Much research has been carried out on modelling soil erosion rates under different climatic and land use conditions. Although some studies have addressed the issue of reduced crop productivity due to soil erosion, few have focused on the economic loss in terms of agricultural production and gross domestic product (GDP). In this study, soil erosion modellers and economists come together to carry out an economic evaluation of soil erosion in the European Union (EU). The study combines biophysical and macroeconomic models to estimate the cost of agricultural productivity loss due to soil erosion by water in the EU. The soil erosion rates, derived from the RUSLE2015 model, are used to estimate the loss in crop productivity (physical change in the production of plants) and to model their impact on the agricultural sector per country. A computable general equilibrium model is then used to estimate the impact of crop productivity change on agricultural production and GDP. The 12 million hectares of agricultural areas in the EU that suffer from severe erosion are estimated to lose around 0.43% of their crop productivity annually. The annual cost of this loss in agricultural productivity is estimated at around €1.25 billion. The computable general equilibrium model estimates the cost in the agricultural sector to be close to €300 million and the loss in GDP to be about €155 million. Italy emerges as the country that suffers the highest economic impact, whereas the agricultural sector in most Northern and Central European countries is only marginally affected by soil erosion losses. Soil erosion is the biggest threat to soil fertility and productivity, as it removes organic matter and important nutrients and prevents vegetation growth, which negatively affects overall biodiversity (Scherr, 2000). In particular, soil erosion changes the physical, chemical, and biological characteristics of soil, which leads to a drop in potential agricultural productivity and gives rise to concerns about food security, especially in the context of a growing world population (Food and Agriculture Organization [FAO], 2015a;Graves et al., 2015;Pimentel, 2006). ----------------------------------------------------------------This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract. The economy-wide implications of sea level rise in 2050 are estimated using a static computable general equilibrium model. This allows for a better estimate of the welfare effects of sea level rise than the common direct cost estimates; and for an estimate of the impact of sea level rise on greenhouse gas emissions. Overall, general equilibrium effects increase the welfare costs of sea level rise, but not necessarily in every sector or region. In the absence of coastal protection, economies that rely most on agriculture are hit hardest. Although energy is substituted for land, overall energy consumption falls with the shrinking economy, hurting energy exporters. With full coastal protection, GDP increases, particularly in regions with substantial dike building, but utility falls, least in regions that protect their coasts and export energy. Energy prices rise and energy consumption falls. The costs of full protection exceed the costs of losing land. The results also show direct costs -the usual method for estimating welfare changes due to sea level rise -are a bad approximation of the general equilibrium welfare effects; previous estimates of the economic impact of sea level rise are therefore biased.

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. We study the economic impacts of climate-change-induced change in human health, viz. cardiovascular and respiratory disorders, diarrhoea, malaria, dengue fever and schistosomiasis. Changes in morbidity and mortality are interpreted as changes in labour productivity and demand for health care, and used to shock the GTAP-E computable general equilibrium model, calibrated for the year 2050. GDP, welfare and investment fall (rise) in regions with net negative (positive) health impacts. Prices, production, and terms of trade show a mixed pattern. Direct cost estimates, common in climate change impact studies, underestimate the true welfare losses. Terms of use: Documents in

This paper uses two models to examine the direct and indirect costs of sea-level rise for Europe for a range of sea-level rise scenarios for the 2020s and 2080s: (1) the DIVA model to estimate the physical impacts of sea-level rise and the direct economic cost, including adaptation, and (2) the GTAP-EF model to assess the indirect economic implications. Without adaptation, impacts are quite significant with a large land loss and increase in the incidence of coastal flooding. By the end of the century Malta has the largest relative land loss at 12% of its total surface area, followed by Greece at 3.5% land loss. Economic losses are however larger in Poland and Germany ($483 and $391 million, respectively). Coastal protection is very effective in reducing these impacts and optimally undertaken leads to protection levels that are higher than 85% in the majority of European states. While the direct economic impact of sea-level rise is always negative, the final impact on countries' economic performances estimated with the GTAP-EF model may be positive or negative. This is because factor substitution, international trade, and changes in investment patterns interact with possible positive implications. The policy insights are (1) while sea-level rise has negative and huge direct economic effects, overall effects on GDP Climatic Change (2012) are quite small (max −0.046% in Poland); (2) the impact of sea-level rise is not confined to the coastal zone and sea-level rise indirectly affects landlocked countries as well (Austria for instance loses −0.003% of its GDP); and (3) adaptation is crucial to keep the negative impacts of sea-level rise at an acceptable level.

We study the economic impacts of climate-change-induced change in human health, viz. cardiovascular and respiratory disorders, diarrhoea, malaria, dengue fever and schistosomiasis. Changes in morbidity and mortality are interpreted as changes in labour productivity and demand for health care, and used to shock the GTAP-E computable general equilibrium model, calibrated for the year 2050. GDP, welfare and investment fall (rise) in regions with net negative (positive) health impacts. Prices, production, and terms of trade show a mixed pattern. Direct cost estimates, common in climate change impact studies, underestimate the true welfare losses.

SummaryThe present research describes a climate change integrated impact assessment exercise, whose economic evaluation is based on a CGE approach and modeling effort. Input to the CGE model comes from a wide although still partial set of up-to-date bottom-up impact studies. Estimates indicate that a temperature increase of 1.92°C compared to preindustrial levels in 2050 could lead to global GDP losses of approximately 0.5% compared to a hypothetical scenario where no climate change is assumed to occur. Northern Europe is expected to benefit from the evaluated temperature increase (+0.18%), while Southern and Eastern Europe are expected to suffer from the climate change scenario under analysis (-0.15% and -0.21% respectively). Most vulnerable countries are the less developed regions, such as South Asia, South-East Asia, North Africa and Sub-Saharan Africa. In these regions the most exposed sector is agriculture, and the impact on crop productivity is by far the most important source of damages. It is worth noting that the general equilibrium estimates tend to be lower, in absolute terms, than the bottom-up, partial equilibrium estimates. The difference is to be attributed to the effect of market-driven adaptation. This partly reduces the direct impacts of temperature increases, leading to lower damage estimates. Nonetheless these remain positive and substantive in some regions. Accordingly, marketdriven adaptation cannot be the solution to the climate change problem. Keywords Abstract:The present research describes a climate change integrated impact assessment exercise, whose economic evaluation is based on a CGE approach and modeling effort. Input to the CGE model comes from a wide although still partial set of up-to-date bottom-up impact studies. Estimates indicate that a temperature increase of 1.92°C compared to pre-industrial levels in 2050 could lead to global GDP losses of approximately 0.5% compared to a hypothetical scenario where no climate change is assumed to occur. Northern Europe is expected to benefit from the evaluated temperature increase (+0.18%), while Southern and Eastern Europe are expected to suffer from the climate change scenario under analysis (-0.15% and -0.21% respectively). Most vulnerable countries are the less developed regions, such as South Asia, South-East Asia, North Africa and Sub-Saharan Africa. In these regions the most exposed sector is agriculture, and the impact on crop productivity is by far the most important source of damages. It is worth noting that the general equilibrium estimates tend to be lower, in absolute terms, than the bottom-up, partial equilibrium estimates. The difference is to be attributed to the effect of market-driven adaptation. This partly reduces the direct impacts of temperature increases, leading to lower damage estimates. Nonetheless these remain positive and substantive in some regions. Accordingly, market-driven adaptation cannot be the solution to the climate change problem.

Tipping points have become a key concept in research on climate change, indicating points of abrupt transition in biophysical systems as well as transformative changes in adaptation and mitigation strategies. However, the potential existence of tipping points in socio-economic systems has remained underexplored, whereas they might be highly policy relevant. This paper describes characteristics of climate change induced socio-economic tipping points (SETPs) to guide future research on SETPS to inform climate policy. We review existing literature to create a tipping point typology and to derive the following SETP definition: a climate change induced, abrupt change of a socio-economic system, into a new, fundamentally different state. Through stakeholder consultation, we identify 22 candidate SETP examples with policy relevance for Europe. Three of these are described in higher detail to identify their tipping point characteristics (stable states, mechanisms and abrupt change): the collapse of winter sports tourism, farmland abandonment and sea-level rise-induced migration. We find that stakeholder perceptions play an important role in describing SETPs. The role of climate drivers is difficult to isolate from other drivers because of complex interplays with socio-economic factors. In some cases, the rate of change rather than the magnitude of change causes a tipping point. The clearest SETPs are found on small system scales. On a national to continental scale, SETPs are less obvious because they are difficult to separate from their associated economic substitution effects and policy response. Some proposed adaptation measures are so transformative that their implementations can be considered an SETP in terms of 'response to climate change'. Future research can focus on identification and impact analysis of tipping points using stylized models, on the exceedance of stakeholder-defined critical thresholds in the RCP/SSP space and on the macro-economic impacts of new system states.

In this paper we developed and tested an integrated methodology for assessing direct and indirect economic impacts of flooding. The methodology combines a spatial analysis of damage to physical stocks with a general economic equilibrium approach using a regionally-calibrated (to Italy) version of a Computable General Equilibrium (CGE) global model. We applied the model to the 2000 Po river flood. To account for the uncertainty in the induced effects on regional economies, we explored three disruption and two recovery scenarios. The results prove that: i) indirect losses are a significant share of direct losses, and ii) the model is able to capture both positive and negative economic effects of a disaster in different areas of the same country. The assessment of indirect impacts is essential for a full understanding of the economic outcomes of natural disasters.