A new study finds that global warming will curb economic growth even in most wealthy countries

"A new study published in Nature by scientists at Stanford and UC Berkeley has made waves for its finding that thus far we have dramatically underestimated the damage human-caused climate change will do to the global economy.

By looking at data from 160 countries across the 50-year period from 1960 to 2010, the authors found that an average local temperature of 13°C (55°F) is economically optimal, particularly for agricultural productivity. That temperature roughly reflects the current climate in many wealthy countries like the USA, Japan, France, and China.

If regional temperatures are cooler, then warming benefits the local economy, but past that peak temperature, warming reduces economic productivity. The robustness of this result is particularly interesting. The study found that it held true for both rich and poor countries, and that the relationship held for both the 1960–1989 and 1990–2010 time frames..."

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2015/oct/27/global-warming-could-be-more-devastating-for-the-economy-than-we-thought

What Are the Economic Consequences of Climate Change?

"The pressing importance of figuring out how rising temperatures will affect people and places around the world. 

When Hurricane Sandy pummeled the east coast of the U.S. and the Caribbean in October 2012 it exposed millions of people and billions of dollars worth of economic assets to the sorts of hazards that might be expected to increase as a result of climate change. An estimated 1.8 million structures and homes were destroyed or damaged, with economic losses exceeding $65 billion.

Among the businesses most negatively affected by Sandy were tourism (losses of more than $1 billion and 10,000 jobs) and small- and medium-scale manufacturing and storage. Retailers, such as clothing firm Eileen Fisher, lost inventory when Sandy flooded warehouses and disrupted supply chains..."

Please follow this link to know more:

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2014/04/the-economic-case-for-acting-on-climate-change/360995/

Climate change is already damaging global economy, report finds

"Economic impact of global warming is costing the world more than $1.2 trillion a year, wiping 1.6% annually from global GDP.

Climate change is already contributing to the deaths of nearly 400,000 people a year and costing the world more than $1.2 trillion, wiping 1.6% annually from global GDP, according to a new study.

The impacts are being felt most keenly in developing countries, according to the research, where damage to agricultural production from extreme weather linked to climate change is contributing to deaths from malnutrition, poverty and their associated diseases.

Air pollution caused by the use of fossil fuels is also separately contributing to the deaths of at least 4.5m people a year, the report found..."

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2012/sep/26/climate-change-damaging-global-economy

A new study finds that global warming will curb economic growth even in most wealthy countries

"A new study published in Nature by scientists at Stanford and UC Berkeley has made waves for its finding that thus far we have dramatically underestimated the damage human-caused climate change will do to the global economy.

By looking at data from 160 countries across the 50-year period from 1960 to 2010, the authors found that an average local temperature of 13°C (55°F) is economically optimal, particularly for agricultural productivity. That temperature roughly reflects the current climate in many wealthy countries like the USA, Japan, France, and China.

If regional temperatures are cooler, then warming benefits the local economy, but past that peak temperature, warming reduces economic productivity. The robustness of this result is particularly interesting. The study found that it held true for both rich and poor countries, and that the relationship held for both the 1960–1989 and 1990–2010 time frames..."

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2015/oct/27/global-warming-could-be-more-devastating-for-the-economy-than-we-thought

Please see...

The costs of Global Warming are tremendous, estimates of course vary but most figures put out are in the trillions. So what does this mean for you and how are you directly affected by these costs?

It’s difficult to answer that question, because the first large-scale study of the economic impact of global warming wasn’t released until recently. But let’s look at some of the data we do have.

In 2007, scientists at the Carnegie Institution measured, over the past 20 years, the annual yields of the world’s six largest crops (which account for 55% of non-meat calories consumed by humans and 70% of total animal feed)—and found that increasingly warmer temperatures led to lower crop yields. Those lower crop yields amounted to a net economic loss of $5 billion a year.

That’s good information, but there was one problem with the Carnegie Institution’s study, however: It looked backward. But by the time the Carnegie Institution’s study was released, another report had begun to gain notoriety: The Stern Review. In this 2006 report, Nicholas Stern, former chief economist of the World Bank, looked forward. His prediction: Climate change will have such a serious impact on economic growth that 1% of global gross domestic product (GDP) will be required to mitigate its effects. That’s a lot of money, given that GDP was almost $70 trillion in 2008, according to the World Bank.

Of course, that wasn’t the end of the discussion. Since the Carnegie Institution’s study and The Stern Review came out, numerous other studies have tried to quantify the economic impact of global warming. And most of these studies have focused on the negative economic impacts of global warming.

For example, in June 2008, the International Energy Agency (IEA) issued its Technology Perspectives report, which concluded that carbon dioxide emissions should be reduced by 50% from 2008 levels. To achieve this, the report projects that $45 trillion in financing will be needed over the next 40 years. That represents about $1 to $2 trillion per year in commercial investment financing.

Another example: In July 2009, Oxfam International released “Suffering the Science—Climate Change, People and Poverty.” This report—which used information gathered from the insurance industry to assess the economic impact of global warming—concluded that trade patterns will likely shift as climate change takes hold. Richer parts of the world will receive a boost, while poorer regions suffer. For example, Oxfam predicted that American agricultural profits will rise by $1.3 billion annually because of climate change, while sub-Saharan Africa will lose $2 billion annually as the viability of one of the region’s staple crops, maize, declined.

Some of these studies on global warming, however, point out that addressing global warming could be more costly that not addressing it. In June 2009, for example, Ben Lieberman, senior policy analyst for energy and environment at the Thomas A. Roe Institute for Economic Policy Studies at The Heritage Foundation, testified before the U.S. Senate that the cap-and-trade approach to addressing global warming—in particular, the Waxman-Markey Cap-and-Trade Bill—inflicts “economic pain.”...

By Editorial Dept

http://oilprice.com/The-Environment/Global-Warming/The-Economic-Impact-Of-Global-Warming.html

economic impacts of climate change

"Damage to property and infrastructure. Sea-level rise, floods, droughts, wildfires, and extreme storms require extensive repair of essential infrastructure such as homes, roads, bridges, railroad tracks, airport runways, power lines, dams, levees, and seawalls.

Lost productivity. Disruptions in daily life related to climate change can mean lost work and school days and harm trade, transportation, agriculture, fisheries, energy production, and tourism. Severe rainfall events and snowstorms can delay planting and harvesting, cause power outages, snarl traffic, delay air travel, and otherwise make it difficult for people to go about their daily business. Climate-related health risks also reduce productivity, such as when extreme heat curtails construction, or when more potent allergies and more air pollution lead to lost work and school days.

Mass migration and security threats. Global warming is likely to increase the number of "climate refugees"—people who are forced to leave their homes because of drought, flooding, or other climate-related disasters. Mass movements of people and social disruption may lead to civil unrest, and might even spur military intervention and other unintended consequences.

Coping costs. Societies may find ways to prepare for and cope with some climate impacts—provided that we do not let our carbon emissions continue unabated. However, even a partial accounting of these measures suggests that coping is likely to be more costly steps to reduce carbon emissions thereby reducing associated climate impacts.

For example, farmers might need to irrigate previously rain-fed areas, cool vulnerable livestock, and manage new or more numerous pests. Local and state governments that taker early steps to ensure that houses are more energy efficient, and build early warning systems for heat waves and disasters and add emergency responders are more likely to cope with extreme events. Governments may also have to build seawalls, contain sewer overflows, and strengthen bridges, subways, and other critical components of the transportation system.

Rebuilding after disasters strike is likely to prove even more costly than these preventive measures, studies show. And these costs do not include those stemming from lives lost and other irreversible consequences of allowing heat-trapping gases to accumulate unchecked in our atmosphere."

http://www.climatehotmap.org/global-warming-effects/economy.html

See please

Simply, it has severe bad effects like biological, chemical, social..

Perhaps the greater changes may occur with areas related with biology that are more sensitive to meteorological variables, either in average as in extreme values, standard deviation, or variance. Some communities of living beings, including humans, seem that are even less predictable than the climate.

Global economy will have great setbacks due to global warming. A temperature increase of 2.50C since industrialization may lead to losses of as much as 2 percent of global economic output, an analysis by the UNIPCC.  Global warming will adversely affect every facet of economy particularly agriculture, health, energy and transportation. World’s agriculture could face a serious decline within this century. An average of 10-35 % decline in agricultural productivity is estimated by 2100. 

Hello Prof. Dr. Abhijit Mitra,

Good Day! I have great pleasure for your kind invitation.

Overall economic productivity is non-linear in temperature for all countries, with productivity peaking at an annual average temperature of 13 °C and declining strongly at higher temperatures.

Temperature change by 2100 may between 1.5°C (2.7F) and 4.8°C (8.6F).

Unmitigated global warming will leave global GDP per capita 23% lower in 2100 than it would be without any warming.

Best

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v527/n7577/full/nature15725.html

http://www.ase.tufts.edu/gdae/education_materials/modules/The_Economics_of_Global_Climate_Change.pdf

It is very difficult to predict economic effects from some of the major changes - loss of habitat, fauna consequently moving to other locations and trying to get established there, sea-level rises. Some changes happen early and surprisingly quickly, others more gradually.

The effects of warming on people's health is another aspect - insect vectors for tropical diseases moving into other areas as they get warmer, heat stress on our bodies, more use of electricity because of needing electric fans and air-conditioning (to prevent heat stress). Better building design should follow, but I suspect that will be slow. The old Queensland house and commercial designs of wide verandas (which shade the walls) and elevating houses on stumps (posts) to allow the flow of air underneath - these traditional designs to encourage air flow and shading of walls were ignored for a few decades when styles more suited to other climates in other parts of Australia became fashionable. Or the veranda was built in to become just another bedroom.

Most of the hottest years on record in my part of the world (Queensland, Australia) have been in the 21st century. Last year was again the hottest on record, month after month. January and February this year were records for heat and I think March was too. April started with maximum daytime temperatures over 30 degrees Celcius here in Ipswich and Brisbane. It is only the last 3 or 4 days that maximum daytime temperatures have been under 30 degrees. mostly 29 degrees, but today it is predicted to be 26 degrees.

I am one of those people who feel the heat very badly and the last few summers, with excessive heat for at least 6 months, have really taken a toll on me. Other people have been complaining of feeling sapped of energy by the unrelenting heat, too.

I am pleased see that more people are carrying reusable water bottles. This should mean that fewer "disposable" bottles of water are being sold and going into landfill, but there seem to be a lot of them everywhere. Perhaps the use of re-usable water bottles still isn't enough to impact on this market. My university discourages the sale of bottled water on campus and has refill points for refilling re-usable bottles. This isn't happening in town.

In addition to Virginia Thorley response, yes I agree that economic effect is hard to predict, and the ongoing movements of people and mass migration to another continent cause by ongoing war conflicts and many other implications which contributes to global warming. As human species, we are very destructive kinds, we change, alter and modified things that suits us instead of working alongside and take care the only planet that we all live and rely on. If things doesn't go in our way, we use heavy machinery  and explosives to dug out the ground (frocking) in the name of economic development and progress. When the temperature change, so as the environment, we consumed so much disposable products to make us feel better ourselves  without thinking about our children and the next generation to come, quite often unnecessary products, we throw away cubic of rubbish to the ocean, in turn polluting our marine life d and dug out fertile agriculture land to build houses. As Virginia stated, we build houses that is not suited to the environment and the climate. Many building developments are focussed on quick economic turn over without thinking the implications. The change has to start from individual and change our mindset.  Furthermore, we are very clever people and we have the knowledge, expertise as well as the resources  to make a difference and direct our energy and resources to benefit as us all. Political governments are there for their own benefits not for the benefits of its people and the environment that sustain us for over a millennia. Though, the environment will recover when the human species are gone on the other hand human cannot survive without the fertile land and its resources.

According to several previous answers, the effect of global warming on the economy is complex and difficult to measure. If one goes by immediate impacts on specific consumption up could be beneficial effects, however they will not be so when changes in the environment affect the scope of food production, biodiversity and preservation of habitats and other phenomena. However, these problems will be both a challenge that can ponder up creativity and industrial machinery whose balances would be seen. balances will be difficult to define and ex-ante occurring processes, coo often the history of mankind highly questionable.

Thanks in advance to Abhijit Mitra on the question, and on this occasion I tried to answer based on understanding the fundamental basis as follows:

Basically global warming is a consequence of human effort in the face of the earth in pursuit of productivity to meet the needs.

Meanwhile, global warming based analysis is a process that takes a long time and anomalies of the accumulated impact of global warming overall.

Rising global temperatures are expected to cause other changes such as rising sea levels, increased intensity of extreme weather phenomena, as well as changes in the amount and pattern of precipitation. The effects of global warming include agricultural output, loss of glaciers and the extinction of various animal species.

On the other hand, GDP is commonly used as an indicator of a country's economic health, as well as the size of a country's standard of living.

Criticism of GDP, adding that the statistics do not take into account the underground economy or unofficially: everything from black market activity to work under-the-table, as well as other transactions that, for various reasons, are not reported to the government. Others criticized the tendency of GDP should be interpreted as a measure of material wealth, but it serves as a measure of productivity of a country, which is not necessarily related.

Based on a fundamental understanding of the above, explained that the GDP or the economy in a particular country is not directly proportional to global warming itself.

Climate variability has a strong influence on disease prevalence and subsequently on the economic wellbeing of the affected households, especially in the low lying Lake Victoria basin of Kenya.

http://www.inderscience.com/info/ingeneral/forthcoming.php?jcode=ijgw

The economics of global warming concerns the economic aspects of global warming; this can inform policies that governments might consider in response. A number of factors make this a difficult problem from both economic and political perspectives: it is a long-term, intergenerational problem; benefits and costs are distributed unequally both within and across countries; and scientific and public opinions may diverge.

http://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/sustainability-and-resource-productivity/our-insights/connecting-climate-change-and-economic-recovery

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economics_of_global_warming

http://phys.org/news/2012-09-global-world-economy.html

http://www.cccep.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/PPBowenetc-economic-slowdown-emissions.pdf

Global warming has affected our economy i.e damage to property and infrastructure, lost productivity, mass migration and security threat, coping costs. That  impacts on sectors of economic development and affect major sources of employment: the chemical, textile, electronics, and automobile industries; retail, health services and real estate.

Dear Abhijit Mitra et all, 

I think that the answers that you have let me with a difficulty to add something new . There are some questions in RG about what is an idea, and then a new idea in relation to your question is hard for me to find.

Could you or anybody help me , because now i am having difficulties in being creative...

Thank you for the knowledge that i get from your interesting question.

Have a nice time

Helena

At this time in Argentina has been raining almost nonstop for more than 15 days and it seems that bad weather will continue. Floods have cost human lives and large crop losses. The problem is attributed to an especially intense El Niño event. The causes of El Niño are still under study.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/El_Ni%C3%B1o

Numerous ways!

Changes in agriculture productivity

Changes in Forest productivity

Changes in Water availability

Health related issues

Changes in Stress level to individual and community

Disturbing social cohesion

The effects are endless and have been described well above. However, the change of attitude depends on the people and I meet a lot who still think climate change is a joke. They just can't see it happening!

This includes some prominent(?) scientists who answer weather/climate questions!!

Therefore, these people will preach inaction and any changes in energy / water savings, etc will be delayed unless governments legislate changes and reduce the use of fossil fuels, etc

Unfortunately, some politicians are among the climate change deniers. A recent Australian Prime Minister was very vocal against the reality of climate change and this attitude affected policies a funding. 

The belief that GLOBAL WARMING HAS INCREASED THE SALE OF SUN SCREEN LOTION, COOLING POWDER, AC etc. is a myth.

Ultimately additional production of these items will again add to global warming.

Please see the bad effects of global warming. Countries near sea already in the process to drown. Countries in the mountain area near glacier like Bhutan are facing of ice melting and floods. whole the world in the danger in years to come.

Unnecessary excessive consumption of resources of natural resources gives rise to excessive production which in turn release more carbon, CFC. It gives rise to wastage of resources. Ultimately it generates pollution.

Though it done more by developed countries, the effect of global warming is faced by all the countries including developing and underdeveloped countries.

More diseases, more droughts are the immediate effects of global warming. It is not GDP and economy that is important, existence of life, nature and civilization is more important.

On one side some don't have water to drink, and others use swimming pool for bathing. Please see outside what is happening to your neighbor before consuming excess commodities.

AC at your home is consuming electricity and releasing CFC, its effect felt by others who are not at fault.

The issue is much much serious than GDP and economy.

Damage to property and infrastructure. Sea-level rise, floods, droughts, wildfires, and extreme storms require extensive repair of essential infrastructure such as homes, roads, bridges, railroad tracks, airport runways, power lines, dams, levees, and seawalls.

Lost productivity. Disruptions in daily life related to climate change can mean lost work and school days and harm trade, transportation, agriculture, fisheries, energy production, and tourism. Severe rainfall events and snowstorms can delay planting and harvesting, cause power outages, snarl traffic, delay air travel, and otherwise make it difficult for people to go about their daily business. Climate-related health risks also reduce productivity, such as when extreme heat curtails construction, or when more potent allergies and more air pollution lead to lost work and school days.

http://www.climatehotmap.org/global-warming-effects/economy.html

Global warming will mainly influence economic growth through drastically reduced or lost productivity, damage to property and infrastructure, mass migration and security threats. Inflation will increase as production is shortened, particularly in agriculture, further weakening real incomes. The negative impacts of global warming and resultant climate change on global economic activity are becoming apparent. Damage to the global capital stock and disruptions to labour supply will reduce productivity and economic activity. Though developing countries will face much of the economic losses owing to their greater reliance on climate sensitive sectors like agriculture, tourism, etc., all countries at some point will lose out to climate change in the long-run.

Yes Dear Markovic, all nations, societies and citizens of the world need to be environmentally-responsible and act accordingly for combating global warming and its devastating consequences including economic fatalities.

For agrarian economy, global warming challenges has impacted severely on raising of agricultural products. Inconsistencies in weather and climate elements has contributed to this.