My key note on uncertainty at the EFSA/BfR Conference
In this post you can watch or read my key note at the Joint EFSA/BfR International Conference on Uncertainty in Risk Analysis!
In this post you can watch or read my key note at the Joint EFSA/BfR International Conference on Uncertainty in Risk Analysis!
How one theorizes uncertainty is central to how uncertainty is analysed. If uncertainty is conceptualised as incomplete knowledge, uncertainty analysis will focus on describing knowledge gaps. If uncertainty is conceptualised as the challenge of predicting the future, uncertainty analysis will focus on describing how present variables may change in the future. In this post, I argue that a theoretical understanding of uncertainty is necessary to guide decision-making, and that the analysis of uncertainty must be theoretically informed and not only solution-oriented.
This is an excerpt from my latest publication: Kovacic, Z. (2018). Conceptualizing numbers at the science-policy interface. Science, Technology & Human Values.
Building on the uncertainty literature, we* conceptualize ambiguity as the type of uncertainty that emerges from complexity.
Measurements are used in policy-making to set targets, and to monitor progress towards targets. Think of CO2 emission targets, energy efficiency targets, waste recycling monitoring. When dealing with complex issues, the choice of metrics is not trivial! The issue of non-equivalence reveals that measurements may be precise, but they do not lead to univocal knowledge. As a consequence, policy objects are constituted also through the choice of metrics.