Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39919041›Full record

ArticlePloS one2025

More than a feeling: A global economic valuation of subjective wellbeing damages resulting from rising temperatures.

Stephan Dietrich, Stafford Nichols

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Stephan DietrichSchool of Business and Economics of Maastricht University and the UNU-MERIT School, Maastricht, Limburg, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-2958-7207
Stafford NicholsThe UNU-MERIT School, Maastricht, Limburg, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-5237-5558

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

When estimating economic and welfare effects from climate change, impact models must make broad assumptions because of a lack of data and the complexity of damage mechanisms. In this paper, we apply a novel approach to try and address this issue. We use an experienced utility approach to measure how extreme heat affects subjective wellbeing. The data comes from a life evaluation question collected on nationally representative surveys covering 160 countries, conducted annually for 13 years. We take advantage of 40 years of variation in daily land surface temperature data, finding that one additional exceptionally hot day significantly lowers wellbeing, by roughly 0.5% on average. This is equivalent to the wellbeing loss resulting from GDP decreasing by several percentage points. The effect size varies substantially between, and within, countries, highlighting the importance of having local data. Further, we analyze the source of wellbeing damages, by looking at income and non-income pathways. Suprisingly, we find that income pathways accounts for only a small proportion of wellbeing damages caused by extreme temperatures. This indicates current models that focus on income pathways are likely missing sources of climate-caused damages.

Indexed as

Climate ChangeHot TemperatureHumansIncomeTemperature

Identifiers

PMID39919041
PMCPMC11805375

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.