Expert judgment in climate science
How it is used and how it can be justified
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 10798707 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Mason Majszak (0000-0003-0775-9418), JULIE JEBEILE (0000-0002-7164-5848) |
| Year | 2023 |
| Volume | 100 |
| Pages | 32-38 |
| Publication date | 2023-08-01 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Studies in History and Philosophy of Science (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0039-3681 • E-ISSN: 1879-2510 |
| Publisher | Elsevier BV (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1016/j.shpsa.2023.05.005 |
| PMID | 37315425 |
| OpenAlex | W4380356590 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 8 |
| References cited | 31 |
Like any science marked by high uncertainty, climate science is characterized by a widespread use of expert judgment. In this paper, we first show that, in climate science, expert judgment is used to overcome uncertainty, thus playing a crucial role in the domain and even at times supplanting models. One is left to wonder to what extent it is legitimate to assign expert judgment such a status as an epistemic superiority in the climate context, especially as the production of expert judgment is particularly opaque. To begin answering this question, we highlight the key components of expert judgment. We then argue that the justification for the status and use of expert judgment depends on the competence and the individual subjective features of the expert producing the judgment since expert judgment involves not only the expert's theoretical knowledge and tacit knowledge, but also their intuition and values. This goes against the objective ideal in science and the criteria from social epistemology which largely attempt to remove subjectivity from expertise
Climate change · Climate science · Competence (human resources · Epistemology · Expert system · Intuition · Subject-matter expert · Tacit knowledge · Wonder · Climate Change Communication and Perception · Computer Science · Philosophy · Philosophy and History of Science · Psychology · Social Psychology · Sustainability and Climate Change Governance · Artificial Intelligence
Justice considerations in climate research
Status of global coastal adaptation
Beyond Values
Turning biodiversity data into evidence
Climate tipping points and expert judgment
A habitability lens to boost effective local climate adaptation
Climate Sensitivity through the Lens of Measurement Practice
The contributory role of local knowledge in climate research
Tipping elements in the Earth's climate system
Distinguishing between legitimate and illegitimate values in climate modeling
Holism, entrenchment, and the future of climate model pluralism
Climate tipping points and expert judgment
Unleashing expert judgment in assessment
Expert reports by large multidisciplinary groups
Opacity thought through
The philosophical novelty of computer simulation methods
Experts in science
Multi-model ensembles in climate science
Value management and model pluralism in climate science
Model Evaluation
Expert Judgment for Climate Change Adaptation
Experts
| Citations per year | 2 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2022 - 2026 (5) |
| Highly cited | No |