IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/16207.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Policy Analysis with Incredible Certitude

Author

Listed:
  • Charles F. Manski

Abstract

Analyses of public policy regularly express certitude about the consequences of alternative policy choices. Yet policy predictions often are fragile, with conclusions resting on critical unsupported assumptions. Then the certitude of policy analysis is not credible. This paper develops a typology of incredible analytical practices and gives illustrative cases. I call these practices conventional certitudes, dueling certitudes, conflating science and advocacy, and wishful extrapolation. I contrast these practices with my vision for credible policy analysis.

Suggested Citation

  • Charles F. Manski, 2010. "Policy Analysis with Incredible Certitude," NBER Working Papers 16207, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:16207
    Note: PE POL
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w16207.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Chen, Qianying & Funke, Michael & Paetz, Michael, 2012. "Market and non-market monetary policy tools in a calibrated DSGE model for mainland China," BOFIT Discussion Papers 16/2012, Bank of Finland, Institute for Economies in Transition.
    2. Argentiero, Amedeo & Bovi, Maurizio & Cerqueti, Roy, 2015. "Over consumption. A horse race of Bayesian DSGE models," MPRA Paper 66445, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Mester, Loretta J., 2016. "Acknowledging Uncertainty, 10-07-2016; Shadow Open Market Committee Fall Meeting, New York, NY," Speech 77, Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland.
    4. Douglas W. Elmendorf, 2015. "“Dynamic Scoring”: Why and How to Include Macroeconomic Effects in Budget Estimates for Legislative Proposals," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 46(2 (Fall)), pages 91-149.
    5. Pesaran, M. Hashem & Smith, Ron P., 2011. "Beyond the DSGE Straitjacket," IZA Discussion Papers 5661, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
    6. Hunt Allcott, 2012. "Site Selection Bias in Program Evaluation," NBER Working Papers 18373, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Whittington, Dale & Jeuland, Marc & Barker, Kate & Yuen, Yvonne, 2012. "Setting Priorities, Targeting Subsidies among Water, Sanitation, and Preventive Health Interventions in Developing Countries," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 40(8), pages 1546-1568.
    8. Muller, Sean, 2014. "Randomised trials for policy: a review of the external validity of treatment effects," SALDRU Working Papers 127, Southern Africa Labour and Development Research Unit, University of Cape Town.
    9. Charles F. Manski, 2015. "Communicating Uncertainty in Official Economic Statistics: An Appraisal Fifty Years after Morgenstern," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 53(3), pages 631-653, September.
    10. Lawrence Mead, 2015. "Only connect: Why government often ignores research," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 48(2), pages 257-272, June.
    11. Charles F. Manski, 2014. "Communicating Uncertainty in Official Economic Statistics," NBER Working Papers 20098, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • C53 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric Modeling - - - Forecasting and Prediction Models; Simulation Methods
    • H43 - Public Economics - - Publicly Provided Goods - - - Project Evaluation; Social Discount Rate
    • H68 - Public Economics - - National Budget, Deficit, and Debt - - - Forecasts of Budgets, Deficits, and Debt

    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:nbr:nberwo:16207. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.html .

    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.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.