Intergenerational Equity with Heterogeneous Individual Time Preferences in a Model of Optimal and Sustainable Growth

Yıl 2023, Cilt: 1 Sayı: 2, 99 - 114, 25.09.2023

Can Askan Mavi

Öz

One of the ethical objections made to inter-generational equity is the violation of consumer sovereignty. To address this concern, this paper presents a continuous-time Overlapping Generations Model (OLG) suitable for the treatment of sustainability issues, which distinguishes the intra- and inter-generational discount factor (Calvo and Obstfeld, 1988) with taking into account heterogeneities of time preferences among individuals. We find that consumption for older patient individuals is always higher than older impatient agents while the social planner decides to allocate equally the consumption between patient and impatient young individuals. Along age, the consumption of patient old agents always increases relatively, whose speed depends on intertemporal elasticity of substitution. Our results show that the consumption of patient and impatient young individuals are interdependent. We also show that the Hotelling rule for renewable resources is not affected regardless of the share of patient and impatient agents in society. Finally, we find that the effect of static increase of the individual discount rate of a patient or impatient agent on sustainable income depends on the level of aggregate consumption.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Environment, Equity, Overlapping generations model, Sustainability

Kaynakça

• Ayong Le Kama, A.D. (2001). Sustainable growth, renewable resources and pollution. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, 25(12), 1911-1918. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0165-1889(00)00007-5
• Burton, P. (1993). Intertemporal preferences and inter-generational equity considerations in optimal resource harvesting. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 24(2), 119-132. https://doi.org/10.1006/jeem.1993.1008
• Calvo, G.A. & Obstfeld, M. (1988). Optimal time consistent fiscal policy with finite lifetimes. Econometrica, 56(2), 411-432. https://doi.org/10.2307/1911079
• Chichilnisky G. 1996. An axiomatic approach to sustainable development. Social Choice Welfare 13, 231-257.
• Cowan, R., Cowan, W. & Swann, G.M.P. (2004). Waves in consumption with interdependence among consumers. Canadian Journal of Economics, 37(1), 149-177. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0008-4085.2004.008_1.x
• d’Autume, A., Hartwick, J.M. & Schubert, K. (2010). The zero discounting and maximin optimal paths in a simple model of global warming. Mathematical Social Sciences, 59(2), 193-207. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mathsocsci.2009.10.002
• Dasgupta, P. (2011). The ethics of inter-generational distribution: reply and response to John E. Roemer. Environmental and Resource Economics, 50(4), 475-493. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10640-011-9496-4
• Denniss, R. (2004). The attitudes of young people to the environment. Australia Institute Webpaper May 2005.
• Endress, L., Zhou, T. & Roumasset, J., (2005). Sustainable growth with environmental spillovers. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 58(4), 527-547. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2004.09.003
• Endress, L.H., Pongkijvorasin, S., Roumasset, J., & Wada, C.A. (2014). Intergenerational equity with individual impatience in a model of optimal and sustainable growth. Resource and Energy Economics, 36(2), 620-635. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.reseneeco.2013.10.001
• Heal, G. & Chichilnisky, G. (1983). Necessary and sufficient conditions for a resolution of the social choice paradox. Journal of Economic Theory, 31(1), 68-87. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-0531(83)90021-2
• Heal, G.M. (2009). Climate economics: a meta-review and some suggestions for future research. Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, 3(1), 4-21. https://doi.org/10.1093/reep/ren014
• Howarth, R.B. (1998). An overlapping generation model of climate–economy interactions. Scandinavian Journal of Economics, 100(3), 575-591. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9442.00123
• Li, C.Z. & Lofgren, K.G. (2000). Renewable Resources and Economic Sustainability: A Dynamic Analysis with Heterogeneous Time Preferences. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 40(3), 236-250. https://doi.org/10.1006/jeem.1999.1121
• Obstfeld, M. (1990). Intertemporal dependence, impatience, and dynamics. Journal of Monetary Economics, 26(1), 45-75. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-3932(90)90031-X
• Ramsey, F.P. (1928). A mathematical theory of saving. The Economic Journal, 38(152), 543-559. https://doi.org/10.2307/2224098
• Scaramozzino P. & Marini, G. (1995). Overlapping generations and environmental control. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 29(1), 64-77. https://doi.org/10.1006/jeem.1995.1031
• Schneider, M., Traeger, C. & Winkler, R. (2012). Trading off generations: equity, discounting, and climate change. European Economic Review, 56, 1621-1644. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euroecorev.2012.08.006
• Solow, R.M. (1974). The economics of resources or the resources of economics. American Economic Review, 64(2), 1-14.
• Solow, R.M. (1986). On the inter-generational allocation of natural resources. Scandinavian Journal of Economics, 88(1), 141-149. https://doi.org/10.2307/3440280
• Weitzman, M.L. (1976). On the welfare significance of national product in a dynamic economy. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 90(1), 156-162. https://doi.org/10.2307/1886092
• Weitzman, M.L. (2007). The Stern Review of the economics of climate change. Journal of Economic Literature, 45(3), 703-724. http://doi.org/10.1257/jel.45.3.703
• Yaari, M.E. (1965). Uncertain lifetime, life insurance, and the theory of consumer. The Review of Economic Studies, 32(2), 137-150. https://doi.org/10.2307/2296058