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

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 20 of the 20 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

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
DOI 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2005.00604.x
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

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.

Overview

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.

Verification

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?

Citations

Cites

Show all 19 references

Research works printed but not linked: 11

  1. Craye M., 2001, Milieu en gezondheid in Vlaanderen: naar en adequate dialoog tussen overheid, bevolking en wetenschap
  2. Van der Sluijs J. P., 1997, Anchoring amid uncertainty; On the management of uncertainties in risk assessment of anthropogenic climate change
  3. Van der Sluijs J. P. Risbey J. S. &Ravetz J. R.(in press).Uncertainty assessment of VOC emissions from paint in the Netherlands.Environmental Monitoring and Assessment.
  4. EEA, 2003, EMEP/CORINAIR Emission Inventory Guidebook
  5. Kloprogge P., 2005, A Method for the Analysis of Assumptions in Assessments Applied to Two Indicators in the Fifth Dutch Environmental Outlook
  6. Aelvoet W., 1998, Risico op gezondheidsschade bij kinderen van de Neerlandwijk te Wilrijk
  7. Schoeters G., 1998, Studie van gezondheidsaspecten en gezondheidsrisico's ten gevolge van milieuverontreiniging in de Neerlandwijk te Wilrijk
  8. Koppen G., 2001, Biomonitoringsonderzoek 50‐65j vrouwen en 21‐40j mannen: evaluatie van de relatie milieu‐gezondheid op basis van meting van biomerkers
  9. Staessen J., 2001, Koepeltekst biomonitoring bij adolescenten: een gevoelige nieuwe methode voor het inschatten van verontreiniging van het leefmilieu en geassocieerde gezondheidsrisico's
  10. Van de Graaf H., 2000, Beleid en Politiek
  11. Von Schomberg R., 1997, Argumentatie in de context van een wetenschappelijke controverse

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 401–426 of 426

Related

See all

Metadata

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)
ORCID
Venue
Risk Analysis
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2005-04
Volume
25
Issue
2
Pages
481-492
ISSN
  • 0272-4332 (ISSN-L)
  • 1539-6924
DOI
10.1111/j.1539-6924.2005.00604.x
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
Licence
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
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Computational Mechanics › Probabilistic and Robust Engineering Design
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Safety, Risk, Reliability and Quality › 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