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

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.     

Robust Climate Policies Under Uncertainty: A Comparison of Robust Decision Making and Info‐Gap Methods

This study compares two widely used approaches for robustness analysis of decision problems: the info‐gap method originally developed by Ben‐Haim and the robust decision making (RDM) approach originally developed by Lempert, Popper, and Bankes. The study uses each approach to evaluate alternative paths for climate‐altering greenhouse gas emissions given the potential for nonlinear threshold responses in the climate system, significant uncertainty about such a threshold response and a variety of other key parameters, as well as the ability to learn about any threshold responses over time. Info‐gap and RDM share many similarities. Both represent uncertainty as sets of multiple plausible futures, and both seek to identify robust strategies whose performance is insensitive to uncertainties. Yet they also exhibit important differences, as they arrange their analyses in different orders, treat losses and gains in different ways, and take different approaches to imprecise probabilistic information. The study finds that the two approaches reach similar but not identical policy recommendations and that their differing attributes raise important questions about their appropriate roles in decision support applications. The comparison not only improves understanding of these specific methods, it also suggests some broader insights into robustness approaches and a framework for comparing them.     

The Precautionary Principle Is Incoherent

This article argues that no version of the precautionary principle can be reasonably applied to decisions that may lead to fatal outcomes. In support of this strong claim, a number of desiderata are proposed, which reasonable rules for rational decision making ought to satisfy. Thereafter, two impossibility theorems are proved, showing that no version of the precautionary principle can satisfy the proposed desiderata. These theorems are directly applicable to recent discussions of the precautionary principle in medicine, biotechnology, environmental management, and related fields. The impossibility theorems do not imply, however, that the precautionary principle is of no relevance at all in policy discussions. Even if it is not a reasonable rule for rational decision making, it is possible to interpret the precautionary principle in other ways, e.g., as an argumentative tool or as an epistemic principle favoring a reversed burden of proof.     

Multi‐Case Review of the Application of the Precautionary Principle in European Union Law and Case Law

The precautionary principle was formulated to provide a basis for political action to protect the environment from potentially severe or irreversible harm in circumstances of scientific uncertainty that prevent a full risk or cost‐benefit analysis. It underpins environmental law in the European Union and has been extended to include public health and consumer safety. The aim of this study was to examine how the precautionary principle has been interpreted and subsequently applied in practice, whether these applications were consistent, and whether they followed the guidance from the Commission. A review of the literature was used to develop a framework for analysis, based on three attributes: severity of potential harm, standard of evidence (or degree of uncertainty), and nature of the regulatory action. This was used to examine 15 pieces of legislation or judicial decisions. The decision whether or not to apply the precautionary principle appears to be poorly defined, with ambiguities inherent in determining what level of uncertainty and significance of hazard justifies invoking it. The cases reviewed suggest that the Commission's guidance was not followed consistently in forming legislation, although judicial decisions tended to be more consistent and to follow the guidance by requiring plausible evidence of potential hazard in order to invoke precaution.     

Using Structured Decision Making to Help Implement a Precautionary Approach to Endangered Species Management

Endangered species protection is a significant risk management concern throughout North America. An extensive conceptual literature emphasizes the role to be played by precautionary approaches. Risk managers, typically working in concert with concerned stakeholders, frequently cite the concept as key to their efforts to prevent extinctions. Little has been done, however, to evaluate the multidimensional impacts of precautionary frameworks or to assist in the examination of competing precautionary risk management options as part of an applied risk management decision framework. In this article we describe how decision-aiding techniques can assist in the creation and analysis of alternative precautionary strategies, using the example of a multistakeholder committee charged with protection of endangered Cultus Lake salmon on the Canadian west coast. Although managers were required to adopt a precautionary approach, little attention had been given to how quantitative analyses could be used to help define the concept or to how a precautionary approach might be implemented in the face of difficult economic, social, and biological tradeoffs. We briefly review key steps in a structured decision-making (SDM) process and discuss how this approach was implemented to help bound the management problem, define objectives and performance measures, develop management alternatives, and evaluate their consequences. We highlight the role of strategy tables, employed to help participants identify, alternative management options. We close by noting areas of agreement and disagreement among participants and discuss the implications of decision-focused processes for other precautionary resource management efforts.     

The Precautionary Principle and/or Risk Assessment in World Trade Organization Decisions: A Possible Role for Risk Perception

Risk analysis has been recognized and validated in World Trade Organization (WTO) decision processes. In recent years the precautionary principle has been proposed as an additional or alternative approach to standard risk assessment. The precautionary principle has also been advocated by some who see it as part of postmodern democracy in which more power is given to the public on health and safety matters relative to the judgments of technocrats. A more cynical view is that the precautionary principle is particularly championed by the European Community as a means to erect trade barriers. The WTO ruling against the European Community's trade barrier against beef from hormone-treated cattle seemed to support the use of risk assessment and appeared to reject the argument that the precautionary principle was a legitimate basis for trade barriers. However, a more recent WTO decision on asbestos contains language suggesting that the precautionary principle, in the form of taking into account public perception, may be acceptable as a basis for a trade barrier. This decision, if followed in future WTO trade disputes, such as for genetically modified foods, raises many issues central to the field of risk analysis. It is too early to tell whether the precautionary principle will become accepted in WTO decisions, either as a supplement or a substitute for standard risk assessment. But it would undermine the value of the precautionary principle if this principle were misused to justify unwarranted trade barriers.     

The Precautionary Principle Versus Risk Analysis

Precautionary behavior serves a valuable protective purpose as a first response to the new. It causes a quick retreat to the safety of the familiar; it provides time for a realistic "friend or foe" assessment of a new event. This rational assessment is often delayed by the sluggishness of government bureaucratic processes, or stopped by an implied challenge to a status quo. At the public level, reassurance may be slow to overcome an early uncertainty. However, a precautionary response does not provide an operational governing principle, although it makes publicly plausible an indefinite concealment of de facto political actions, or nonaction. The alternative of rational decision making at the policy level should flow from a comparative benefit/cost/risk analysis. Such early risk analyses have pragmatic uncertainties based on the limited available knowledge base and, accordingly, require judgmental application.     

Bridging the Gaps between Impact Assessments and Resettlement Planning: A Case Study of Padma Multipurpose Bridge Project,Bangladesh

The traditional methodologies including spatial decision support systems have at times showed their ineffectiveness in terms of gathering, analyzing and incorporating diversified views of affected persons into resettlement planning. This ineffectiveness is in dealing with unstructured problems and uncertainty in analyzing alternative strategies. This paper therefore proposes an integrated methodology (combination of argumentative mapping and qualitative probabilistic networks) to counter these limitations. The new methodology was introduced in a large-scale infrastructure project to verify its applicability. Results derived from the study not only provide better insights into resettlement-related problems, but also indicate critical management options for desired objectives.     

Addressing Supply–Demand Imbalance: Designing Efficient Remanufacturing Strategies

The management of remanufacturing inventory system is often challenged by mismatched supply (i.e., returned units, called cores) and demand. Typically, the demand for remanufactured units is high and exceeds the supply early in a product's lifetime, and drops below the supply late in the lifetime. This supply–demand imbalance motivates us to study a switching strategy to facilitate the decision‐making process. This strategy deploys a push mode at the early stage of a product's lifetime, which remanufactures scarce cores to stock to responsively satisfy the high demand, and switches to a pull mode as the product approaches obsolescence to accurately match the low demand with supply. In addition, the strategy further simplifies the decision‐making process by ignoring the impact of leftover cores at the end of each decision period. We show that the optimal policy of the switching strategy possesses a simple, multi‐dimensional base‐stock structure, which aims to remanufacture units from the i best‐quality categories up to the ith state‐independent base‐stock level. An extensive numerical study shows that the switching strategy delivers close‐to‐optimal and robust performance: the strategy only incurs an average profit loss of 1.21% and a maximum of 2.27%, compared with the optimal one. The numerical study also shows when a pure push or pull strategy, a special case of the switching strategy, delivers good performance. The study offers the managerial insight that firms can use simple, easy‐to‐implement strategies to efficiently manage the remanufacturing inventory system.     

Does Concern‐Driven Risk Management Provide a Viable Alternative to QRA?

This article discusses a concept of concern-driven risk management, in which qualitative expert judgments about whether concerns warrant specified risk management interventions are used in preference to quantitative risk assessment (QRA) to guide risk management decisions. Where QRA emphasizes formal quantitative assessment of the probable consequences caused by the recommended actions, and comparison to the probable consequences of alternatives, including the status quo, concern-driven risk management instead emphasizes perceived urgency or severity of the situation motivating recommended interventions. In many instances, especially those involving applications of the precautionary principle, no formal quantification or comparison of probable consequences for alternative decisions is seen as being necessary (or, perhaps, possible or desirable) prior to implementation of risk management measures. Such concern-driven risk management has been recommended by critics of QRA in several areas of applied risk management. Based on case studies and psychological literature on the empirical performance of judgment-based approaches to decision making under risk and uncertainty, we conclude that, although concern-driven risk management has several important potential political and psychological advantages over QRA, it is not clear that it performs better than (or as well as) QRA in identifying risk management interventions that successfully protect human health or achieve other desired consequences. Therefore, those who advocate replacing QRA with concern-driven alternatives, such as expert judgment and consensus decision processes, should assess whether their recommended alternatives truly outperform QRA, by the criterion of producing preferred consequences, before rejecting the QRA paradigm for practical applications.     

A new approach to risk evaluation and management: risk-based, precaution-based, and discourse-based strategies.

Our concept of nine risk evaluation criteria, six risk classes, a decision tree, and three management categories was developed to improve the effectiveness, efficiency, and political feasibility of risk management procedures. The main task of risk evaluation and management is to develop adequate tools for dealing with the problems of complexity, uncertainty. and ambiguity. Based on the characteristics of different risk types and these three major problems, we distinguished three types of management--risk-based, precaution-based, and discourse-based strategies. The risk-based strategy--is the common solution to risk problems. Once the probabilities and their corresponding damage potentials are calculated, risk managers are required to set priorities according to the severity of the risk, which may be operationalized as a linear combination of damage and probability or as a weighted combination thereof. Within our new risk classification, the two central components have been augmented with other physical and social criteria that still demand risk-based strategies as long as uncertainty is low and ambiguity absent. Risk-based strategies are best solutions to problems of complexity and some components of uncertainty, for example, variation among individuals. If the two most important risk criteria, probability of occurrence and extent of damage, are relatively well known and little uncertainty is left, the traditional risk-based approach seems reasonable. If uncertainty plays a large role, in particular, indeterminacy or lack of knowledge, the risk-based approach becomes counterproductive. Judging the relative severity of risks on the basis of uncertain parameters does not make much sense. Under these circumstances, management strategies belonging to the precautionary management style are required. The precautionary approach has been the basis for much of the European environmental and health protection legislation and regulation. Our own approach to risk management has been guided by the proposition that any conceptualization of the precautionary principle should be (1) in line with established methods of scientific risk assessments, (2) consistent and discriminatory (avoiding arbitrary results) when it comes to prioritization, and (3) at the same time, specific with respect to precautionary measures, such as ALARA or BACT, or the strategy of containing risks in time and space. This suggestion does, however, entail a major problem: looking only to the uncertainties does not provide risk managers with a clue about where to set priorities for risk reduction. Risks vary in their degree of remaining uncertainties. How can one judge the severity of a situation when the potential damage and its probability are unknown or contested? In this dilemma, we advise risk managers to use additional criteria of hazardousness, such as "ubiquity versibility," and "pervasiveness over time," as proxies for judging severity. Our approach also distinguishes clearly between uncertainty and ambiguity. Uncertainty refers to a situation of being unclear about factual statements; ambiguity to a situation of contested views about the desirability or severity of a given hazard. Uncertainty can be resolved in principle by more cognitive advances (with the exception of indeterminacy). ambiguity only by discourse. Discursive procedures include legal deliberations as well as novel participatory approaches. In addition, discursive methods of planning and conflict resolution can be used. If ambiguities are associated with a risk problem, it is not enough to demonstrate that risk regulators are open to public concerns and address the issues that many people wish them to take care ot The process of risk evaluation itself needs to be open to public input and new forms of deliberation. We have recommended a tested set of deliberative processes that are, at least in principle, capable of resolving ambiguities in risk debates (for a review, see Renn, Webler, & Wiedemaun. 1995). Deliberative processes are needed, however, for ail three types of management. Risk-based management relies on epistemiological, uncertainty-based management on reflective, and discourse-based management on participatory discourse forms. These three types of discourse could be labeled as an analytic-deliberative procedure for risk evaluation and management. We see the advantage of a deliberative style of regulation and management in a dynamic balance between procedure and outcome. Procedure should not have priority over the outcome; outcome should not have priority over the procedure. An intelligent combination of both can elaborate the required prerequisites of democratic deliberation and its substantial outcomes to enhance the legitimacy of political decisions (Guttman & Thompson, 1996; Bohman, 1997. 1998).     

INTEGER GOAL PROGRAMMING IN ADVERTISING MEDIA SELECTION

The media selection decision allocates advertising dollars among competing media so as to optimize promotional and corporate objectives. Linear programming attempts to model this process have been complicated by multiple and often conflicting management goals, the need for integer solutions, and nonlinearities. This study offers a technique that is sufficiently robust to simultaneously handle these problems. An alternative media selection framework is presented and the results of an illustrative application of integer goal programming are discussed. The proposed model improves on linear programming by success fully providing for optimal, integer solutions in settings that more realistically reflect the complexity of the media decision environment.     

Risk Analysis, Life Cycle Assessment—The Common Challenge of Dealing with the Precautionary Frame (Based on the Toxicity Controversy in Sweden and the Netherlands)

Life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) and comparative risk assessment (RA) use the same building blocks for analyzing fate and potential effects of toxic substances. It is tacitly assumed that emission-effect calculations can give uniform and decisive answers in debates on toxicity problems. For several decades, mainstream policy sciences have taken a different starting point when analyzing decision making on complex, controversial societal issues. Such controversies in essence are thought to be caused by the fact that different actor coalitions adhere to a different, but in scientific terms equally reasonable, conceptualization or "framing" of the problem. A historical, argumentative analysis of the Dutch chlorine debate and the Swedish PVC debate shows that this is also true in the discussions on toxic substances. Three frames have been identified, which were coined the "risk assessment frame," "the strict control frame," and the "precautionary frame." These frames tacitly disagree about the extent of knowledge/ignorance about the impacts of substances, the robustness/fallibility of emission-reduction schemes, and the robustness/vulnerability of nature. The latter frame, adhered to by environmentalists, seeks to judge substances mainly on their inherent safety. Under the current institutional arrangements and practices, RA and LCIA are executed mainly in line with the philosophy expressed by the risk assessment frame. This article gives various suggestions for dealing with framing in debates on toxic substances. One of the options is elaborated in somewhat more detail, i.e., the development of multiple indicators and calculation schemes for RA and LCIA that reflect the different frames. An outline is given for a possible indicator system reflecting the precautionary principle.     

Anticipating or Accommodating to Public Concern? Risk Amplification and the Politics of Precaution Reexamined

Regulatory use of the precautionary principle (PP) tends to be broadly characterized either as a responsible approach for safeguarding against health and environmental risks in the face of scientific uncertainties, or as “state mismanagement” driven by undue political bias and public anxiety. However, the “anticipatory” basis upon which governments variably draw a political warrant for adopting precautionary measures often remains ambiguous. Particularly, questions arise concerning whether the PP is employed preemptively by political elites from the “top down,” or follows from more conventional democratic pressures exerted by citizens and other stakeholders from the “bottom up.” This article elucidates the role and impact of citizen involvement in the precautionary politics shaping policy discourse surrounding the U.K. government's “precautionary approach” to mobile telecommunications technology and health. A case study is presented that critically reexamines the basis upon which U.K. government action has been portrayed as an instance of anticipatory policy making. Findings demonstrate that the use of the PP should not be interpreted in the preemptive terms communicated by U.K. government officials alone, but also in relation to the wider social context of risk amplification and images of public concern formed adaptively in antagonistic precautionary discourse between citizens, politicians, industry, and the media, which surrounded cycles of government policy making. The article discusses the sociocultural conditions and political dynamics underpinning public influence on government anticipation and responsiveness exemplified in this case, and concludes with research and policy implications for how society subsequently comes to terms with the emergence and precautionary governance of new technologies under conflict.     

Post-Katrina Hazard Mitigation on the Gulf Coast

The article reviews the major hazard mitigation measures considered for the Gulf Coast following hurricanes between 2005 and 2008, especially Hurricanes Katrina and Ike. Basic similarities among and between the hazard events are noted, along with a wide variety of efforts to eliminate or reduce risks from natural hazards in establishing mitigation as the major protector of affected areas. Intergovernmental collaboration, insurance reform, and public risk perception are included. Both the processes used and substantive policy options are examined. This includes attempts at system-wide solutions in dealing with the mullti-state region for recovery from devastation and providing greater resiliency toward further hazard events. Such themes as a comprehensive system approach and the use of risk informed decision making, communication of risk to the public, and the use of professional and technical expertise, are being used on the Gulf Coast. Risk informed decision making uses techniques and methods from risk analysis, scenario planning, and multi-criteria decision analysis. Stakeholders are incorporated into the development of alternatives conveyed to the public. Policy alternative include coastal restoration measures such as barrier island and shoreline restoration, structural engineering such as floodwalls and levees, and nonstructural options such as buyouts, relocation, and effective zoning and building codes. The most comprehensive approaches follow a multiple lines of defense strategy to combine the various types of risk reduction measures.     

Confronting Deep Uncertainties in Risk Analysis

How can risk analysts help to improve policy and decision making when the correct probabilistic relation between alternative acts and their probable consequences is unknown? This practical challenge of risk management with model uncertainty arises in problems from preparing for climate change to managing emerging diseases to operating complex and hazardous facilities safely. We review constructive methods for robust and adaptive risk analysis under deep uncertainty. These methods are not yet as familiar to many risk analysts as older statistical and model‐based methods, such as the paradigm of identifying a single “best‐fitting” model and performing sensitivity analyses for its conclusions. They provide genuine breakthroughs for improving predictions and decisions when the correct model is highly uncertain. We demonstrate their potential by summarizing a variety of practical risk management applications.     

Coping with Gray Markets: The Impact of Market Conditions and Product Characteristics

Gray markets, also known as parallel imports, have created fierce competition for manufacturers in many industries. We analyze the impact of parallel importation on a price‐setting manufacturer that serves two markets with uncertain demand, and characterize her policy against parallel importation. We show that ignoring demand uncertainty can take a significant toll on the manufacturer's profit, highlighting the value of making price and quantity decisions jointly. We find that adjusting prices is more effective in controlling gray market activity than reducing product availability, and that parallel importation forces the manufacturer to reduce her price gap while demand uncertainty forces her to lower prices. Furthermore, we explore the impact of market conditions (such as market base, price sensitivity, and demand uncertainty) and product characteristics (“fashion” vs. “commodity”) on the manufacturer's policy towards parallel importation. We also provide managerial insights about the value of strategic decision‐making by comparing the optimal policy to the uniform pricing policy that has been adopted by some companies to eliminate gray markets entirely. The comparison indicates that the value of making price and quantity decisions strategically is highest for moderately different market conditions and non‐commodity products.     

Reasoned Decision Making Without Math? Adaptability and Robustness in Response to Surprise

Many real‐world planning and decision problems are far too uncertain, too variable, and too complicated to support realistic mathematical models. Nonetheless, we explain the usefulness, in these situations, of qualitative insights from mathematical decision theory. We demonstrate the integration of info‐gap robustness in decision problems in which surprise and ignorance are predominant and where personal and collective psychological factors are critical. We present practical guidelines for employing adaptable‐choice strategies as a proxy for robustness against uncertainty. These guidelines include being prepared for more surprises than we intuitively expect, retaining sufficiently many options to avoid premature closure and conflicts among preferences, and prioritizing outcomes that are steerable, whose consequences are observable, and that do not entail sunk costs, resource depletion, or high transition costs. We illustrate these concepts and guidelines with the example of the medical management of the 2003 SARS outbreak in Vietnam.