Module 4
Module 4
SOCIO-ECONOMIC ANALYSES
Socio-economic analyses can help us assess the benefits and costs associated
with climate change adaptation measures.
The screening looks at climate adaptation across the 14 sectors dealt with in
the government's climate change adaptation strategy from 2008.
An important conclusion of the screening is, that for almost all of the sectors
it is assessed that climate change adaptation can take place within the existing
regulatory framework.
Furthermore, the screening shows that there is a general demand for socio-
economic analyses at a more concrete level within geographically delimited areas
(e.g. at municipal level), because the diversity within and across the different
sectors makes it difficult to reach conclusions based on analyses carried out at a
very general level. To ensure the best possible adaptation from a socio-economic
perspective, a cross-sectoral approach will have to be used, so as far as possible, all
relevant sectors and cross-cutting effects are incorporated simultaneously.
PARTIAL ANALYSES
This partial approach has the advantage of being well defined, the results are
simple and easy to interpret, and it opens up for numerous different methods of
calculation of consequences. The disadvantage is that we cannot be sure that what
is optimal in the analysis of a measure is also optimal in general. This makes it
more difficult to compare results across measures.
In principle, a CBA values all the effects of both the reference scenario and of
the measure. The measure should only be implemented if the present value of the
benefits exceeds the present value of the costs, so that the measure yields a socio-
economic profit. When comparing several measures, the measure yielding the
highest socio-economic return should be chosen.
A CEA measures the costs relative to a desired effect (e.g. net costs per tonne
of carbon emission reduction). A CEA is especially suited for calculating how society
can most cost-effectively achieve a given target within e.g. the climate area.
COST OF INACTION
In the area of climate adaptation, the concept of cost of inaction (COI) is often
applied, i.e. the costs of doing nothing in terms of climate adaptation; of choosing a
laissez-faire approach. The cost of inaction is an expression for the damage we avoid
if we adapt to a changing climate.
Cost of inaction cannot stand alone. This is because the cost of inaction only
shows what will happen if we choose to do nothing in terms of climate adaptation; if
we take no political action. To provide a full picture of things, the cost of inaction
should be held up against the costs of action in an overall cost-benefit analysis.
The cost of inaction can have considerable clout and is often used in the early
phases of policy preparation, where focus is on identifying problems and
communicating the need for political action. Cost of inaction is thus often used to
outline the necessity of acting in a given area. Cost of in action is also used to
suggest in which sectors action should be taken. However, cost of inaction cannot be
used when comparing or choosing between different political measures (for instance
climate change adaptation measures) or to assess a single given political measure.
This would require calculating the cost of the political measure.
METHODOLOGICAL ISSUES
Uncertainty, the time perspective for benefits and costs, and the availability
of data can be decisive for the quality and design of socio-economic analyses.
Often, there is a lack of knowledge about when and with how big an effect the
different climate change impacts will occur. This is essential when assessing and
timing climate change adaptation measures. It entails an extra element of
uncertainty when interpreting and applying the results of a socio-economic analysis.
TIME PERSPECTIVE
DISCOUNTING
The time horizons in the climate change adaptation area are very long; we
are calculating with 50 or 100 years or several hundred years. Discounting is
therefore a special challenge in this area.
If the discount rate is of a certain size, there is a risk that the present value
may become very small when discounting is over such a long time horizon. This
could mean that damage costs incurred in the last part of the century will become so
insignificant that they are almost irrelevant in the calculations. This could distort
assessments of climate change adaptation measures, because the benefits, i.e. the
damage avoided in the far future, become very small. It could also have
consequences for how resources and costs are distributed across generations.
SENSITIVITY ANALYSES
REFERENCES
https://en.klimatilpasning.dk/knowledge/socio-economy/