Cited by 426Environmental and Social Impact AssessmentsProbabilistic and Robust Engineering DesignRisk and Safety Analysis

Combining Quantitative and Qualitative Measures of Uncertainty in Model‐Based Environmental Assessment: The NUSAP System

Open access
Van Der Sluijs, Jeroen P., Craye, Matthieu, Funtowicz, Silvio, Kloprogge, Penny, Ravetz, Jerry, Risbey, James·2005·Risk Analysis

Abstract

This article discusses recent experiences with the Numeral Unit Spread Assessment Pedigree (NUSAP) system for multidimensional uncertainty assessment, based on four case studies that vary in complexity. We show that the NUSAP method is applicable not only to relatively simple calculation schemes but also to complex models in a meaningful way and that NUSAP is useful to assess not only parameter uncertainty but also (model) assumptions. A diagnostic diagram can be used to synthesize results of quantitative analysis of parameter sensitivity and qualitative review (pedigree analysis) of parameter strength. It provides an analytic tool to prioritize uncertainties according to quantitative and qualitative insights in the limitations of available knowledge. We show that extension of the pedigree scheme to include societal dimensions of uncertainty, such as problem framing and value‐laden assumptions, further promotes reflexivity and collective learning. When used in a deliberative setting, NUSAP pedigree assessment has the potential to foster a deeper social debate and a negotiated management of complex environmental problems.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2005.00604.x

Cites

20 of 20 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Tools of post-normal-science inspiration for knowledge and modelling quality assessment could be adapted to the analysis of algorithms, such as the NUSAP notation system and sensitivity auditing.

    “Tools of post-normal-science inspiration for knowledge and modelling quality assessment could be adapted to the analysis of algorithms, such as the NUSAP (Numeral Unit Spread Assessment Pedigree) notation system for the management and communication of uncertainty (Funtowicz and Ravetz, 1990;Van Der Sluijs, 2005) and sensitivity auditing (Saltelli and Funtowicz, 2014), respectively.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Van Der Sluijs, J. P., Craye, M., Funtowicz, S., Kloprogge, P., Ravetz, J., & Risbey, J.
Affiliations
  • Joint Research Centre (IT)
  • Utrecht University (NL)
  • European Commission (BE)
  • Monash University (AU)
Venue
Risk Analysis
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2005-04
Volume
25
Issue
2
Pages
481-492
ISSN
  • 0272-4332 (ISSN-L)
  • 1539-6924
OpenAlex
W2119214313
Cited by
426
References
19
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 38 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 19 · 2020: 22 · 2019: 21 · 2018: 26 · 2017: 35 · 2016: 15 · 2015: 25 · 2014: 21 · 2013: 23 · 2012: 23
FWCI
65.98
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Risk Analysis (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Utrecht University Repository (Utrecht University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law › Environmental and Social Impact Assessments
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Probabilistic and Robust Engineering Design
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Risk and Safety Analysis
Keywords
uncertainty analysis, multidimensional uncertainty, pedigree analysis, parameter sensitivity, model assumptions, diagnostic diagrams, problem framing, deliberative decision-making, collective learning, environmental assessment, model-based evaluation
MeSH terms
Vehicle Emissions, Computer Simulation, Environment, Environmental Monitoring, Environmental Pollutants, Models, Theoretical, Public Health, Software, Systems Theory, Models, Statistical, Risk Assessment, Uncertainty

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review