Uncertainty, imprecision, and the precautionary principle in climate change assessment

2005 ◽  
Vol 52 (6) ◽  
pp. 213-225 ◽  
Author(s):  
M.E. Borsuk ◽  
L. Tomassini

Statistical decision theory can provide useful support for climate change decisions made under conditions of uncertainty. However, the probability distributions used to calculate expected costs in decision theory are themselves subject to uncertainty, disagreement, or ambiguity in their specification. This imprecision can be described using sets of probability measures, from which upper and lower bounds on expectations can be calculated. However, many representations, or classes, of probability measures are possible. We describe six of the more useful classes and demonstrate how each may be used to represent climate change uncertainties. When expected costs are specified by bounds, rather than precise values, the conventional decision criterion of minimum expected cost is insufficient to reach a unique decision. Alternative criteria are required, and the criterion of minimum upper expected cost may be desirable because it is consistent with the precautionary principle. Using simple climate and economics models as an example, we determine the carbon dioxide emissions levels that have minimum upper expected cost for each of the selected classes. There can be wide differences in these emissions levels and their associated costs, emphasizing the need for care when selecting an appropriate class.

Author(s):  
Eugen Pissarskoi

How can we reasonably justify a climate policy goal if we accept that only possible consequences from climate change are known? Precautionary principles seem to offer promising guidelines for reasoning in such epistemic situations. This chapter presents two versions of the precautionary principle (PP) and defends one of them as morally justifiable. However, it argues that current versions of the PP do not allow discrimination between relevant climate change policies. Therefore, the chapter develops a further version of the PP, the Controllability Precautionary Principle (CPP), and defends its moral plausibility. The CPP incorporates the following idea: in a situation when the possible outcomes of the available actions cannot be ranked with regard to their value, the choice between available options for action should rest on the comparison of how well decision makers can control the processes of the implementation of the available strategies.


2002 ◽  
Vol 357 (1420) ◽  
pp. 419-448 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wilson S. Geisler ◽  
Randy L. Diehl

In recent years, there has been much interest in characterizing statistical properties of natural stimuli in order to better understand the design of perceptual systems. A fruitful approach has been to compare the processing of natural stimuli in real perceptual systems with that of ideal observers derived within the framework of Bayesian statistical decision theory. While this form of optimization theory has provided a deeper understanding of the information contained in natural stimuli as well as of the computational principles employed in perceptual systems, it does not directly consider the process of natural selection, which is ultimately responsible for design. Here we propose a formal framework for analysing how the statistics of natural stimuli and the process of natural selection interact to determine the design of perceptual systems. The framework consists of two complementary components. The first is a maximum fitness ideal observer, a standard Bayesian ideal observer with a utility function appropriate for natural selection. The second component is a formal version of natural selection based upon Bayesian statistical decision theory. Maximum fitness ideal observers and Bayesian natural selection are demonstrated in several examples. We suggest that the Bayesian approach is appropriate not only for the study of perceptual systems but also for the study of many other systems in biology.


Author(s):  
Elías Moreno ◽  
Francisco José Vázquez-Polo ◽  
Miguel Ángel Negrín-Hernández

2008 ◽  
Vol 12 (8) ◽  
pp. 291-297 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julia Trommershäuser ◽  
Laurence T. Maloney ◽  
Michael S. Landy

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document