Maskin |
Harvard | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
||||
|
William Nordhaus |
Yale | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
||||
|
Maurice Obstfeld |
Peterson Institute for International Economics | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Parag Pathak |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Larry Samuelson |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
The temptation to free ride is strong. Collective action could bring gains to everyone.
|
||||
|
José Scheinkman |
Columbia University | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Richard Schmalensee |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Fiona Scott Morton |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Carl Shapiro |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Robert Shimer |
University of Chicago | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Again, some some form of international agreement on taxation is warranted. Not sure that international regulations are justified.
|
||||
|
Stefanie Stantcheva |
Harvard | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
||||
|
James Stock |
Harvard | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Collective need not mean through the UN, a good example is the Open Coalition for Carbon Markets, a group of countries announced at COP in part in response to the EU CBAM. These are plausibly more realistic and nimble than UN agreements.
|
||||
|
Nancy Stokey |
University of Chicago | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Chad Syverson |
Chicago Booth | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Richard Thaler |
Chicago Booth | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Christopher Udry |
Northwestern | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Ivan Werning |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Yes, the externality is global (albeit unequally distributed), so a solution requires coordinating actions to internalize the effects of carbon emissions worldwide. Otherwise, countries have an individual incentive to free ride and shirk on cutting emissions.
|
||||
