Researchers slightly lower study’s estimate of drop in global income due to climate change

Category: Science/Environment

Listening

Unlocking Word Meanings

Read the following words/expressions found in today’s article.

  1. overstate / ˌoʊ vərˈsteɪt / (v.) – to say or show that something is bigger, more important, or more serious than it really is
    Example:

    Many advertisements tend to overstate how good some products are.


  2. resilience / rɪˈzɪl yəns / (n.) – the ability to recover quickly from problems, difficulties, or damage
    Example:

    Companies must build financial resilience to survive economic crises.


  3. peer-reviewed / ˌpɪr rɪˈvjud / (adj.) – having been read and checked by other experts in the same industry
    Example:

    The team’s new findings are interesting, but they are not yet peer-reviewed, so researchers can’t fully trust the results.


  4. retraction / rɪˈtræk ʃən / (n.) – an official notice saying that something, such as a published article, study, or statement, is wrong and will be removed or corrected
    Example:

    The newspaper issued a retraction after discovering errors in the article.


  5. inaccuracy / ɪnˈæk yər ə si / (n.) – a mistake in information, numbers, or facts
    Example:

    The company apologized for the inaccuracies in its financial report, which confused investors.


Article

Read the text below.

The authors of a study that examined climate change’s potential effect on the global economy said that data errors led them to slightly overstate an expected drop in income over the next 25 years.


The researchers at Germany’s Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, writing in the journal Nature in 2024, had forecast a 19% drop in global income by 2050. Their revised analysis puts the figure at 17%.


The authors also said in their original work that there was a 99% chance that, by midcentury, it would cost more to fix damage from climate change than it would cost to build resilience. Their new analysis, not yet peer-reviewed, lowered that figure to 91%.


The Associated Press (AP) reported on the original study. Nature posted a retraction of it.


The researchers cited data inaccuracies in the first paper, particularly with underlying economic data for Uzbekistan between 1995 and 1999 that had a large influence on the results, and that their analysis had underestimated statistical uncertainty.


Max Kotz, one of the study’s authors, told the AP that the heart of the study is unchanged: climate change will be enormously damaging to the world economy if unchecked, and that the impact will hit hardest in the lowest-income areas that contribute the fewest emissions, driving the planet’s warming.


Gernot Wagner, a climate economist at Columbia Business School who wasn’t involved with the research, said the thrust of the Potsdam Institute’s work remains the same “no matter which part of the range the true figure will be.”


“Climate change already hits home, quite literally. Home insurance premiums across the U.S. have already seen, in part, a doubling over the past decade alone,” Wagner said. “Rapidly accumulating climate risks will only make the numbers go up even more.”


This article was provided by The Associated Press.


Viewpoint Discussion

Enjoy a discussion with your tutor.

Discussion A

  • According to the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research’s revised analysis, there is a 17% expected drop in global income by 2050 because of climate change. What do you think the situation might be like for businesses if that forecast happens (ex. there might be a lot of job cuts)? Discuss.
  • How might a drop in global income affect our buying power or ability to buy products/services? Discuss.

Discussion B

  • The researchers at Germany’s Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research said that data errors led them to slightly overstate their forecast. How does this retraction affect your trust in researchers? If the new analysis showed a big change from the previous forecast, do you think this will create a negative reaction? Why or why not? Discuss.
  • Max Kotz, one of the study’s authors, said that the heart of the study is unchanged: climate change will be enormously damaging to the world. In this case, do you think it’s necessary to retract the previous research? Why or why not? Discuss.