Climatic Change

, Volume 33, Issue 2, pp 139–143

When is it appropriate to combine expert judgments?

An editorial essay
  • David W. Keith
Article

Summary

Rather than seeking improved methodologies, difficulty in combining expert opinion should serve as a warning flag that causes us to seek alternative modes of policy analysis. These alternatives are usually more appropriate for the real audience for our analyses.

Policy analysis of climate change is too often framed in terms that amount to preparing the tools with which a benevolent world dictator could do cost-benefit analysis. This tends to overemphasize end-to-end analysis that must rely on the combined opinions of experts. This framing is unrealistic and encourages omission of important aspects of the climate problem such as its heterogeneity. Rejecting this framing in favor of alternate, less all encompassing, forms of policy analysis permits more robust results, and reduces the emphasis on combining expert opinion.

While the opinions expressed here are my own, I thank Hadi Dowlatabadi, M. Granger Morgan, Ted Parson, and James Risbey for their perceptive comments.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Ayres, R. U.: 1984, ‘Limits and Possibilities of Large-Scale Long-Range Societal Models’, Techno- logical Forecasting and Social Change 25, 297–308.Google Scholar
  2. Dalkey, N. C.: 1967, ‘Delphi’ Rand Corporation paper P-3704, Rand Co., Santa Monica, CA.Google Scholar
  3. Genest, C. and Zidek, J. V.: 1986, ‘Combining Probability Distributions: A Critique and an Annotated Bibliography’, Statistical Science 1, 114–148.Google Scholar
  4. Kantrowitz, A.: 1967, ‘Proposal for an Institution for Scientific Judgment’, Science 156, 763–764.Google Scholar
  5. Lempert, R. J., Schlesinger, M. E., and Bankes, S. C.: 1996, ‘When We Don't Know the Costs or the Benefits: Adaptive Strategies for Abating Climate Change’, Climatic Change 33, 235–274 (this issue).Google Scholar
  6. Morgan, M. G. and Dowlatabadi, H.: 1996, ‘Learning from Integrated Assessment of Climate Change’, Climatic Change, in press.Google Scholar
  7. Morgan, M. G. and Keith, D. W.: 1995, ‘Subjective Judgments by Climate Experts’, Environmental Science and Technology 29, 468–476 A.Google Scholar
  8. Titus, J. G. and Narayanan, V.: 1996, ‘The Probability of Sea-Level Rise’, Climatic Change 33, 151–212 (this issue).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • David W. Keith
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of ChemistryHarvard UniversityCambridgeUSA

Personalised recommendations