Prospects for the open treatment of uncertainty in environmental research

Author:

Brown James D.1

Affiliation:

1. NOAA/National Weather Service and University Corporation for Atmospheric Research, USA,

Abstract

Current treatments of uncertainty in environmental research embody several myths about the causes and consequences of imperfect knowledge, namely: (1) the dominant role of environmental factors in controlling uncertainty, such as system complexity, non-linearity and space-time variability, rather than social and psychological factors; (2) the primacy of observations in locating, quantifying, and reducing uncertainty; and (3) the value of technical assessments of uncertainty in ‘risk-based decision-making’. While the identification and treatment of specific sources of uncertainty remain impractical in some areas of environmental research, a source-based approach is increasingly used in environmental modeling. Here, selected sources of uncertainty are quantified with probability distributions and propagated to model outputs (a forward problem), while data are used to calibrate these estimates and reduce uncertainty (an inverse problem). More generally, current treatments of uncertainty and risk are dominated by attempts to quantify, minimize, and control uncertainty. Uncertainty is viewed as an ‘information deficit’ to be resolved, rather than an inherent product of conducting research. This paper argues for more open treatments of uncertainty in environmental research. Such openness requires an appreciation of the social and psychological causes of uncertainty, the role of observations as imperfect and contingent expressions of visible events, and the myriad ways in which scientific information can be misinterpreted, misused, or sidelined in environmental decision-making. The paper begins with a discussion of the nature and causes of uncertainty in environmental research. A review of current treatments of uncertainty is followed by an analysis of the source-based approach to assessing uncertainty. Prospects for the open treatment of uncertainty are then discussed in terms of circumventing the three ‘myths of uncertainty’ that characterize recent work in environmental research.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

General Earth and Planetary Sciences,Earth and Planetary Sciences (miscellaneous),Geography, Planning and Development

Reference204 articles.

1. Agnew, C.T. 1995: Desertification, drought and development in the Sahel . In Binns, A., editor, People and environment in Africa, Chichester: Wiley, 137-49.

2. Ensemble forecasting of species distributions

3. An overview of model integration for environmental applications—components, frameworks and semantics

Cited by 35 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3