nep-res New Economics Papers
on Resource Economics
Issue of 2024‒09‒23
three papers chosen by
Maximo Rossi, Universidad de la RepÃúºblica


  1. High temperatures and workplace injuries By Matteo Picchio; Jan C. Van Ours
  2. Political Economy of Climate Change Adaptation By Yasmine van der Straten; Enrico Perotti; Frederick van der Ploeg
  3. Home Improvement, Wealth Inequality, and the Energy-Efficiency Paradox By Martijn I. Dröes; Yasmine Van Der Straten

  1. By: Matteo Picchio (Department of Economics and Social Sciences, Universita' Politecnica delle Marche); Jan C. Van Ours (Erasmus School of Economics and Tinbergen Institute, The Netherlands)
    Abstract: High temperatures can have a negative effect on workplace safety for a variety of reasons. Discomfort and reduced concentration caused by heat can lead to workers making mistakes and injuring themselves. Discomfort can also be an incentive for workers to report an injury that they would not have reported in the absence of heat. We investigate how temperature affects injuries of professional tennis players in outdoor singles matches. We find that for men injury rates increase with ambient temperatures. For women, there is no effect of high temperatures on injuries. Among male tennis players, there is some heterogeneity in the temperature effects, which seem to be influenced by incentives. Specifically, when a male player is losing at the beginning of a crucial (second) fourth set in (best-of-three) best-of-five matches, the temperature effect is much larger than when he is winning. In best-of-five matches, which are more exhausting, this effect is age-dependent and stronger for older players.
    Keywords: Climate change, temperatures, tennis, injuries, health.
    JEL: J24 J81 Q51 Q54
    Date: 2024–09
    URL: https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:anc:wpaper:489
  2. By: Yasmine van der Straten (University of Amsterdam); Enrico Perotti (University of Amsterdam); Frederick van der Ploeg (University of Oxford and University of Amsterdam)
    Abstract: We study the evolution of voter support for public adaptation when political preferences are shaped by rising climate risk and economic inequality. Political support for tax-funded intervention to preserve habitable land evolves over time when households differ in age, income and beliefs. Support for public adaptation is initially low, rising as climate risk increases. We show that the political equilibrium experiences a tipping point in response to habitat loss if beliefs are not too dispersed, leading to a shift towards a more active adaptation policy. A steady rise in inequality may induce a second tipping point, but the policy impact depends on the balance between the gap in income and beliefs. Overall, public intervention is undermined by a †tragedy of the horizon†effect as cohorts internalize only partially its long-term benefits for future generations. This prevents public adaptation from converging to the social optimum even when political support is highest.
    Keywords: Climate change adaptation, economic inequality, tragedy of the horizon, political tipping points
    JEL: D63 H23 Q54 Q58
    Date: 2024–02–29
    URL: https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:tin:wpaper:20240013
  3. By: Martijn I. Dröes (University of Amsterdam); Yasmine Van Der Straten (University of Amsterdam)
    Abstract: This article examines the rate at which different households go green and how this affects the distribution of both wealth and CO2 benefits. Using a unique dataset from the Netherlands, we find that lower-income households are less likely to make their homes more energy efficient. At the same time, higher-income households sort themselves into homes that are already more energy efficient to begin with. Over a 15-year horizon, the combined effect on energy savings accumulates to 17% of median net wealth, with ex ante sorting explaining 65% of this effect. Although a policy that encourages lower-income households to own energy-efficient homes reduces wealth inequality and poverty, it leaves 83% of the potential CO2 benefits unrealized because the brownest households are in the upper part of the income distribution. Our results indicate that there is a policy trade-off between sheltering low-income households against climate risk on the one hand and effectively reducing CO2 emissions on the other.
    Keywords: Energy efficiency, home improvement, wealth inequality, CO2 emissions
    JEL: D31 Q41 Q43 Q54 R31
    Date: 2024–04–17
    URL: https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:tin:wpaper:20240026

This nep-res issue is ©2024 by Maximo Rossi. It is provided as is without any express or implied warranty. It may be freely redistributed in whole or in part for any purpose. If distributed in part, please include this notice.
General information on the NEP project can be found at https://nep.repec.org. For comments please write to the director of NEP, Marco Novarese at <director@nep.repec.org>. Put “NEP” in the subject, otherwise your mail may be rejected.
NEP’s infrastructure is sponsored by the School of Economics and Finance of Massey University in New Zealand.