Responsibility Under Uncertainty: Which Climate Decisions Matter Most?

Abstract

We propose a new method for estimating how much decisions under monadic uncertainty matter. The method is generic and suitable for measuring responsibility in finite horizon sequential decision processes. It fulfills “fairness” requirements and three natural conditions for responsibility measures: agency, avoidance and causal relevance. We apply the method to study how much decisions matter in a stylized greenhouse gas emissions process in which a decision maker repeatedly faces two options: start a “green” transition to a decarbonized society or further delay such a transition. We account for the fact that climate decisions are rarely implemented with certainty and that their consequences on the climate and on the global economy are uncertain. We discover that a “moral” approach towards decision making — doing the right thing even though the probability of success becomes increasingly small — is rational over a wide range of uncertainties.

Perspectives on adaptive dynamical systems

“…Ionescu et al 56 argue that type theory fits most of the requirements for frameworks for modeling and programming put forward by Broy et al 57 In a research program originally initiated by Ionescu, type theory has been applied to understand notions of vulnerability, viability, reachability, avoidability (discrete dynamical systems), optimality (control theory), climate sensitivity, commitment, and responsibility (climate policy). [58][59][60][61] The largest study of the above is Ionescu et al 58 where various notions of vulnerability, stemming from domains such as climate change, food security, or natural hazard studies, are compared.…”