Double trade-off between adaptation and mitigation for sea level rise: an application of FUND. Tol, R. S. J. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, 12(5):741–753, June, 2007. ![Double trade-off between adaptation and mitigation for sea level rise: an application of FUND [link]](https://bibbase.org/img/filetypes/link.svg "link")
Paper doi abstract bibtex This paper studies the effects of adaptation and mitigation on the impacts of sea level rise. Without adaptation, the impact of sea level rise would be substantial, almost wiping out entire countries by 2100, although the globally aggregate effect is much smaller. Adaptation would reduce potential impacts by a factor 10–100. Adaptation would come at a minor cost compared to the damage avoided. As adaptation depends on socio-economic status, the rank order of most vulnerable countries is different than the rank order of most exposed countries. Because the momentum of sea level rise is so large, mitigation can reduce impacts only to a limited extent. Stabilising carbon dioxide concentrations at 550 ppm would cut impacts in 2100 by about 10%. However, the costs of emission reduction lower the avoided impacts by up to 25% (average 10%). This is partly due to the reduced availability of resources for adaptation, and partly due to the increased sensitivity to wetland loss by adaptation.
@article{tol_double_2007,
title = {Double trade-off between adaptation and mitigation for sea level rise: an application of {FUND}},
volume = {12},
issn = {1381-2386, 1573-1596},
shorttitle = {The double trade-off between adaptation and mitigation for sea level rise},
url = {http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11027-007-9097-2},
doi = {10.1007/s11027-007-9097-2},
abstract = {This paper studies the effects of adaptation and mitigation on the impacts of sea level rise. Without adaptation, the impact of sea level rise would be substantial, almost wiping out entire countries by 2100, although the globally aggregate effect is much smaller. Adaptation would reduce potential impacts by a factor 10–100. Adaptation would come at a minor cost compared to the damage avoided. As adaptation depends on socio-economic status, the rank order of most vulnerable countries is different than the rank order of most exposed countries. Because the momentum of sea level rise is so large, mitigation can reduce impacts only to a limited extent. Stabilising carbon dioxide concentrations at 550 ppm would cut impacts in 2100 by about 10\%. However, the costs of emission reduction lower the avoided impacts by up to 25\% (average 10\%). This is partly due to the reduced availability of resources for adaptation, and partly due to the increased sensitivity to wetland loss by adaptation.},
language = {en},
number = {5},
urldate = {2017-05-05},
journal = {Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change},
author = {Tol, Richard S. J.},
month = jun,
year = {2007},
keywords = {CK, Untagged},
pages = {741--753},
}
Downloads: 0
{"_id":"XmTyxbyWfXJQyBhTG","bibbaseid":"tol-doubletradeoffbetweenadaptationandmitigationforsealevelriseanapplicationoffund-2007","author_short":["Tol, R. S. J."],"bibdata":{"bibtype":"article","type":"article","title":"Double trade-off between adaptation and mitigation for sea level rise: an application of FUND","volume":"12","issn":"1381-2386, 1573-1596","shorttitle":"The double trade-off between adaptation and mitigation for sea level rise","url":"http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11027-007-9097-2","doi":"10.1007/s11027-007-9097-2","abstract":"This paper studies the effects of adaptation and mitigation on the impacts of sea level rise. Without adaptation, the impact of sea level rise would be substantial, almost wiping out entire countries by 2100, although the globally aggregate effect is much smaller. Adaptation would reduce potential impacts by a factor 10–100. Adaptation would come at a minor cost compared to the damage avoided. As adaptation depends on socio-economic status, the rank order of most vulnerable countries is different than the rank order of most exposed countries. Because the momentum of sea level rise is so large, mitigation can reduce impacts only to a limited extent. Stabilising carbon dioxide concentrations at 550 ppm would cut impacts in 2100 by about 10%. However, the costs of emission reduction lower the avoided impacts by up to 25% (average 10%). This is partly due to the reduced availability of resources for adaptation, and partly due to the increased sensitivity to wetland loss by adaptation.","language":"en","number":"5","urldate":"2017-05-05","journal":"Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change","author":[{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Tol"],"firstnames":["Richard","S.","J."],"suffixes":[]}],"month":"June","year":"2007","keywords":"CK, Untagged","pages":"741–753","bibtex":"@article{tol_double_2007,\n\ttitle = {Double trade-off between adaptation and mitigation for sea level rise: an application of {FUND}},\n\tvolume = {12},\n\tissn = {1381-2386, 1573-1596},\n\tshorttitle = {The double trade-off between adaptation and mitigation for sea level rise},\n\turl = {http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11027-007-9097-2},\n\tdoi = {10.1007/s11027-007-9097-2},\n\tabstract = {This paper studies the effects of adaptation and mitigation on the impacts of sea level rise. Without adaptation, the impact of sea level rise would be substantial, almost wiping out entire countries by 2100, although the globally aggregate effect is much smaller. Adaptation would reduce potential impacts by a factor 10–100. Adaptation would come at a minor cost compared to the damage avoided. As adaptation depends on socio-economic status, the rank order of most vulnerable countries is different than the rank order of most exposed countries. Because the momentum of sea level rise is so large, mitigation can reduce impacts only to a limited extent. Stabilising carbon dioxide concentrations at 550 ppm would cut impacts in 2100 by about 10\\%. However, the costs of emission reduction lower the avoided impacts by up to 25\\% (average 10\\%). This is partly due to the reduced availability of resources for adaptation, and partly due to the increased sensitivity to wetland loss by adaptation.},\n\tlanguage = {en},\n\tnumber = {5},\n\turldate = {2017-05-05},\n\tjournal = {Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change},\n\tauthor = {Tol, Richard S. J.},\n\tmonth = jun,\n\tyear = {2007},\n\tkeywords = {CK, Untagged},\n\tpages = {741--753},\n}\n\n\n\n","author_short":["Tol, R. S. J."],"key":"tol_double_2007","id":"tol_double_2007","bibbaseid":"tol-doubletradeoffbetweenadaptationandmitigationforsealevelriseanapplicationoffund-2007","role":"author","urls":{"Paper":"http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11027-007-9097-2"},"keyword":["CK","Untagged"],"metadata":{"authorlinks":{}},"html":""},"bibtype":"article","biburl":"http://bibbase.org/zotero-group/ajello/2099979","dataSources":["EndJaSpcpPJCQnJDH"],"keywords":["ck","untagged"],"search_terms":["double","trade","between","adaptation","mitigation","sea","level","rise","application","fund","tol"],"title":"Double trade-off between adaptation and mitigation for sea level rise: an application of FUND","year":2007}