IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jomega/v37y2009i6p1051-1062.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Does the best practice of rational-style model-based policy analysis already include ethical considerations?

Author

Listed:
  • Walker, Warren E.

Abstract

This paper deals with ethics in the context of the real-world practice of operations research (OR), once an analyst has taken on the responsibility of carrying out a rational-style model-based policy study for a client. OR models are often used by policy analysts to assist decisionmakers in choosing a good course of action based on multiple (and competing) criteria from among a variety of alternatives under uncertain conditions as part of the policy analysis process. The paper suggests that if applied operations researchers (acting as rational-style model-based policy analysts, and not as policy analysts playing a different role or as policy advocates) use the scientific method and apply the generally accepted best practices of their profession, they will be acting in an ethical manner. It, therefore, describes the steps of a typical rational-style model-based policy analysis study, and specifies the tenets of good practice in each step. It also provides a list of questions and statements that the analyst and those evaluating an analyst's work (both internally and externally) can use to help make sure that the study adheres to the tenets of good practice for rational-style model-based policy analysis and remains within ethical bounds.

Suggested Citation

  • Walker, Warren E., 2009. "Does the best practice of rational-style model-based policy analysis already include ethical considerations?," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 37(6), pages 1051-1062, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jomega:v:37:y:2009:i:6:p:1051-1062
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305-0483(08)00139-4
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. James S. Hodges, 1991. "Six (Or So) Things You Can Do with a Bad Model," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 39(3), pages 355-365, June.
    2. Steve Bankes, 1993. "Exploratory Modeling for Policy Analysis," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 41(3), pages 435-449, June.
    3. Patrick Allen & Bart Bennett & Manuel Carrillo & Bruce Goeller & Warren Walker, 1992. "Quality in Policy Modeling," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 22(4), pages 70-85, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Tommaso Agasisti & Giuseppe Munda & Ralph Hippe, 2019. "Measuring the efficiency of European education systems by combining Data Envelopment Analysis and Multiple-Criteria Evaluation," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 51(2), pages 105-124, June.
    2. Kleijnen, Jack P.C., 2011. "Ethical issues in engineering models : An operations researcher's reflections," Other publications TiSEM 88caba9e-1d78-47d7-9a0b-b, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    3. Hämäläinen, Raimo P. & Lahtinen, Tuomas J., 2016. "Path dependence in Operational Research—How the modeling process can influence the results," Operations Research Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 3(C), pages 14-20.
    4. Calvete, Herminia I. & Galé, Carmen, 2011. "On linear bilevel problems with multiple objectives at the lower level," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 33-40, January.
    5. Lahtinen, Tuomas J. & Hämäläinen, Raimo P., 2016. "Path dependence and biases in the even swaps decision analysis method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 249(3), pages 890-898.
    6. Diekmann, Sven, 2013. "Moral mid-level principles in modeling," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 226(1), pages 132-138.
    7. Ormerod, Richard J. & Ulrich, Werner, 2013. "Operational research and ethics: A literature review," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 228(2), pages 291-307.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Marjolijn Haasnoot & Hans Middelkoop & Astrid Offermans & Eelco Beek & Willem Deursen, 2012. "Exploring pathways for sustainable water management in river deltas in a changing environment," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 115(3), pages 795-819, December.
    2. Kleijnen, Jack P. C., 1995. "Verification and validation of simulation models," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 82(1), pages 145-162, April.
    3. Moallemi, Enayat A. & Elsawah, Sondoss & Ryan, Michael J., 2020. "Strengthening ‘good’ modelling practices in robust decision support: A reporting guideline for combining multiple model-based methods," Mathematics and Computers in Simulation (MATCOM), Elsevier, vol. 175(C), pages 3-24.
    4. Jan Kwakkel & Willem Auping, 2021. "Reaction: A commentary on Lustick and Tetlock (2021)," Futures & Foresight Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 3(2), June.
    5. Moallemi, Enayat A. & Elsawah, Sondoss & Ryan, Michael J., 2020. "Robust decision making and Epoch–Era analysis: A comparison of two robustness frameworks for decision-making under uncertainty," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    6. S Robinson, 2008. "Conceptual modelling for simulation Part I: definition and requirements," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 59(3), pages 278-290, March.
    7. Jan Kwakkel & Gönenç Yücel, 2014. "An Exploratory Analysis of the Dutch Electricity System in Transition," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 5(4), pages 670-685, December.
    8. Warren E. Walker & Marjolijn Haasnoot & Jan H. Kwakkel, 2013. "Adapt or Perish: A Review of Planning Approaches for Adaptation under Deep Uncertainty," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 5(3), pages 1-25, March.
    9. Claralucia Prates Machado & Maria Isabel Wolf Morandi & Miguel Sellitto, 2019. "System Dynamics and Learning Scenarios for Process Improvement and Regional Resilience: A Study in The Footwear Industry of Southern Brazil," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 32(6), pages 663-686, December.
    10. Guido A Veldhuis & Nico M de Reus & Bas MJ Keijser, 2020. "Concept development for comprehensive operations support with modeling and simulation," The Journal of Defense Modeling and Simulation, , vol. 17(1), pages 99-116, January.
    11. Erik Pruyt & Jan H. Kwakkel, 2014. "Radicalization under deep uncertainty: a multi-model exploration of activism, extremism, and terrorism," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 30(1-2), pages 1-28, January.
    12. Jan H. Kwakkel & Erik Pruyt, 2015. "Using System Dynamics for Grand Challenges: The ESDMA Approach," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(3), pages 358-375, May.
    13. Jack P. C. Kleijnen & Susan M. Sanchez & Thomas W. Lucas & Thomas M. Cioppa, 2005. "State-of-the-Art Review: A User’s Guide to the Brave New World of Designing Simulation Experiments," INFORMS Journal on Computing, INFORMS, vol. 17(3), pages 263-289, August.
    14. Evelina Trutnevyte & Céline Guivarch & Robert Lempert & Neil Strachan, 2016. "Reinvigorating the scenario technique to expand uncertainty consideration," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 135(3), pages 373-379, April.
    15. Timothy Wojan & Anil Rupasingha, 2001. "Crisis as Opportunity: Local Context, Adaptive Agents and the Possibilities of Rural Development," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(2), pages 141-152.
    16. Auping, Willem L. & Pruyt, Erik & de Jong, Sijbren & Kwakkel, Jan H., 2016. "The geopolitical impact of the shale revolution: Exploring consequences on energy prices and rentier states," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 390-399.
    17. Hidayatno, Akhmad & Jafino, Bramka Arga & Setiawan, Andri D. & Purwanto, Widodo Wahyu, 2020. "When and why does transition fail? A model-based identification of adoption barriers and policy vulnerabilities for transition to natural gas vehicles," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    18. Seyed Ahmad Reza Mir Mohammadi Kooshknow & Rob den Exter & Franco Ruzzenenti, 2020. "An Exploratory Agent-Based Modeling Analysis Approach to Test Business Models for Electricity Storage," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-14, April.
    19. Altay, Nezih & Green III, Walter G., 2006. "OR/MS research in disaster operations management," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 175(1), pages 475-493, November.
    20. Hackney, Jeremy & Marchal, Fabrice, 2011. "A coupled multi-agent microsimulation of social interactions and transportation behavior," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 45(4), pages 296-309, May.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jomega:v:37:y:2009:i:6:p:1051-1062. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/375/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.