IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/orinte/v38y2008i5p382-405.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Polar Bear Population Forecasts: A Public-Policy Forecasting Audit

Author

Listed:
  • J. Scott Armstrong

    (The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104)

  • Kesten C. Green

    (Business and Economic Forecasting, Monash University, Victoria 3800, Australia)

  • Willie Soon

    (Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138)

Abstract

Calls to list polar bears as a threatened species under the United States Endangered Species Act are based on forecasts of substantial long-term declines in their population. Nine government reports were written to help US Fish and Wildlife Service managers decide whether or not to list polar bears as a threatened species. We assessed these reports based on evidence-based (scientific) forecasting principles. None of the reports referred to sources of scientific forecasting methodology. Of the nine, Amstrup et al. [Amstrup, S. C., B. G. Marcot, D. C. Douglas. 2007. Forecasting the rangewide status of polar bears at selected times in the 21st century. Administrative Report, USGS Alaska Science Center, Anchorage, AK.] and Hunter et al. [Hunter, C. M., H. Caswell, M. C. Runge, S. C. Amstrup, E. V. Regehr, I. Stirling. 2007. Polar bears in the Southern Beaufort Sea II: Demography and population growth in relation to sea ice conditions. Administrative Report, USGS Alaska Science Center, Anchorage, AK.] were the most relevant to the listing decision, and we devoted our attention to them. Their forecasting procedures depended on a complex set of assumptions, including the erroneous assumption that general circulation models provide valid forecasts of summer sea ice in the regions that polar bears inhabit. Nevertheless, we audited their conditional forecasts of what would happen to the polar bear population assuming , as the authors did, that the extent of summer sea ice would decrease substantially during the coming decades. We found that Amstrup et al. properly applied 15 percent of relevant forecasting principles and Hunter et al. 10 percent. Averaging across the two papers, 46 percent of the principles were clearly contravened and 23 percent were apparently contravened. Consequently, their forecasts are unscientific and inconsequential to decision makers. We recommend that researchers apply all relevant principles properly when important public-policy decisions depend on their forecasts.

Suggested Citation

  • J. Scott Armstrong & Kesten C. Green & Willie Soon, 2008. "Polar Bear Population Forecasts: A Public-Policy Forecasting Audit," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 38(5), pages 382-405, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:orinte:v:38:y:2008:i:5:p:382-405
    DOI: 10.1287/inte.1080.0383
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/inte.1080.0383
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/inte.1080.0383?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Schnaars, Steven P. & Bavuso, R. Joseph, 1986. "Extrapolation models on very short-term forecasts," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 14(1), pages 27-36, February.
    2. Armstrong, J. Scott & Green, Kesten C. & Jones, Randall J. & Wright, Malcolm, 2008. "Predicting elections from politicians’ faces," MPRA Paper 9150, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. JS Armstrong, 2004. "The Seer-Sucker Theory: The Value of Experts in Forecasting," General Economics and Teaching 0412009, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Kesten C. Green & J. Scott Armstrong, 2007. "Global Warming: Forecasts by Scientists Versus Scientific Forecasts," Energy & Environment, , vol. 18(7), pages 997-1021, December.
    5. Robert Fildes & Paul Goodwin, 2007. "Against Your Better Judgment? How Organizations Can Improve Their Use of Management Judgment in Forecasting," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 37(6), pages 570-576, December.
    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. Armstrong, J. Scott & Green, Kesten C. & Graefe, Andreas, 2015. "Golden rule of forecasting: Be conservative," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(8), pages 1717-1731.
    2. Steven C. Amstrup & Hal Caswell & Eric DeWeaver & Ian Stirling & David C. Douglas & Bruce G. Marcot & Christine M. Hunter, 2009. "Rebuttal of “Polar Bear Population Forecasts: A Public-Policy Forecasting Audit”," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 39(4), pages 353-369, August.
    3. Green, Kesten C & Armstrong, J Scott & Soon, Willie, 2008. "Benchmark forecasts for climate change," MPRA Paper 12163, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    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. Armstrong, J. Scott & Green, Kesten C. & Graefe, Andreas, 2015. "Golden rule of forecasting: Be conservative," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(8), pages 1717-1731.
    2. Baecke, Philippe & De Baets, Shari & Vanderheyden, Karlien, 2017. "Investigating the added value of integrating human judgement into statistical demand forecasting systems," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 191(C), pages 85-96.
    3. Fildes, Robert & Goodwin, Paul & Onkal, Dilek, 2015. "Information use in supply chain forecasting," MPRA Paper 66034, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Leitner, Johannes & Leopold-Wildburger, Ulrike, 2011. "Experiments on forecasting behavior with several sources of information - A review of the literature," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 213(3), pages 459-469, September.
    5. Fildes, Robert & Goodwin, Paul & Lawrence, Michael & Nikolopoulos, Konstantinos, 2009. "Effective forecasting and judgmental adjustments: an empirical evaluation and strategies for improvement in supply-chain planning," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 3-23.
    6. Suripto & Supriyanto, 2021. "The Effect of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Stock Prices with the Event Window Approach: A Case Study of State Gas Companies, in the Energy Sector," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 11(3), pages 155-162.
    7. Fildes, Robert & Petropoulos, Fotios, 2015. "Simple versus complex selection rules for forecasting many time series," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(8), pages 1692-1701.
    8. Syntetos, Aris A. & Nikolopoulos, Konstantinos & Boylan, John E. & Fildes, Robert & Goodwin, Paul, 2009. "The effects of integrating management judgement into intermittent demand forecasts," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(1), pages 72-81, March.
    9. Daniel E Re & David W Hunter & Vinet Coetzee & Bernard P Tiddeman & Dengke Xiao & Lisa M DeBruine & Benedict C Jones & David I Perrett, 2013. "Looking Like a Leader–Facial Shape Predicts Perceived Height and Leadership Ability," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(12), pages 1-10, December.
    10. Cedric A. Lehmann & Christiane B. Haubitz & Andreas Fügener & Ulrich W. Thonemann, 2022. "The risk of algorithm transparency: How algorithm complexity drives the effects on the use of advice," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 31(9), pages 3419-3434, September.
    11. Fildes, Robert & Goodwin, Paul, 2021. "Stability in the inefficient use of forecasting systems: A case study in a supply chain company," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 1031-1046.
    12. Franses, Philip Hans & Legerstee, Rianne, 2013. "Do statistical forecasting models for SKU-level data benefit from including past expert knowledge?," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 80-87.
    13. Kesten C. Green & J. Scott Armstrong, 2004. "Value of Expertise For Forecasting Decisions in Conflicts," Monash Econometrics and Business Statistics Working Papers 27/04, Monash University, Department of Econometrics and Business Statistics.
    14. De Baets, Shari & Harvey, Nigel, 2018. "Forecasting from time series subject to sporadic perturbations: Effectiveness of different types of forecasting support," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 163-180.
    15. Palmeira, Mauricio, 2020. "Advice in the presence of external cues: The impact of conflicting judgments on perceptions of expertise," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 82-96.
    16. Franses, Ph.H.B.F., 2009. "Forecasting Sales," Econometric Institute Research Papers EI 2009-29, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Erasmus School of Economics (ESE), Econometric Institute.
    17. Athanasopoulos, George & Hyndman, Rob J. & Song, Haiyan & Wu, Doris C., 2011. "The tourism forecasting competition," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 822-844.
    18. Green, Kesten C. & Armstrong, J. Scott, 2015. "Simple versus complex forecasting: The evidence," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(8), pages 1678-1685.
    19. Youssef Boulaksil & Philip Hans Franses, 2009. "Experts' Stated Behavior," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 39(2), pages 168-171, April.
      • Boulaksil, Y. & Franses, Ph.H.B.F., 2008. "Experts' Stated Behavior," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2008-001-MKT, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    20. R Fildes & K Nikolopoulos & S F Crone & A A Syntetos, 2008. "Forecasting and operational research: a review," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 59(9), pages 1150-1172, September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    adaptation; bias; climate change; decision making; endangered species; expert opinion; extinction; evaluation; evidence-based principles; expert judgment; forecasting methods; global warming; habitat loss; mathematical models; scientific method; sea ice;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C53 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric Modeling - - - Forecasting and Prediction Models; Simulation Methods
    • H0 - Public Economics - - General
    • C5 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric Modeling
    • C0 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - General
    • H23 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Externalities; Redistributive Effects; Environmental Taxes and Subsidies
    • C4 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods: Special Topics

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:inm:orinte:v:38:y:2008:i:5:p:382-405. 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: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    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.