While utility maximisation approaches are used widely, they have been criticised for making unrealistic assumptions. Knowledge is often not freely available, and the limitations of human cognitive capacities are well-documented (van den Bergh et al. 2000). Further well known cognitive biases exist. Bounded rationality relaxes the assumptions of utility optimisation, and aims to predict behaviour based on, for example, heuristics or rules of thumb, which are simple rules that achieve an approximately optimal outcome (Kahneman et al. 1982). Bounded rationality suggests that people engage in a mental search of available options, and choose the first one that is satisfactory (Simon 1956). This so-called satisficing is different from optimizing in that it involves comparing not the outcomes of different choice options, but of each choice option with a set of minimum criteria. Closely linked to bounded rationality is the concept of adaptive heuristics: people develop and use mental shortcuts to identify acceptable options quickly, with a minimal amount of necessary information (Payne et al. 1993).
What actions will an actor take? What consequences will these action have?
Individual decision making is, to a great extent, responsible for how climate (and their changes) affect the study unit.
Individuals take action to maximise utility. Information is not freely available and individuals have limited cognitive abilities.
1. Select of actors and constraints 2. Specify of decision rule for actor
Prediction actions. Consequences of actions.
[text to be added]
Botzen and van der Bergh (2009) use bounded rationality assumptions to estimate risk premiums under different climate change scenarios for the Netherlands. They find estimation results suggest that a profitable flood insurance market could be feasible.
This section is based on the UNEP PROVIA guidance document |
1. | You want to identify adaptation measures. | |
2. | Your focus is on public actors and on individual actions. | |
3. | The actors' potential capacity is high, but the private actors are not adapting autonomously. | |
4. | Adaptation would not conflict with private interests. | |
5. | It is not succificient to describe actors and behaviours. | |
6. | It is assumed that individuals' choice is described by mathematical axioms. | |
7. | It is assumed that individuals do not have full knowledge of outcomes. |