van-asselt-rotmans-2002.html

van Asselt, M. B. A., and Jan Rotmans (2002). "Uncertainty in integrated assessment modelleing: from positivism to pluralism." Climate Change 54: 75-105.

A

Two major categories of uncertainty

variability, of the real world

limited knowledge, of the person analyzing the problem, incomplete information

Sources of variability - see Figure 1

sources of variability
inherent randomness non-linear or chaotic nature of the process
value diversity differences in peopl's mental maps, world views and norm
human behavior non-rational behavior, deviations from normal, or discrepancies between what they say and what they actually do
social non-linear or chaotic nature of social systems linked to the process
technological surprises breakthroughs or qualitatively different technologies
limited knowledge
inexactness lack of ability to measure or measurement error
lack of data lacking data that could have been collected but wasn't
practical immeasurability technically possible to measure but too expensive or other similar reason
conflicting evidence directly contradictory datasets or interpretation
reducible ignorance we don't know what we don't know
indeterminancy we understand enough of the laws governing the processes to know that they lead to unpredictable outcomes
irreducible ignorance we cannot know

 

 

B

Pluralistic Uncertainty Management

Differs from traditional management in that it seeks multiple perspectives

  • perspective = coherent and consistent description of the world that guide them to act

compare the behavior of three socio-cultural perspectives

individualist (market optimist)

egalitarian (environmental worry wart)

hierarchist (controllist)

(see Van Asselt & Rotmans 1996)

address a controvesy or dilemma

  • controversy = different opinions
  • dilemma = forced to make a decision between two options that are both difficult or undesirable

Problem definition

"Can we provide a future world population with enough food, clean water and energy to guarantee a healthy life, while safeguarding our natural resource base?"

Example - looking at water availability and demand

consider:

  • water scarcity models
  • water quality models
  • water supply-cost curves
  • water demand
  • diffusion of new technology
  • partial consumption use
  • sensitivity to climate change

examine alternative interpretations

  • population growth desired
  • limits to population
  • other values and predictions

look at the different perspective descriptions of the problem and management style

hierachist - egalitarian - indivudalist

generate predictions from the model for each type

 

 

 

C

Compare the management styles and worldviews to look for mismatches.

  • where a world view description (think of this a hypothetical reality)
  • is matched up against policy and management approaches that are based on a different worldview
  • i.e. what if the world doesn't work the way you are trying to manage it?
  • look for the best and worst cases:

Table summarizing different worldviews and how they think the climate will react based on a version of nature

  CO2 impact on temperature because nature is
Hierachist amplifying tolerant if kept under control
Egalitarian strong amplification fragile
Individualist high dampening resilient, robust

 

CO2 and temperature relationships are predicted to be:

note that individualist predicts lowest temp increase for medium CO2