Rethinking climate impacts through human wellbeing

Human wellbeing is increasingly recognized as a better benchmark for sustainable development than GDP. Yet, while GDP is losing its prominence as a measure of wellbeing, climate impacts are still mostly assessed in monetary terms, most notably through the social cost of carbon, which is based solely on economic damage. The study, titled “Wellbeing cost of carbon” and published in Global Sustainability, takes an important step toward measuring climate impacts in terms that matter directly to people by shifting the focus from economic output to human wellbeing itself.

Linking climate, society, and human wellbeing

Using a global systems model together with the Years of Good Life (YoGL) indicator developed at IIASA, the researchers show how climate change, economic development, and social conditions combined shape long-term human wellbeing. Years of Good Life measures how many years individuals can expect to live in good physical and cognitive health, above poverty, and with overall life satisfaction.

By explicitly modeling feedbacks between natural, human, and economic capital and Years of Good Life, the analysis provides the first quantitative estimation of the core equation of sustainability science using an empirically grounded and intuitive wellbeing metric, going well beyond earlier approaches that could not clearly trace how environmental change affects wellbeing over time.

Key results: up to 11.3 Years of Good Life at stake

The results show that strong climate action could increase individual wellbeing by up to 10.4 Years of Good Life on average, while high-emissions pathways could reduce lifetime wellbeing by as much as 11.3 years. Younger generations face the highest marginal wellbeing losses from today’s emissions, highlighting pronounced intergenerational inequities. The analysis also reveals gender differences, with men experiencing higher marginal wellbeing losses per unit of carbon emitted, despite women often having lower overall wellbeing levels.

“Our study demonstrates that wellbeing can be modeled in a forward-looking and integrated way, capturing the links between climate change, the economy, and social development,” says study author and IIASA Senior Research Scholar, Sibel Eker. “For policymakers, the approach offers a way to compare climate and development pathways, with human wellbeing – not just economic output – at the center of decision-making.”

“For the first time, we can quantify how changes in climate and other forms of natural, human or economic capital translate into gains or losses in human wellbeing across generations and genders. It is time to think about the wellbeing cost of carbon instead of focusing only on economic costs, because what ultimately matters is how today’s emissions shape the quality of life of future generations,” concludes IIASA Distinguished Emeritus Research Scholar and coauthor, Wolfgang Lutz.

Reference
Eker, S., Reiter, C., Liu, Q., Kuhn, M., Lutz, W. (2026). Wellbeing cost of carbon. Global Sustainability DOI: 10.1017/sus.2025.10042