Data supplementing the MSc thesis: Supporting the expert judgement process for quantifying uncertainties in policy research – A case study of the unique challenges with implementing structured expert elicitation for projecting policy effects
What's in it
Expert opinions are crucial to quantify unknown variables when it is not feasible to use traditional research methods (limited resources or questions about future values). Implementing structured expert elicitation (SEE) is important for the quality and credibility of assumptions made by these experts or the researchers who enlist them. However, application in practice has been limited. When research is performed to project policy effects, the context is so volatile that the accuracy of experts' judgements cannot be validated. Moreover, experts may focus on quantifying uncertainty while ignoring extreme uncertainties (war, future technological inventions), operating from a status quo point of view, in order to support the policy relevance of their research. This leads to a unique context of the expert judgement process. It is unclear how experts address expert judgement in this practice. Moreover, it is not yet known what problems may limit application of SEE protocols in this context. I work with the PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency to evaluate their expert judgement process for the KEV (The Climate and Energy Outlook). On a yearly basis their (sector) experts are …
Files and services
- DataCite REST API (JSON)api.datacite.orgOpen