Is there any research on internalizing x-risks or global catastrophic risks into economies?

By Ramiro @ 2022-07-06T17:08 (+19)

I wonder if anyone is working on the possibility of internalizing catastrophic risks into current economies? Or else: why wouldn't it be useful?

After all, I think that debates on computing and internalizing carbon costs have made climate change policy a more tractable issue (and have helped foster an economic literature relevant for longtermism)... I have some hypothesis on why this wouldn't apply to other major GCR and x-risks, but I wonder if someone has already written about it.


dominicroser @ 2022-07-06T20:27 (+15)

A paper that Kian Mintz-Woo is working on is relevant: "Incentives for the Long-Term(ist)"

From the abstract: "To address long-term externalities, I propose internalizing long-term externalized costs: according to our best estimates of the long-term costs of an activity or product, this cost should be added."

You would have to ask him directly where he's currently at with his draft.

Ramiro @ 2022-07-14T15:37 (+9)

I'll do this. I think this discussion is getting a lot of track when it comes to climate change. Precisely because low-prob catastrophic scenarios are neglected by climate change IAMs - because they lead to a collapse of the cost-benefit analysis, according to Weitzman (2009) -  Stiglitz, Taylor & Stern have been advocating for target-consistent pricing. I wonder if something analogous would be feasible for x-risks.
For instance, there have been many advocates for a robot tax on automation to internalize possible damages to job markets; I never quite bought this idea (I'm not sure we should distinguish types of unemployment when it comes to social insurance), but I find it more attractive if it could be used to fund differential progress.

Larks @ 2022-07-06T20:01 (+10)

Owen has done some related work here and here on pricing research externalities.