AI 中文总结
研究气候适应程度对经济评估很关键，经济学家常用长期差分与固定效应估计量比较来衡量，但二者都不一致，其差异会低估适应程度，标准检验功效不足，经校准模拟显示差异会使适应程度低估30% - 80%。
AI 中文摘要
理解我们适应气候变化的程度对于未来气候损害的经济评估至关重要。经济学家越来越多地使用长期差分和固定效应估计量之间的比较来衡量气候适应性。我们表明这种比较可能会产生误导。两种估计量对于其预期参数都不一致，因为长期差分（LD）和固定效应（FE）估计量都是对气候和天气的长期与短期响应的加权平均值。因此，两者之间的差异低估了真实的适应程度，基于此差异的标准检验——在控制规模的同时——在研究人员通常遇到的情况下往往功效严重不足。一个经经验校准的模拟表明，这种差异会使适应程度低估约30% - 80%，具体取决于平均窗口。
英文摘要
Understanding the degree to which we are able to adapt to climate change is central to economic assessments of future climate damages. Economists increasingly use comparisons between long differences and fixed effects estimators to measure climate adaptation. We show that such comparisons can be misleading. Neither estimator is consistent for its intended parameter, as both the long-difference (LD) and fixed effects (FE) estimands are weighted averages of the long- and short-run responses to climate and weather. As a result, the difference between the two understates the true extent of adaptation, and the standard test based on this difference --while controlling size -- tends to be substantially underpowered in the settings researchers typically encounter. An empirically-calibrated simulation shows this difference understates adaptation by about 30--80%, depending on the averaging window.
