RESUMEN

Standardized and/or centralized proactive research governance can lessen tensions.

RESUMEN

The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic required significant public health interventions from local governments. Early in the pandemic, RAND researchers developed a decision support tool to provide policymakers with insight into the trade-offs they might face when choosing among nonpharmaceutical intervention levels. Using an updated version of the model, the researchers performed a stress-test of a variety of alternative reopening plans, using California as an example. This article presents the general lessons learned from these experiments and discusses four characteristics of the best reopening strategies.

RESUMEN

The COVID-19 pandemic required significant public health interventions from local governments. Although nonpharmaceutical interventions often were implemented as decision rules, few studies evaluated the robustness of those reopening plans under a wide range of uncertainties. This paper uses the Robust Decision Making approach to stress-test 78 alternative reopening strategies, using California as an example. This study uniquely considers a wide range of uncertainties and demonstrates that seemingly sensible reopening plans can lead to both unnecessary COVID-19 deaths and days of interventions. We find that plans using fixed COVID-19 case thresholds might be less effective than strategies with time-varying reopening thresholds. While we use California as an example, our results are particularly relevant for jurisdictions where vaccination roll-out has been slower. The approach used in this paper could also prove useful for other public health policy problems in which policymakers need to make robust decisions in the face of deep uncertainty.

Asunto(s)

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Amid global scarcity of COVID-19 vaccines and the threat of new variant strains, California and other jurisdictions face the question of when and how to implement and relax COVID-19 Nonpharmaceutical Interventions (NPIs). While policymakers have attempted to balance the health and economic impacts of the pandemic, decentralized decision-making, deep uncertainty, and the lack of widespread use of comprehensive decision support methods can lead to the choice of fragile or inefficient strategies. This paper uses simulation models and the Robust Decision Making (RDM) approach to stress-test California's reopening strategy and other alternatives over a wide range of futures. We find that plans which respond aggressively to initial outbreaks are required to robustly control the pandemic. Further, the best plans adapt to changing circumstances, lowering their stringent requirements to reopen over time or as more constituents are vaccinated. While we use California as an example, our results are particularly relevant for jurisdictions where vaccination roll-out has been slower.

RESUMEN

Many of today's most pressing policy challenges are usefully characterized as wicked problems. With contested framings parties to a decision disagree not only on potential solutions, but on the nature of the problem they are trying to solve. The quantitative tools of risk and policy analysis, commonly designed to develop and compare choices within a single decision framing, are poorly designed to bring quantitative information into debates with contested framings. This study aims to build on recent advances in decision making under deep uncertainty (DMDU) to demonstrate methods and tools that may help resolve the tension between quantitative decision support and multiworldview approaches for addressing wicked problems. The study employs robust decision making (RDM), one common DMDU method, and a new version of the lake model, a simple and widely used model of a coupled human and natural system, to conduct a stylized analysis that reflects three different worldviews. The RDM analysis solves the decision challenge independently for each worldview and then compares each set of solutions from the vantage of the other worldviews. The resulting utopia-dystopia matrix informs problem reframing that seeks robust, adaptive strategies independently consistent with each worldview and thus provides a locus for agreement. The study describes how stakeholder engagements might use such analytic tools and their information products to provide overlapping but alternative entry points for groups with fundamentally different worldviews to engage with each other in deliberative processes appropriate for wicked problems.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Notwithstanding current heavy dependence on gas-fired electricity generation in the Eastern African Power Pool (EAPP), hydropower is expected to play an essential role in improving electricity access in the region. Expansion planning of electricity infrastructure is critical to support investment and maintaining balanced consumer electricity prices. Variations in water availability due to a changing climate could leave hydro infrastructure stranded or result in underutilization of available resources. In this study, we develop a framework consisting of long-term models for electricity supply and water systems management, to assess the vulnerability of potential expansion plans to the effects of climate change. We find that the most resilient EAPP rollout strategy corresponds to a plan optimised for a slightly wetter climate compared to historical trends. This study demonstrates that failing to climate-proof infrastructure investments can result in significant electricity price fluctuations in selected countries (Uganda & Tanzania) while others, such as Egypt, are less vulnerable.

RESUMEN

Participatory modeling aims to incorporate stakeholders into the process of developing models for the purpose of eliciting information, appropriately reflecting stakeholder interests and concerns, and improving stakeholder understanding, and acceptance of the analysis. Participatory modeling, using causal loop diagramming (CLD), was used to explore the impact of climate change on public health in Long Beach, California. CLD, commonly used in participatory modeling, provided useful information to serve as the basis for a quantitative system dynamics model to protect the citizens of Long Beach, and potentially other cities or regions affected by climate change. Diverse stakeholders constructed CLDs depicting the impacts of climate change on public health in Long Beach. This exercise aimed to (1) identify public health issues that might be caused or exacerbated by climate change; (2) examine the systemic connections between climate change and other drivers of public health/illness and mortality; and (3) identify feedback loops to gain an understanding of how climate change could impact public health over coming decades. Six groups of five stakeholders were tasked with depicting the impacts of climate change on public health. Each group designated a key health outcome of concern on a citywide scale, including critical drivers of the outcome at higher and lower scales if necessary (for example, state laws, or household-level decisions that affect health outcomes in the aggregate). Social, environmental, political, and economic variables were all considered. After the small group diagramming exercise, groups presented diagram results to other participants, and the discussion around the diagrams was recorded.

RESUMEN

Many institutions worldwide are considering how to include uncertainty about future changes in sea-levels and storm surges into their investment decisions regarding large capital infrastructures. Here we examine how to characterize deeply uncertain climate change projections to support such decisions using Robust Decision Making analysis. We address questions regarding how to confront the potential for future changes in low probability but large impact flooding events due to changes in sea-levels and storm surges. Such extreme events can affect investments in infrastructure but have proved difficult to consider in such decisions because of the deep uncertainty surrounding them. This study utilizes Robust Decision Making methods to address two questions applied to investment decisions at the Port of Los Angeles: (1) Under what future conditions would a Port of Los Angeles decision to harden its facilities against extreme flood scenarios at the next upgrade pass a cost-benefit test, and (2) Do sea-level rise projections and other information suggest such conditions are sufficiently likely to justify such an investment? We also compare and contrast the Robust Decision Making methods with a full probabilistic analysis. These two analysis frameworks result in similar investment recommendations for different idealized future sea-level projections, but provide different information to decision makers and envision different types of engagement with stakeholders. In particular, the full probabilistic analysis begins by aggregating the best scientific information into a single set of joint probability distributions, while the Robust Decision Making analysis identifies scenarios where a decision to invest in near-term response to extreme sea-level rise passes a cost-benefit test, and then assembles scientific information of differing levels of confidence to help decision makers judge whether or not these scenarios are sufficiently likely to justify making such investments. Results highlight the highly-localized and context dependent nature of applying Robust Decision Making methods to inform investment decisions.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Decision analysis-a systematic approach to solving complex problems-offers tools and frameworks to support decision making that are increasingly being applied to environmental challenges. Alternatives analysis is a method used in regulation and product design to identify, compare, and evaluate the safety and viability of potential substitutes for hazardous chemicals. OBJECTIVES: We assessed whether decision science may assist the alternatives analysis decision maker in comparing alternatives across a range of metrics. METHODS: A workshop was convened that included representatives from government, academia, business, and civil society and included experts in toxicology, decision science, alternatives assessment, engineering, and law and policy. Participants were divided into two groups and were prompted with targeted questions. Throughout the workshop, the groups periodically came together in plenary sessions to reflect on other groups' findings. RESULTS: We concluded that the further incorporation of decision science into alternatives analysis would advance the ability of companies and regulators to select alternatives to harmful ingredients and would also advance the science of decision analysis. CONCLUSIONS: We advance four recommendations: a) engaging the systematic development and evaluation of decision approaches and tools; b) using case studies to advance the integration of decision analysis into alternatives analysis; c) supporting transdisciplinary research; and d) supporting education and outreach efforts. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP483.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Individuals use values to frame their beliefs and simplify their understanding when confronted with complex and uncertain situations. The high complexity and deep uncertainty involved in climate risk management (CRM) lead to individuals' values likely being coupled to and contributing to their understanding of specific climate risk factors and management strategies. Most mental model approaches, however, which are commonly used to inform our understanding of people's beliefs, ignore values. In response, we developed a "Values-informed Mental Model" research approach, or ViMM, to elicit individuals' values alongside their beliefs and determine which values people use to understand and assess specific climate risk factors and CRM strategies. Our results show that participants consistently used one of three values to frame their understanding of risk factors and CRM strategies in New Orleans: (1) fostering a healthy economy, wealth, and job creation, (2) protecting and promoting healthy ecosystems and biodiversity, and (3) preserving New Orleans' unique culture, traditions, and historically significant neighborhoods. While the first value frame is common in analyses of CRM strategies, the latter two are often ignored, despite their mirroring commonly accepted pillars of sustainability. Other values like distributive justice and fairness were prioritized differently depending on the risk factor or strategy being discussed. These results suggest that the ViMM method could be a critical first step in CRM decision-support processes and may encourage adoption of CRM strategies more in line with stakeholders' values.

RESUMEN

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.

RESUMEN

U.S. consumers generate more pharmaceutical revenue per person than Europeans do. This has led some U.S. policymakers to call for limits on U.S. pharmaceutical spending and prices. Using a microsimulation approach, we analyze the welfare impacts of lowering U.S. prices toward European levels, and how these impacts vary with key modeling assumptions. Under the assumptions most favorable to them, price controls generate modest benefits (a few thousand dollars per person). However, for the remainder of plausible assumptions, price controls generate costs that are an order of magnitude higher. In contrast, publicly financing reductions in consumer prices, without affecting manufacturer prices, delivers benefits in virtually all plausible cases.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Many commentators have suggested the need for new decision analysis approaches to better manage systems with deeply uncertain, poorly characterized risks. Most notably, policy challenges such as abrupt climate change involve potential nonlinear or threshold responses where both the triggering level and subsequent system response are poorly understood. This study uses a simple computer simulation model to compare several alternative frameworks for decision making under uncertainty -- optimal expected utility, the precautionary principle, and three different approaches to robust decision making -- for addressing the challenge of adding pollution to a lake without triggering unwanted and potentially irreversible eutrophication. The three robust decision approaches -- trading some optimal performance for less sensitivity to assumptions, satisficing over a wide range of futures, and keeping options open -- are found to identify similar strategies as the most robust choice. This study also suggests that these robust decision approaches offer a quantitative, decision analytic framework that captures the spirit of the precautionary principle while addressing some of its shortcomings. Finally, this study finds that robust strategies may be preferable to optimum strategies when the uncertainty is sufficiently deep and the set of alternative policy options is sufficiently rich.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Agent-based modeling (ABM) is a powerful representational formalism that has wide utility for modeling nonlinear systems. For ABM to achieve its potential as a scientific tool, our ability to build models that embody our knowledge must be complemented by rigorous means for making inferences using such models. Due to nonlinearity, this rigor cannot in general be based solely on demonstrating that a model reliably predicts the outcomes of available physical measurements. In this paper we describe an alternative approach to robust reasoning based on the concept of ensembles of alternative models. Ensembles of models can be defined that plausibly span classes of systems including the system of interest. Research methodologies for searching and sampling from such ensembles can be used to support plausible conclusions about invariant properties of ensembles of ABMs and hence of the classes of systems they represent. Notable among these are approaches that implement a competition between ensembles of problem formulations or challenges and conclusions robust to these challenges. This approach is demonstrated using examples drawn from our research.

RESUMEN

This report should be of interest to decisionmakers concerned with the long-term effects of their actions, those who conduct long-term planning, and anyone who deals more generally with decisionmaking under deep uncertainty. (Au)

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Agent-based models are an increasingly powerful tool for simulating social systems because they can represent important phenomenon difficult to capture in other mathematical formalisms. But, agent-based models have provided only limited support for policy-making because their distinctive abilities are often most useful in situations where the future is unpredictable. In such situations, the traditional analytic methods for applying simulation models to support decision-making are least effective. Fortunately, new analytic approaches for decision-making under conditions of deep uncertainty--emphasizing large ensembles of model-created scenarios and adaptive policies evaluated with the criteria of robustness, rather than with optimality or efficiency--can unleash the full potential of agent-based policy simulators.

RESUMEN

Models of complex systems can capture much useful information but can be difficult to apply to real-world decision-making because the type of information they contain is often inconsistent with that required for traditional decision analysis. New approaches, which use inductive reasoning over large ensembles of computational experiments, now make possible systematic comparison of alternative policy options using models of complex systems. This article describes Computer-Assisted Reasoning, an approach to decision-making under conditions of deep uncertainty that is ideally suited to applying complex systems to policy analysis. The article demonstrates the approach on the policy problem of global climate change, with a particular focus on the role of technology policies in a robust, adaptive strategy for greenhouse gas abatement.