英文标题：
《The fallacy of evidence based policy》
---
作者：
Andrea Saltelli, Mario Giampietro
---
最新提交年份：
2015
---
英文摘要：
  The use of science for policy is at the core of a perfect storm generated by the insurgence of several concurrent crises: of science, of trust, of sustainability. The modern positivistic model of science for policy, known as evidence based policy, is based on dramatic simplifications and compressions of available perceptions of the state of affairs and possible explanations (hypocognition). This model can result in flawed prescriptions. The flaws become more evident when dealing with complex issues characterized by concomitant uncertainties in the normative, descriptive and ethical domains. In this situation evidence-based policy may concur to the fragility of the social system. Science plays an important role in reducing the feeling of vulnerability of humans by projecting a promise of protection against uncertainties. In many applications quantitative science is used to remove uncertainty by transforming it into probability, so that mathematical modelling can play the ritual role of haruspices. This epistemic governance arrangement is today in crisis. The primacy of science to adjudicate political issues must pass through an assessment of the level of maturity and effectiveness of the various disciplines deployed. The solution implies abandoning dreams of prediction, control and optimization obtained by relying on a limited set of simplified narratives to define the problem and moving instead to an open exploration of a broader set of plausible and relevant stories. Evidence based policy has to be replaced by robust policy, where robustness is tested with respect to feasibility (compatibility with processes outside human control); viability (compatibility with processes under human control, in relation to both the economic and technical dimensions), and desirability domain (compatibility with a plurality of normative considerations relevant to a plurality of actors).
---
中文摘要：
将科学应用于政策是一场完美风暴的核心，这场风暴是由几个同时发生的危机引发的：科学危机、信任危机、可持续性危机。现代实证主义的政策科学模型，被称为基于证据的政策，是基于对事态的现有感知和可能的解释（次认知）的戏剧性简化和压缩。这种模式可能导致处方存在缺陷。在处理规范性、描述性和伦理领域伴随着不确定性的复杂问题时，缺陷变得更加明显。在这种情况下，基于证据的政策可能与社会制度的脆弱性相一致。科学在减少人类脆弱感方面发挥着重要作用，因为它承诺保护人类免受不确定性的影响。在许多应用中，定量科学通过将不确定性转化为概率来消除不确定性，因此数学建模可以起到至关重要的作用。这种认知型治理安排如今处于危机之中。科学在裁决政治问题上的首要地位必须通过对所部署的各种学科的成熟程度和有效性的评估。解决方案意味着放弃通过依赖一组有限的简化叙述来定义问题而获得的预测、控制和优化的梦想，转而开放探索更广泛的合理和相关的故事。以证据为基础的政策必须被稳健的政策所取代，在可行性方面测试稳健（与人类无法控制的过程的兼容性）；可行性（与人类控制下的过程在经济和技术方面的兼容性）和可取性领域（与多个参与者相关的多个规范性考虑的兼容性）。
---
分类信息：

一级分类：Quantitative Finance        数量金融学
二级分类：Economics        经济学
分类描述：q-fin.EC is an alias for econ.GN. Economics, including micro and macro economics, international economics, theory of the firm, labor economics, and other economic topics outside finance
q-fin.ec是econ.gn的别名。经济学，包括微观和宏观经济学、国际经济学、企业理论、劳动经济学和其他金融以外的经济专题
--
一级分类：Physics        物理学
二级分类：Physics and Society        物理学与社会
分类描述：Structure, dynamics and collective behavior of societies and groups (human or otherwise). Quantitative analysis of social networks and other complex networks. Physics and engineering of infrastructure and systems of broad societal impact (e.g., energy grids, transportation networks).
社会和团体（人类或其他）的结构、动态和集体行为。社会网络和其他复杂网络的定量分析。具有广泛社会影响的基础设施和系统（如能源网、运输网络）的物理和工程。
--

---
PDF下载：
-->