IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/riskan/v25y2005i5p1109-1120.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How Much Uncertainty is Too Much and How Do We Know? A Case Example of the Assessment of Ozone Monitor Network Options

Author

Listed:
  • Cynthia H. Stahl
  • Alan J. Cimorelli

Abstract

Limited time and resources usually characterize environmental decision making at policy organizations such as the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. In these climates, addressing uncertainty, usually considered a flaw in scientific analyses, is often avoided. However, ignoring uncertainties can result in unpleasant policy surprises. Furthermore, it is important for decisionmakers to know how defensible a chosen policy option is over other options when the uncertainties of the data are considered. The purpose of this article is to suggest an approach that is unique from other approaches in that it considers uncertainty in two specific ways—the uncertainty of stakeholder values within a particular decision context and data uncertainty in the light of the decision‐contextual data–values relationship. It is the premise of this article that the interaction between data and stakeholder values is critical to how the decision options are viewed and determines the effect of data uncertainty on the relative acceptability of the decision options, making the understanding of this interaction important to decisionmakers and other stakeholders. This approach utilizes the recently developed decision analysis framework and process, multi‐criteria integrated resource assessment (MIRA). This article will specifically address how MIRA can be used to help decisionmakers better understand the importance of uncertainty on the specific (i.e., decision contextual) environmental policy options that they are deliberating.

Suggested Citation

  • Cynthia H. Stahl & Alan J. Cimorelli, 2005. "How Much Uncertainty is Too Much and How Do We Know? A Case Example of the Assessment of Ozone Monitor Network Options," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(5), pages 1109-1120, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:25:y:2005:i:5:p:1109-1120
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2005.00666.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2005.00666.x
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2005.00666.x?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Finger, Matthias & Verlaan, Philomene, 1995. "Learning our way out: A conceptual framework for social-environmental learning," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 23(3), pages 503-513, March.
    2. van Groenendaal, W.J.H., 2003. "Group decision support for public policy planning," Other publications TiSEM eecbe70b-1ce7-4885-903f-6, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    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. Cynthia H. Stahl, 2014. "Out of the Land of Oz: the importance of tackling wicked environmental problems without taming them," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 34(4), pages 473-477, December.
    2. Annika Styczynski & Jedamiah Wolf & Somdatta Tah & Arnab Bose, 2014. "When decision-making processes fail: an argument for robust climate adaptation planning in the face of uncertainty," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 34(4), pages 478-491, December.
    3. Adam M. Finkel & George Gray, 2018. "Taking the reins: how regulatory decision-makers can stop being hijacked by uncertainty," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 38(2), pages 230-238, June.

    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. Yong Zeng & Yanpeng Cai & Guohe Huang & Jing Dai, 2011. "A Review on Optimization Modeling of Energy Systems Planning and GHG Emission Mitigation under Uncertainty," Energies, MDPI, vol. 4(10), pages 1-33, October.
    2. Garmendia, Eneko & Stagl, Sigrid, 2010. "Public participation for sustainability and social learning: Concepts and lessons from three case studies in Europe," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(8), pages 1712-1722, June.
    3. Marleen Maarleveld & Constant Dabgbégnon, 1999. "Managing natural resources: A social learning perspective," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 16(3), pages 267-280, September.
    4. Xenia I. Loizidou & Demetra L. Orthodoxou & Michael I. Loizides & Yannis N. Krestenitis, 2021. "A community-based approach for site-specific policies and solutions on marine litter: the example of Paphos, Cyprus," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 41(1), pages 33-44, March.
    5. Chmielewska Aneta & Adamiczka Jerzy & Romanowski Michał, 2020. "Genetic Algorithm as Automated Valuation Model Component in Real Estate Investment Decisions System," Real Estate Management and Valuation, Sciendo, vol. 28(4), pages 1-14, December.
    6. Renigier-Biłozor Małgorzata & Biłozor Andrzej, 2016. "Information Capacity Database in the Rating Model on the Basis of Polish and Italian Real Estate Markets," Real Estate Management and Valuation, Sciendo, vol. 24(3), pages 40-51, September.
    7. Kevin Collins & Ray Ison, 2010. "Trusting Emergence: Some Experiences of Learning about Integrated Catchment Science with the Environment Agency of England and Wales," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 24(4), pages 669-688, March.
    8. Tavana, Madjid & Behzadian, Majid & Pirdashti, Mohsen & Pirdashti, Hasan, 2013. "A PROMETHEE-GDSS for oil and gas pipeline planning in the Caspian Sea basin," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 716-728.

    More about this item

    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:wly:riskan:v:25:y:2005:i:5:p:1109-1120. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1539-6924 .

    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.