  Integrated assessment models have become the primary tools for comparing
climate policies that seek to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Policy
comparisons have often been performed by considering a planner who seeks to
make optimal trade-offs between the costs of carbon abatement and the economic
damages from climate change. The planning problem has been formalized as one of
optimal control, the objective being to minimize the total costs of abatement
and damages over a time horizon. Studying climate policy as a control problem
presumes that a planner knows enough to make optimization feasible, but
physical and economic uncertainties abound. Earlier, Manski, Sanstad, and
DeCanio proposed and studied use of the minimax-regret (MMR) decision criterion
to account for deep uncertainty in climate modeling. Here we study choice of
climate policy that minimizes maximum regret with deep uncertainty regarding
both the correct climate model and the appropriate time discount rate to use in
intergenerational assessment of policy consequences. The analysis specifies a
range of discount rates to express both empirical and normative uncertainty
about the appropriate rate. The findings regarding climate policy are novel and
informative. The MMR analysis points to use of a relatively low discount rate
of 0.02 for climate policy. The MMR decision rule keeps the maximum future
temperature increase below 2C above the 1900-10 level for most of the parameter
values used to weight costs and damages.
