IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/riskan/v30y2010i3p371-376.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Ignorance Is Not Probability

Author

Listed:
  • William A. Huber

Abstract

The distinction between ignorance about a parameter and knowing only a probability distribution for that parameter is of fundamental importance in risk assessment. Brief dialogs between a hypothetical decisionmaker and a risk assessor illustrate this point, showing that the distinction has real consequences. These dialogs are followed by a short exposition that places risk analysis in a decision‐theoretic framework, describes the important elements of that framework, and uses these to shed light on Terje Aven's criticism of nonprobabilistic purely “objective” methods. Suggestions are offered concerning a more effective approach to evaluating those methods.

Suggested Citation

  • William A. Huber, 2010. "Ignorance Is Not Probability," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(3), pages 371-376, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:30:y:2010:i:3:p:371-376
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2010.01361.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2010.01361.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2010.01361.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. Terje Aven, 2010. "On the Need for Restricting the Probabilistic Analysis in Risk Assessments to Variability," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(3), pages 354-360, March.
    2. Robert B. Cumming, 1981. "Is Risk Assessment A Science?," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 1(1), pages 1-3, March.
    3. Terje Aven, 2010. "Reply to Discussants on “The Need for Restricting the Probabilistic Analysis in Risk Assessments to Variability”," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(3), pages 381-384, March.
    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. Kash Barker & Kaycee J. Wilson, 2012. "Decision Trees with Single and Multiple Interval-Valued Objectives," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 9(4), pages 348-358, December.
    2. Yacov Y. Haimes & Joost R. Santos & Chenyang Lian & Kenneth Crowther & Kash Barker, 2012. "Letter to the Editor," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(1), pages 3-6, January.
    3. C M Rocco S, 2012. "Effects of the transition rate uncertainty on the steady state probabilities of Markov models using interval arithmetic," Journal of Risk and Reliability, , vol. 226(2), pages 234-245, April.
    4. Terje Aven & Ortwin Renn, 2015. "An Evaluation of the Treatment of Risk and Uncertainties in the IPCC Reports on Climate Change," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(4), pages 701-712, April.

    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. Didier Dubois, 2010. "Representation, Propagation, and Decision Issues in Risk Analysis Under Incomplete Probabilistic Information," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(3), pages 361-368, March.
    2. Sarat Sivaprasad & Cameron A. MacKenzie, 2018. "The Hurwicz Decision Rule’s Relationship to Decision Making with the Triangle and Beta Distributions and Exponential Utility," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 15(3), pages 139-153, September.
    3. D. Warner North, 2011. "Uncertainties, Precaution, and Science: Focus on the State of Knowledge and How It May Change," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(10), pages 1526-1529, October.
    4. Yu, Xuchao & Liang, Wei & Zhang, Laibin & Reniers, Genserik & Lu, Linlin, 2018. "Risk assessment of the maintenance process for onshore oil and gas transmission pipelines under uncertainty," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 177(C), pages 50-67.
    5. Nicola Pedroni & Enrico Zio & Alberto Pasanisi & Mathieu Couplet, 2017. "A critical discussion and practical recommendations on some issues relevant to the non-probabilistic treatment of uncertainty in engineering risk assessment," Post-Print hal-01652230, HAL.
    6. Suo, Weilan & Wang, Lin & Li, Jianping, 2021. "Probabilistic risk assessment for interdependent critical infrastructures: A scenario-driven dynamic stochastic model," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 214(C).
    7. Christopher W. Karvetski & James H. Lambert, 2012. "Evaluating deep uncertainties in strategic priority‐setting with an application to facility energy investments," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(4), pages 483-493, December.
    8. Tim Bedford & Alireza Daneshkhah & Kevin J. Wilson, 2016. "Approximate Uncertainty Modeling in Risk Analysis with Vine Copulas," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(4), pages 792-815, April.
    9. Anil Markandya & Enrica Cian & Laurent Drouet & Josué M. Polanco-Martínez & Francesco Bosello, 2019. "Building Risk into the Mitigation/Adaptation Decisions simulated by Integrated Assessment Models," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 74(4), pages 1687-1721, December.
    10. S. Cucurachi & E. Borgonovo & R. Heijungs, 2016. "A Protocol for the Global Sensitivity Analysis of Impact Assessment Models in Life Cycle Assessment," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(2), pages 357-377, February.
    11. Sven Ove Hansson & Terje Aven, 2014. "Is Risk Analysis Scientific?," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(7), pages 1173-1183, July.
    12. Terje Aven, 2018. "An Emerging New Risk Analysis Science: Foundations and Implications," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(5), pages 876-888, May.
    13. Rodney C. Ewing & Martin S. Tierney & Leonard F. Konikow & Rob P. Rechard, 1999. "Performance Assessments of Nuclear Waste Repositories: A Dialogue on Their Value and Limitations," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(5), pages 933-958, October.
    14. Terje Aven, 2012. "Foundational Issues in Risk Assessment and Risk Management," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(10), pages 1647-1656, October.
    15. Emanuele Borgonovo & William Castaings & Stefano Tarantola, 2011. "Moment Independent Importance Measures: New Results and Analytical Test Cases," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(3), pages 404-428, March.
    16. Nicola Pedroni & Enrico Zio, 2013. "Uncertainty Analysis in Fault Tree Models with Dependent Basic Events," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(6), pages 1146-1173, June.
    17. Rob P. Rechard, 1999. "Historical Relationship Between Performance Assessment for Radioactive Waste Disposal and Other Types of Risk Assessment," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(5), pages 763-807, October.
    18. Michael Greenberg & Anthony Cox & Vicki Bier & Jim Lambert & Karen Lowrie & Warner North & Michael Siegrist & Felicia Wu, 2020. "Risk Analysis: Celebrating the Accomplishments and Embracing Ongoing Challenges," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(S1), pages 2113-2127, November.
    19. Robert B. Cumming, 1981. "What Is Science Good For?," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 1(4), pages 225-227, December.
    20. Michael Greenberg & Karen Lowrie, 2011. "Celebrating Three Decades of Public Policy‐Oriented Interdisciplinary Research," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(1), pages 7-11, January.

    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:30:y:2010:i:3:p:371-376. 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.