IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/wirecc/v11y2020i5ne666.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Governing climate risks in the face of normative uncertainties

Author

Listed:
  • Behnam Taebi
  • Jan H. Kwakkel
  • Céline Kermisch

Abstract

Governing risks is not only a technical matter, but also a matter of ethical and societal considerations. In this article, we argue that in addition to scientific and technical uncertainties, we need to also address normative uncertainties of risk decisions. We define normative uncertainties as situations where there are different partially morally defensible ‐‐ but incompatible ‐‐ options or courses of action, or ones in which there is no fully morally defensible option. We conceptualize normative uncertainties, distinguishing between the four categories of evolutionary, theoretical, conceptual, and epistemic normative uncertainties. We will show different instances of normative uncertainties in climate adaptation strategies. We finally present two methods for identifying and dealing with normative uncertainties, namely, the Wide Reflective Equilibrium and adaptive planning. Situations of normative uncertainties have always been and will continue to be present in risk decisions and they have often been dealt with in an implicit manner. In this article, we make them explicit, which could lead to better morally informed and justified decisions about climate risks. This article is categorized under: Climate, Nature, and Ethics > Ethics and Climate Change.

Suggested Citation

  • Behnam Taebi & Jan H. Kwakkel & Céline Kermisch, 2020. "Governing climate risks in the face of normative uncertainties," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 11(5), September.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:wirecc:v:11:y:2020:i:5:n:e666
    DOI: 10.1002/wcc.666
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.666
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/wcc.666?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Cuppen, Eefje & Pesch, Udo & Remmerswaal, Sanne & Taanman, Mattijs, 2019. "Normative diversity, conflict and transition: Shale gas in the Netherlands," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 165-175.
    2. Mytelka, Lynn K. & Smith, Keith, 2002. "Policy learning and innovation theory: an interactive and co-evolving process," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(8-9), pages 1467-1479, December.
    3. Brans, J. P. & Macharis, C. & Kunsch, P. L. & Chevalier, A. & Schwaninger, M., 1998. "Combining multicriteria decision aid and system dynamics for the control of socio-economic processes. An iterative real-time procedure," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 109(2), pages 428-441, September.
    4. Marjolein B.. A. van Asselt & Ellen Vos, 2006. "The Precautionary Principle and the Uncertainty Paradox," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(4), pages 313-336, June.
    5. Busenberg, George J., 2001. "Learning in Organizations and Public Policy," Journal of Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 21(2), pages 173-189, May.
    6. Marjolein B. A. van Asselt & Ellen Vos, 2008. "Wrestling with uncertain risks: EU regulation of GMOs and the uncertainty paradox," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(1-2), pages 281-300, January.
    7. Céline Kermisch & Behnam Taebi, 2017. "Sustainability, Ethics and Nuclear Energy: Escaping the Dichotomy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(3), pages 1-13, March.
    8. Taebi, Behnam & Roeser, Sabine & van de Poel, Ibo, 2012. "The ethics of nuclear power: Social experiments, intergenerational justice, and emotions," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 202-206.
    9. Walker, Warren E. & Rahman, S. Adnan & Cave, Jonathan, 2001. "Adaptive policies, policy analysis, and policy-making," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 128(2), pages 282-289, January.
    10. Andy Stirling, 2010. "Keep it complex," Nature, Nature, vol. 468(7327), pages 1029-1031, December.
    11. Behnam Taebi, 2017. "Bridging the Gap between Social Acceptance and Ethical Acceptability," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(10), pages 1817-1827, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Bramka Arga Jafino & Jan H. Kwakkel & Frans Klijn, 2022. "Evaluating the distributional fairness of alternative adaptation policies: a case study in Vietnam’s upper Mekong Delta," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 173(3), pages 1-20, August.
    2. Haye Geukes & Udo Pesch & Aad Correljé & Behnam Taebi, 2021. "A Healthy Metaphor? The North Sea Consultation and the Power of Words," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-16, November.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Hamarat, Caner & Kwakkel, Jan H. & Pruyt, Erik, 2013. "Adaptive Robust Design under deep uncertainty," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 80(3), pages 408-418.
    2. Rivera-Ferre, Marta G. & Ortega-Cerda, Miquel, 2011. "Assessment of the Agri-food System for Sustainability: Recognizing Ignorance," 2011 International Congress, August 30-September 2, 2011, Zurich, Switzerland 115965, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    3. Ormerod, Richard J. & Ulrich, Werner, 2013. "Operational research and ethics: A literature review," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 228(2), pages 291-307.
    4. Kunsch, P.L. & Kavathatzopoulos, I. & Rauschmayer, F., 2009. "Modelling complex ethical decision problems with operations research," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 37(6), pages 1100-1108, December.
    5. Yanwei Li & Araz Taeihagh & Martin de Jong & Andreas Klinke, 2021. "Toward a Commonly Shared Public Policy Perspective for Analyzing Risk Coping Strategies," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 41(3), pages 519-532, March.
    6. Baustert, Paul & Othoniel, Benoit & Rugani, Benedetto & Leopold, Ulrich, 2018. "Uncertainty analysis in integrated environmental models for ecosystem service assessments: Frameworks, challenges and gaps," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 33(PB), pages 110-123.
    7. Jamie K. Wardman & Gabe Mythen, 2016. "Risk communication: against the Gods or against all odds? Problems and prospects of accounting for Black Swans," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(10), pages 1220-1230, November.
    8. Braun, Dietmar & Benninghoff, Martin, 2003. "Policy learning in Swiss research policy--the case of the National Centres of Competence in Research," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(10), pages 1849-1863, December.
    9. Reichardt, Kristin & Rogge, Karoline S. & Negro, Simona, 2015. "Unpacking the policy processes for addressing systemic problems: The case of the technological innovation system of offshore wind in Germany," Working Papers "Sustainability and Innovation" S2/2015, Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research (ISI).
    10. Sandrine Mathy & Patrick Criqui & Katharina Knoop & Manfred Fischedick & Sascha Samadi, 2016. "Uncertainty management and the dynamic adjustment of deep decarbonization pathways," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(sup1), pages 47-62, June.
    11. Rebecca Page & Lisa Dilling, 2020. "How experiences of climate extremes motivate adaptation among water managers," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 161(3), pages 499-516, August.
    12. Saner, Marc A. & Bordt, Michael, 2016. "Building the consensus: The moral space of earth measurement," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 74-81.
    13. Etienne Rouwette & Ingrid Bastings & Hans Blokker, 2011. "A Comparison of Group Model Building and Strategic Options Development and Analysis," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 20(6), pages 781-803, November.
    14. Dodgson, Mark & Hughes, Alan & Foster, John & Metcalfe, Stan, 2011. "Systems thinking, market failure, and the development of innovation policy: The case of Australia," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(9), pages 1145-1156.
    15. Giordano, Thierry, 2012. "Adaptive planning for climate resilient long-lived infrastructures," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 80-89.
    16. Rafols, Ismael & Leydesdorff, Loet & O’Hare, Alice & Nightingale, Paul & Stirling, Andy, 2012. "How journal rankings can suppress interdisciplinary research: A comparison between Innovation Studies and Business & Management," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(7), pages 1262-1282.
    17. Jonathan Breckon, 2022. "Communicating and using systematic reviews—Learning from other disciplines," Campbell Systematic Reviews, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(4), December.
    18. Szarka, Joseph, 2006. "Wind power, policy learning and paradigm change," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(17), pages 3041-3048, November.
    19. Elvira Uyarra & Kieron Flanagan & Edurne Magro & James R Wilson & Markku Sotarauta, 2017. "Understanding regional innovation policy dynamics: Actors, agency and learning," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 35(4), pages 559-568, June.
    20. Nill, Jan & Kemp, Ren, 2009. "Evolutionary approaches for sustainable innovation policies: From niche to paradigm?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 668-680, May.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:wirecc:v:11:y:2020:i:5:n:e666. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1002/(ISSN)1757-7799 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.