IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/scippl/v50y2023i2p243-252..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Numeric work: The efforts of calculation actors to make numbers count in climate and energy policy

Author

Listed:
  • Susanne Jørgensen
  • Knut H Sørensen

Abstract

Policy documents suggest that quantitative information is important in the development of climate and energy policy. This is supported by quantitative studies research into the use of numbers in governance, which tends to assume that numbers have sufficient epistemic authority to be used by policymakers because they are believed to be trustworthy since they are produced through mechanical objectivity. This paper questions such assumptions, by analysing the extent of extra-calculative work when providing numeric information to policymakers. We term such efforts numeric work and analyse the extent and content of such work based on interviewed experts who are engaged with calculating climate and energy issues in the context of policymaking in Norway. Numeric work shares features with the actor–network theory concept of translation but differs due to the dialogic interaction between calculation actors and policymakers that includes efforts to improve the transparency of calculation, which counters a complete black-boxing of calculation results.

Suggested Citation

  • Susanne Jørgensen & Knut H Sørensen, 2023. "Numeric work: The efforts of calculation actors to make numbers count in climate and energy policy," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 50(2), pages 243-252.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:scippl:v:50:y:2023:i:2:p:243-252.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/scipol/scac054
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Helga Nowotny, 2003. "Democratising expertise and socially robust knowledge," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 30(3), pages 151-156, June.
    2. Rose, Nikolas, 1991. "Governing by numbers: Figuring out democracy," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 16(7), pages 673-692.
    3. Johan Christensen & Cathrine Holst, 2017. "Advisory commissions, academic expertise and democratic legitimacy: the case of Norway," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 44(6), pages 821-833.
    4. Andrea Saltelli & Gabriele Bammer & Isabelle Bruno & Erica Charters & Monica Di Fiore & Emmanuel Didier & Wendy Nelson Espeland & John Kay & Samuele Lo Piano & Deborah Mayo & Roger Pielke Jr & Tommaso, 2020. "Five ways to ensure that models serve society: a manifesto," Nature, Nature, vol. 582(7813), pages 482-484, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Chiasson, Guy & Angelstam, Per & Axelsson, Robert & Doyon, Frederik, 2019. "Towards collaborative forest planning in Canadian and Swedish hinterlands: Different institutional trajectories?," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 334-345.
    2. Pushpa Arabindoo, 2020. "Renewable energy, sustainability paradox and the post-urban question," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 57(11), pages 2300-2320, August.
    3. Kin Wing (Ray) Chan, 2020. "Politics of smell: Constructing animal waste governmentality and good farming subjectivities in colonial Hong Kong," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 38(6), pages 1055-1074, September.
    4. Olivier Boiral & Marie‐Christine Brotherton & Léo Rivaud & David Talbot, 2022. "Comparing the uncomparable? An investigation of car manufacturers' climate performance," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(5), pages 2213-2229, July.
    5. Gunn, Callum J. & Bertelsen, Neil & Regeer, Barbara J. & Schuitmaker-Warnaar, Tjerk Jan, 2021. "Valuing patient engagement: Reflexive learning in evidence generation practices for health technology assessment," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 280(C).
    6. Markus Dressel, 2022. "Models of science and society: transcending the antagonism," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-15, December.
    7. Rau, Henrike & Goggins, Gary & Fahy, Frances, 2018. "From invisibility to impact: Recognising the scientific and societal relevance of interdisciplinary sustainability research," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 266-276.
    8. Maran, Laura & Bracci, Enrico & Funnell, Warwick, 2016. "Accounting and the management of power: Napoleon’s occupation of the commune of Ferrara (1796–1799)," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 60-78.
    9. Ines Wagner & Mari Teigen, 2022. "Egalitarian inequality: Gender equality and pattern bargaining," Gender, Work and Organization, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(2), pages 486-501, March.
    10. Lu, Xuefei & Borgonovo, Emanuele, 2023. "Global sensitivity analysis in epidemiological modeling," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 304(1), pages 9-24.
    11. Bay, Charlotta, 2018. "Makeover accounting: Investigating the meaning-making practices of financial accounts," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 44-54.
    12. Sauermann, Henry & Vohland, Katrin & Antoniou, Vyron & Balázs, Bálint & Göbel, Claudia & Karatzas, Kostas & Mooney, Peter & Perelló, Josep & Ponti, Marisa & Samson, Roeland & Winter, Silvia, 2020. "Citizen science and sustainability transitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(5).
    13. Ejiogu, Amanze & Ambituuni, Ambisisi & Ejiogu, Chibuzo, 2021. "Accounting for accounting’s role in the neoliberalization processes of social housing in England: A Bourdieusian perspective," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    14. Nicholas R. Magliocca, 2020. "Agent-Based Modeling for Integrating Human Behavior into the Food–Energy–Water Nexus," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-25, December.
    15. Stefan Thomas & David Scheller & Susan Schröder, 2021. "Co-creation in citizen social science: the research forum as a methodological foundation for communication and participation," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 8(1), pages 1-11, December.
    16. Klenk, Nicole L. & Hickey, Gordon M., 2011. "A virtual and anonymous, deliberative and analytic participation process for planning and evaluation: The Concept Mapping Policy Delphi," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 152-165, January.
    17. Andrea Mennicken & Robert Salais, 2022. "The New Politics of Numbers: An Introduction," Post-Print hal-04115712, HAL.
    18. Jessica Weinkle, 2022. "An evaluation of North Carolina science advice on COVID-19 pandemic response," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-16, December.
    19. Mennicken, Andrea & Miller, Peter & Samiolo, Rita, 2008. "Accounting for economic sociology," economic sociology. perspectives and conversations, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies, vol. 10(1), pages 3-7.
    20. Jennifer Garard & Larissa Koch & Martin Kowarsch, 2018. "Elements of success in multi-stakeholder deliberation platforms," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 4(1), pages 1-16, December.

    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:oup:scippl:v:50:y:2023:i:2:p:243-252.. 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/spp .

    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.