Abstract Integrated assessment models (IAMs) exclude individual non-human animal welfare, despite clear evidence that climate change will harm billions of animals through habitat loss, extreme weather, and ecosystem disruption. We argue that this is a significant moral oversight. Further, incorporating animal welfare into IAMs is technically feasible, using traditional economic methods or novel ones. Crucially, accounting for animal welfare in IAMs need not undermine considerations of justice for humans.
Palmer et al. (Sat,) studied this question.