Goklany
This paper challenges claims that global warming outranks other threats facing humanity through the foreseeable future tassumed to be 2085-2100). World Health Organization and British government-sponsored global impact studies indicate that, relative to other factors, global warming's impact on key determinants of human and environmental well-being should be small through 2085 even under the warmest Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) scenario. Specifically, over 20 other health risks currently contribute more to death and disease worldwide than global warming. Through 2085, only 13% of mortality from hunger, malaria, and extreme weather events (including coastal flooding from sea level rise) should be from warming. Moreover, warming should reduce future global population at risk of water stress, and pressures on ecosystems and boods versity (by increasing net biome productivity and decreasing habitat conversion). That warming is not tundamental to human well-being is reinforced by lower bound estimates of net gross domestic product (GDP) per capita, This measure adjusts GDP downward to account for damages from warming due to market, health, and environmental impacts, and risk of catastrophe. For both developing and industrialized countries, net GDP per capita-alheit an imperfect surrogate for human well-being should be (1) double the current US level by 2100 under the warmest scenario, and (2) lowest under the poorest IPCC scenario but highest under the warmest scenario through 2200. The warmest world, being wealthier, should also have greater capacity to address any problem, including warming. Therefore, other problems and, specifically, lowered economic development are greater threats to humanity than global warming 2012 john Wiley & Sons, Lad
How to cite this article
WIRES Clim Chang 2012, 1489-509, do 10.1002/wxc.194
INTRODUCTION
S ome scientists and policy makers claim that global warming is among the most, if not the most, important issue facing mankind. UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, for example, call global warming the most important priority for human beings, echoing similar statements by other wiseld leaders, past and present. Such claims have obvious implications for the allocation of society's always scarce resources to address the many challenges that humanity faces. However, there are no scientific studies that justify such claims at the global scale.
Justification must necessarily be based on a
showing that the net global impact of warming
8726 H Cure Road, Vir, Virginia, USA
Volume 2 November December 2012
exceeds that of other problems now and through the foreseeable future. I will, consistent with other studies, assume that the foreseeable future extends to 2085-2100. This is probably optimistic because cinission scenarios are driven by socioeconomic assumptions and projections, which arguably canno be projected semi-realistically for more than 5-10 years at a time. It
Although most impact studies have been undertaken at less-than-global scales, aume, e.g., the so-called fast track assessments (FFA) sponsored. by the British Government, are indeed global i in scale. The individual FTAs projected the global impacts for hunger, malaria, water resources, coastal flooding, forests, and land cover through 2085. However, like many other impact studies, each FTA study was restricted to t one or two determinants of human or environmental..
Goklany
This paper challenges claims that global warming outranks other threats facing humanity through the foreseeable future tassumed to be 2085-2100). World Health Organization and British government-sponsored global impact studies indicate that, relative to other factors, global warming's impact on key determinants of human and environmental well-being should be small through 2085 even under the warmest Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) scenario. Specifically, over 20 other health risks currently contribute more to death and disease worldwide than global warming. Through 2085, only 13% of mortality from hunger, malaria, and extreme weather events (including coastal flooding from sea level rise) should be from warming. Moreover, warming should reduce future global population at risk of water stress, and pressures on ecosystems and boods versity (by increasing net biome productivity and decreasing habitat conversion). That warming is not tundamental to human well-being is reinforced by lower bound estimates of net gross domestic product (GDP) per capita, This measure adjusts GDP downward to account for damages from warming due to market, health, and environmental impacts, and risk of catastrophe. For both developing and industrialized countries, net GDP per capita-alheit an imperfect surrogate for human well-being should be (1) double the current US level by 2100 under the warmest scenario, and (2) lowest under the poorest IPCC scenario but highest under the warmest scenario through 2200. The warmest world, being wealthier, should also have greater capacity to address any problem, including warming. Therefore, other problems and, specifically, lowered economic development are greater threats to humanity than global warming 2012 john Wiley & Sons, Lad
How to cite this article
WIRES Clim Chang 2012, 1489-509, do 10.1002/wxc.194
INTRODUCTION
S ome scientists and policy makers claim that global warming is among the most, if not the most, important issue facing mankind. UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, for example, call global warming the most important priority for human beings, echoing similar statements by other wiseld leaders, past and present. Such claims have obvious implications for the allocation of society's always scarce resources to address the many challenges that humanity faces. However, there are no scientific studies that justify such claims at the global scale.
Justification must necessarily be based on a
showing that the net global impact of warming
8726 H Cure Road, Vir, Virginia, USA
Volume 2 November December 2012
exceeds that of other problems now and through the foreseeable future. I will, consistent with other studies, assume that the foreseeable future extends to 2085-2100. This is probably optimistic because cinission scenarios are driven by socioeconomic assumptions and projections, which arguably canno be projected semi-realistically for more than 5-10 years at a time. It
Although most impact studies have been undertaken at less-than-global scales, aume, e.g., the so-called fast track assessments (FFA) sponsored. by the British Government, are indeed global i in scale. The individual FTAs projected the global impacts for hunger, malaria, water resources, coastal flooding, forests, and land cover through 2085. However, like many other impact studies, each FTA study was restricted to t one or two determinants of human or environmental..