On Simple Rules for the Social Cost of Carbon

The objective of this paper is to assess the use of simple rules for the social cost of carbon. It is shown that several interrelated objections may apply. The main issues are the following. First, the underlying theoretical models typically assume that the economy finds itself on a balanced growth path, implying that addressing the issue of designing policies for the short run, which play a role in the actual policy debate, are neglected. Second, for some cases the assumptions made regarding the marginal damages of high temperature or of arge atmospheric CO2\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$$CO_{2}$$\end{document} stocks are shown to be incompatible with other assumptions made. Third, typically the rules follow from an optimal growth model and associate the social cost for a particular year with GDP for that year, but it is not always acknowledged that it should be optimal rather than actual GDP for that year. I also go into the performance of simple rules as compared to first-best.