School of Geography and the Environment

Header Image

MSc Environmental Change and Management:
Reflecting on the dissertation process

By Håkon Sælen and Jennifer Helgeson (2007)
Supervised by Dr. Cameron Hepburn

Writing a 15,000 word dissertation was a pretty frightening prospect when we first enrolled in the MSc ECM. As it turned out, it did involve quite a lot of hard work, but it was also a greatly rewarding experience that has opened many doors for the both of us. To get through the process, it is important to find: 1. a truly intriguing subject, and 2. a supervisor that is engaged and cares about the work you propose. We were lucky enough to do both.

In the whirlwind surrounding the Stern Review we found ourselves swept up in the debate over a single variable in the standard economics framework of climate change analysis. It is key in determining the discount rate used in economic modeling aimed at answering one of the most important political questions of our time is: how much and at what rate should we reduce green house gas emissions in order to mitigate climate change?

Our work focuses on determining public’s valuation over three key ethical judgments:

1. How much risk should be taken with the future economy?
2. How should impacts on poor people be weighed relative to impacts on their rich contemporaries?
3. How much weight should be given to rich generations relative to poorer ones?

The standard economic framework assumes that all of these questions must be answered in the same way. In fact, it all boils down to the choice of one single parameter. This implies that the level of aversion against risk must be the same as the level of aversion against income inequality both within and across generations. In the Climate Ethics Survey, we set out to test whether this assumption can be said to reflect the attitudes of the general public. The survey asks a series of questions aimed at eliciting repsondents’ level of aversion against risk and inequality. The survey was administered online, and was completed by over 3500 respondents from 92 different countries. (View questionnaire here.) The results suggest that people view the three different questions as distinct. A new framework which is better suited for incorporating such attitudes is suggested.

It is somewhat unusual for students to work together on the dissertations, but the few people who have done so have been very successful. We designed the survey and analysed the data together, but took care to differentiate our research questions, and the final write-up was done individually. We found that working as a pair enabled us to carry out a much more extensive project than we could have done on our own. In addition, it was more enjoyable to work together with someone than alone.

There were definite ups and downs in the dissertation process, but the work was truly worthwhile. The frameworks and models underlying our dissertations, not to mention on-line programming were completely new to us! We took on a challenge, not the safe bet for our dissertation work, and stood to gain a great deal. The key for us in overcoming the many challenges was to involve people with expertise in different fields. This is something we would encourage future candidates to do. Most people are happy to help, and it will greatly enhance the quality of your dissertation.

We plan to continue working on developing the research started by our dissertations, with the aim of presenting at different conferences and publishing in academic journals.

You can read both dissertations online as well as shortened summaries of their findings. (See downloads below)

Jennifer has taken the position of environmental economist at the Office of Applied Economics, National Institute of Standards and Technology.

Håkon has taken the position of research assistant at the Center for International Climate and Environmental Research – Oslo.