Guest essay by Eric Worrall
A new study claims that people who live in tropical climates can’t be as productive as people who live in temperate climates – that 13c (55F) is the optimum temperature for human productivity. In the press release, the researchers further claim that warmer temperatures lead to poorer school results and more violence.
The abstract of the study;
Growing evidence demonstrates that climatic conditions can have a profound impact on the functioning of modern human societies, but effects on economic activity appear inconsistent. Fundamental productive elements of modern economies, such as workers and crops, exhibit highly non-linear responses to local temperature even in wealthy countries. In contrast, aggregate macroeconomic productivity of entire wealthy countries is reported not to respond to temperature, while poor countries respond only linearly. Resolving this conflict between micro and macro observations is critical to understanding the role of wealth in coupled human–natural systems and to anticipating the global impact of climate change. Here we unify these seemingly contradictory results by accounting for non-linearity at the macro scale. We show that overall economic productivity is non-linear in temperature for all countries, with productivity peaking at an annual average temperature of 13 °C and declining strongly at higher temperatures. The relationship is globally generalizable, unchanged since 1960, and apparent for agricultural and non-agricultural activity in both rich and poor countries. These results provide the first evidence that economic activity in all regions is coupled to the global climate and establish a new empirical foundation for modelling economic loss in response to climate change, with important implications. If future adaptation mimics past adaptation, unmitigated warming is expected to reshape the global economy by reducing average global incomes roughly 23% by 2100 and widening global income inequality, relative to scenarios without climate change. In contrast to prior estimates, expected global losses are approximately linear in global mean temperature, with median losses many times larger than leading models indicate.
Read more: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nature15725.html
According to the Washington Post;
Culling together economic and temperature data for over 100 wealthy and poorer countries alike over 50 years, the researchers assert that the optimum temperature for human productivity is seems to be around 13 degrees Celsius or roughly 55 degrees Fahrenheit, as an annual average for a particular place. Once things get a lot hotter than that, the researchers add, economic productivity declines “strongly.”
“The relationship is globally generalizable, unchanged since 1960, and apparent for agricultural and non-agricultural activity in both rich and poor countries,” write the authors, led by Marshall Burke of Stanford’s Department of Earth System Science, who call their study “the first evidence that economic activity in all regions is coupled to the global climate.” Burke published the study with Solomon Hsiang and Edward Miguel, economists at the University of California, Berkeley.
…
Assuming this relationship between temperature and productivity is correct, that naturally leads to deep questions about its cause. The researchers locate them in two chief places: agriculture and people. In relation to rising temperature, Burke says, “We see that agricultural productivity declines, labor productivity declines, kids do worse on tests, and we see more violence.”
…
However, the new work has already drawn criticism — University of Sussex economist Richard Tol called it “hugely problematic” in an email to the Post — so it remains to be seen what other researchers make of the work.
Even if we accept the study at face value, according to the abstract, unmitigated warming is expected to reshape the global economy by reducing average global incomes roughly 23% by 2100 and widening global income inequality, relative to scenarios without climate change.
Given that the global economy is growing at around 1% per annum per capita, a simple projection still yields a 130% increase in per capita income by 2100 under BAU. A 23% reduction to a 130% gain doesn’t seem such a big deal, in the scheme of things.
(1 + 0.01)85 years = 2.3
2.3 (230%) – the original 100% = 130% gain
I’m concerned that this study may be ignoring a lot of political and historical context. If an equivalent study was performed in the age of the Roman Empire, when much of the world’s economic activity centred on warm countries like Italy and Egypt, it seems likely that the calculated “optimum economic temperature” would have been significantly higher than 13c (55F)
However the simplest criticism of the study is the irrefutable fact that humans are physiologically optimised to extreme tropical conditions.
How would you feel, right now, if you took all your clothes off outdoors? You might feel embarrassed – but that is a cultural response. What you would most likely feel is cold, unless it was a hot day.
We all wear clothes, for comfort, style, and most importantly, to protect ourselves from the cold. Even in my home town on the edge of the tropics, certainly in winter, and for at least part of the Summer, people have to wear clothes, otherwise they get uncomfortably cold.
If you become too hot, such as when performing outdoor physical labour on a hot day, you can adjust your clothing to optimise your body temperature, say by swapping a long sleeve shirt for a t-shirt, wearing shorts, or in extreme cases by peeling down to not much clothing at all. I’ve mowed a large hilly multi-acre lawn with a petrol push mower, on days when the temperature exceeded 110F (45c). I’ll spare you the image of what I was wearing on those days.
My point is, humans are physiologically well adjusted to handling very hot weather, without adverse effects, providing we are acclimatised, providing we stay hydrated, and providing we dress appropriately for the weather. In any climate cooler than the extreme tropics where humans evolved, we have to wear clothes pretty much continuously, to protect ourselves from the cold.
Suggesting that productivity inevitably drops off, as we approach our physiological optimum environmental temperature, in my opinion is just plain silly.
As for the productivity of other plants and animals on which we depend, tropical countries are characterised by their superabundance of natural life, including food plants and animals. Some staple crops such as oats might like it cold – but there is plenty of edible farm produce which thrives in the heat.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

There’s very little that’s as lovely and delicious as the well-constructed, beautifully crafted expression of an abstraction.
-William Rosen
“The Most Powerful Idea in the World: A Story of Steam, Industry, and Invention”
New York, New York 2010.
An excerpt—
“This is why Rocket’s moment in history is unique. That soot-blackened locomotive sits squarely at the deflection point where a line describing human productivity (and therefore human welfare) that had been as flat as Kansas for a hundred centuries made a turn like the business end of a hockey stick. Rocket is when humanity finally learned to run twice as fast.
It’s still running today. If you examined the years since 1800 in twenty year-increments, and charted every way that human welfare can be expressed in numbers— not just annual per capita GDP, which climbed to more than $6,000 by 2000, but mortality at birth (in fact, mortality at any age); calories consumed; prevalence of disease; average height of adults; percentage of lifetime spent disabled; percentage of population enrolled in primary, secondary, and postsecondary education; illiteracy; and annual hours of leisure time— the chart will show every measure better at the end of the period than it was at the beginning. And the phenomenon isn’t restricted to Europe and North America; the same improvements have occurred in every region of the world. A baby born in France in 1800 could expect to live thirty years— twenty-five years less than a baby born in the Republic of the Congo in 2000. The nineteenth century French infant would be at a significant risk of starvation, infectious disease, and violence, and even if he or she were to survive into adulthood, would be far less likely to learn how to read…”
55F and no sun doesn’t make me happy. 55F and sun is moderately nice.. but the plants around my area in the south east don’t like to grow much at 55F
No wonder the world fell to pieces at the end of the little ice age — productivity all over the world plummeted as temperatures rose.
If an equivalent study was performed in the age of the Roman Empire, when much of the world’s economic activity centred on warm countries like Italy and Egypt.
____________________________________
And Syria.
The Levant was perhaps the richest region in the Empire (outside Rome). It had the major cities of the Judaean Decapolis. It had the largest temple in the Empire at Baalbeck in Lebanon. And it had the most expensive temple in the Empire at Palmyra (which was destroyed just last month, by ISIS).
The poverty of the region in our era was caused solely by the new Mos administration which took over in the 7th century and decimated and enslaved the populations. And thier long term mal-administration and over taxation led to further economic and population declines. Just in the region around Aleppo, the result was the 700 ‘Dead Cities of Aleppo’, which are still standing and still lie abandoned.
R
Wow! What a coincidence that 15C is just 1 degree less than the global average of 16C. We’d better cool the planet down to it’s 97% certainty ‘comfort zone’ of 15C.
Oops! I mean cool it three degrees! Wow, I knew I felt uncomfortably hot!
Does anyone know how much was paid to Marshall Burke, Solomon M. Hsiang & Edward Miguel for producing this idiocy masquerading as ‘science?’ [And who paid it?]
More evidence that one can come up with whatever result they want with their research.
And surprise, surprise, the WApost article was penned by Chris Mooney.
I should submit a grant request for researching the same topic.
Outline of experimental protocol:
Conduct a survey of people from around the world.
Survey questions:
1) At what temperature do you feel
– most comfortable?
– most productive?
2) What is your annual income?
Bet I’ll get more accurate results than those Berkeley clowns. I also bet 55F will not be the most frequent answer. (Did these guys conduct their modeling in a wine cellar?)
My guess: the ‘research’ accomplished at a temp more than 55 degrees!
The computer models have spoken…the science is settled.
The purpose of the paper is provide more drivel from the media to convince the public of the calamities they face if we don’t do exactly what our progressive “leaders” demand.
The propaganda is on here:
http://www.wired.com/2015/10/climate-change-is-going-to-cost-the-world-money-lots-of-money/
13 deg C would mean our heating would be on all the time. Doesn’t sound very efficient to me. It’s a bit low for office temperatures.
My first reaction was that this paper asserts that the Earth was too warm in the 20th century for “optimal” economic performance (20th c global average approx 13.9 C). But then I realized that taking out sea surface temps (not a lot of factories, farms or office buildings out there) reduces the relevant 20th century global annual average (land only) to about 8.5 C. And 2014 land temps were already 1 C above the 20th century’s chilly average.
Thank God for global warming — soon we’ll all be rich!
https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/201413
They forgot that higher temperatures also cause more body odor. Maybe clothespin manufacturers can get a subsidy?
That clearly proves that Russians MUST be most productive people on surface of the Earth!
Winter time the house thermostats (7 zones) are set at maybe 64 F, 62 F at night. Sweater weather. 55 F is too cold. Jackets, sweaters, gloves, lap blankets. Ask anybody who has actually lived, camped, hiked, fished, or worked in 55 F.
Singapore’s founding leader, Lee Kwan Yew, said that the biggest non governmental impact on Singapore was air conditioning:
Question: Anything else besides multicultural tolerance that enabled Singapore’s success?
Answer: Air conditioning. Air conditioning was a most important invention for us, perhaps one of the signal inventions of history. It changed the nature of civilization by making development possible in the tropics.
Without air conditioning you can work only in the cool early-morning hours or at dusk. The first thing I did upon becoming prime minister was to install air conditioners in buildings where the civil service worked. This was key to public efficiency.
I guess that’s why Detroit is so prosperous and Singapore so poor.
If Singapore was not the air conditioned nation, I am sure it would not be nearly so successful. Thanks for making the exact same point as I did using sarcasm.
Chris,
Poor nations have air conditioning, too.
Also, I’d be interested in the provenance of that 12:07 pm quote. Got a link?
Adding a tidbit. Maslow.
Many many people do not have safety. Many many of the people who do, don’t remember how essential it is.
One of the authors is a Berkeley economist, so hopefully they controlled for all the well documented factors which affect production – as in total factor productivity. But the references listed do not contain any obvious mentions of standard papers in this large literature, unless these have been incorporated into the climate economics papers listed. Unfortunately, with climate-related polemic research one fears the worst!
Tough day facilitating a knotty issue with difficult people, but we broke thru with a critical thinking approach. Gives me hope.
While at the table my mind drifted off to the wacko piece of optimum temp. I ended up thinking about what endpoint would/could/should be measured concerning “productivity”. As things have it, they had a guppy tank full with lots of little guppies. Not knowing these things, I asked, all things being equal, what is the optimum temp for a guppy pop explosion. Turns out something in the range of 74 to 78 works just fine.
So, all things being equal, what is the optimum breeding temperature range for humans ?
Seems like it would be VERY difficult to be productive if temperatures were never warm enough for most fruit and vegetables to produce seeds.
I know what temperature my current mate likes in order to bump uglies. I also know what foods my mate likes. If I was in copulation mode, I’d create a controlled climate that allowed me to get both. In a post CAGW reality, I’ll have to do that with minimal carbon footprint. Obviously, I’ve gone off on a tangent, but it does make me think hard about to what ends we are headed.
History shows that farming technology leads development. If you can feed your community well, then free time for a well fed community leads to development in other technologies. Next to develop is military technology and many times have invaders then created an empire that reinvigorated development.
Egypt, Babylon, China and India lead the way in good grain growing areas. Ancient Greece, Persians and Rome came next and they relied on imported grain. From then on, you get invaders from further north that could feed its people, grow a population and develop military technologies. After they were invaded by Germanic tribes, Mongols, Turks and the Norse, did the original areas of learning get another boost and the north develop arts and learning.
Then in modern times, the development of grains that grow in colder regions (rye and oats) along with importation of wheat meant that a large population could be kept fed with food that could be stored in the north. The northern areas in Europe and N. America were better for growing other foods such as meat and dairy, with a lot of down time in the winter. I think this is where the big difference in the development between north and south came about when the industrial revolution started – a well fed population that was bored and a wealthy elite to sponsor learning and development of industry, who also needed a product to sell to the warmer grain growing regions. Then you get a the modern culture of value adding and need for order.
Australia was then settled, and Sydney with a daily mean of just under 17°C is the premier city for industry and learning, with Melbourne a close second and having a climate close to that of Athens than Paris. A long last out of the capital cities is Hobart with a daily mean of 13!
There was a thriving human population in what is now Australia ~60,000ya. Temperatures didn’t seem to affect them at all.
Clearly these globalist hacks haven’t read Jared Diamonds Pulitzer Prize winning work “Guns, Germs, and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies”.
Global, global, F-ing global! The word appears ten times in the abstract, five in the last two sentences of the drivelling tripe.
so do we condemn the planet for failing to maintain the optimum temperature over its long pre-industrial existence – and should we now attempt to manipulate the weather/climate to that end now that we have become so powerful & infallible /sarc
I spent a few years in northern Nigeria mapping the geology of large tracts of the country. I worked virtually every day during the dry season in dry savanna country in 40+C on one to two day compass traverses without an assistant. My field house was two round mud huts enclosed in an outer mud wall to make a race-track shaped thatch-covered structure. My most prized equipment was a deep, concrete bathtub that I asked to be filled for the evening before I returned along with a small bundle of sticks for cooking up my meal.
A long lingering bath, a liter of tea (I only had a quart canteen of water for the day’s work – so much for everyone here these days hydrating themselves even if they are walking to the grocery store!). My first smoke of the day in the bathtub – “3-Rings” cigarettes, followed by my second and final meal of the day and I was rejuvenated. I spent the evening plotting geology on the base map and examining the load of rocks I had collected and put permanent labels on. Sleep came in minutes after getting under the mosquito netting. I was just as productive there as I was in northern Canada for many years. Ditto for developing a dimension stone quarry and sawing plant near Moshi, Tanzania at the foot of Kilimanjaro, evaluating lode and placer gold and tin in Benin and Togo years later. I got acclimatized quickly and was a mean, lean working machine from the Arctic Circle in Canada, the desert in Nevada and the equatorial band in Africa. Unremarkably, where I live, in my body my temperature averages 37C.
GP
Ah, the puritan work ethic. While it may be a popular form of measuring productivity, it’s not for many others.
It can be argued that many of our routines mimic certain primate behavoirs. Check out Macachiavellian Intelligence by Maestripieri. You’ll be lightly entertained.
Certain monkey clans like the rhesus are happy to let up in coming lower status monkeys do the hard work while lounging around attempting to seduce females. And the females hedging their bets will mate with multiple up in coming monkeys … of course behind the bushes while other females distract certain males.
The book is a good read because in addition to being well written, it allows humans like me to step outside themselves and see perhaps how others view the purpose of life.
Knute, thank you for your pleasant reply; I believe I would be entertained by this book. The work ethic is, of course, learned. If you have 100 ha wheat farm, well you do the work you need to do to harvest it. If you are a sailor, you can’t stop halfway. Mapping geology is not unlike that. I noted also farmers in Nigeria working from dawn to dusk.
My obvious point was that the thesis of the article under discussion says more about its racist authors than it does about climate and productivity. Regarding more indolent clever monkeys, we in fact seem to have come from such a strain. Our inventiveness seems to be driven by the desire to reduce the work load and increase leisure. I certainly haven’t been constrained overly strongly by puritan ethics that would deny me the warm company of interested females.
GP
Thanks for the kind acknowledgement. Collegiate banter is undervalued in a polarized society.
“My obvious point was that the thesis of the article under discussion says more about its racist authors than it does about climate and productivity.”
Point taken. I forget who quoted Hoffer here, but it spurred me to reread The True Believers. Also encourage this read as it does a fine job in trying to explain this concept of mass movements (re CAGW) and what may motivate them.
After rereading the book, it dawned on me that the greatest period of economic wealth creation has perhaps unintentionally also created a new generation of disillusioned folks. These folks having been raised in this opulent time may have become disillusioned with the happiness it offered and were (are) susceptible to psuedoscience solutions to a new happiness.
It’s a quick read as Hoffer was a no nonsense Longshoreman.
They probably consider churning out global warming drivel as “productive”.