Decision Analysis:

Making Decisions in the Face of Uncertainty with Competing Objectives

Shelie Miller, SNRE, February 17, 2015
Signal to Noise (perhaps more like climate)

From social research methods .net

 Models can perform the “control experiment” that we
can’t do in the real world
Average surface temperature change (°C)

Meehl et al., J. Climate (2004)

What are the climate change impacts of
emerging technologies?

How do we design new technologies

(and/or the policies that govern them)
to achieve preferred outcomes?
Making Decisions Under Uncertainty

High

Information about system

Ability to change system

Low

Design Process
 Path Dependence

We may only be able to “see” one node ahead

Responses to the Climate Change Problem

Autonomous/ Policy/
Individual Societal

Reactive Anticipatory

Adaptation Mitigation
One Proposed Pathway to Greenhouse Gas
Mitigation

Each of these “wedges” is extremely costly

National Resources Defense Council

 What if…
• What if climate change isn’t as bad as
scientists think?
• If we act now and never have major negative
impacts, how do we know we did the right
thing?
 Best Case Scenario:
We take action, then never see dire scenario predictions come true

• This has happened before…

• Approximately $100 billion spent in US alone

• Was Y2K a hoax?
• If you could go back in time and spend less time and money on
the Y2K “catastrophe”, would you?
 Decision Analysis
• Any decision can be broken into 3 parts
– What is the goal? (objective)
– What can be controlled? (decision variables)
– What can’t be controlled? (constraints)

• What you can/can’t control may depend on

who you are
 What is your decision space?

Your team has been asked to be part of a task force to create a Climate Action
Plan for the University of Michigan. The goal is to reduce the university’s
greenhouse gas emissions by as much as possible.
• What can you control?
• What can’t you control?
• What are some of the uncertainties that might affect your recommendations?
• How would your answers be different if you were the President of the
university? A representative of Congress?
 Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis

May have multiple, competing goals

Greenhouse Gas Water Land Cost

Emissions Footprint Footprint

Stakeholder Dependent Tradeoff Analysis

 Weighted Scoring
Alternative 1 Alternative 2

Criteria Weight Score Value Score Value

Criteria 1 W1 S1,1 W1 x S1,1 S2,1 W1 x S2,1

Criteria 2 W2 S1,2 W2 x S1,2 S2,2 W2 x S2,2

Factors
Considered Criteria 3 W3 S1,3 W3 x S1,3 S2,3 W3 x S2,3

Criteria 4 W4 S1,4 W4 x S1,4 S2,4 W4 x S2,4

Quantifies
TOTAL: T1 T2
Stakeholder
Values Technical
Evaluations Final Score

Courtesy CH2M-Hill
 BASF Eco-Efficiency Analysis

*BASF does use weighting factors based on public opinion surveys; final values
are normalized on the basis of weighted scores.
What additional criteria influence a decision?

In the first example, your goal was to reduce the university’s

greenhouse gas emissions by as much as possible. But any
major policy decision often weighs a variety of goals.
– What are other criteria that are important to think about when
creating a climate action plan?
– How would your team decide to make a decision, given
competing goals?
 Weighting Methods
• Decision Analysis vs Decision Support
 Decisions Need to Be Made in a Wide Variety
of Contexts

WEALTH Need to introduce spatial scales as well

LOCAL TEMPORAL

NEAR-TERM LONG-TERM

GLOBAL

Small scales inform large scales.

SPATIAL Large scales inform small scales.
 How Will Your Frame of Analysis Change
Depending on:
• Short-term vs Long-term
• Wealthy vs. Poor Countries
• High Impact vs. Low Impact Countries
• Timeframe of election cycles vs. climate cycle

• How do you weigh:

– Climate change impacts
– Costs (mitigation, adaptation, climate effects)
– Social justice/equity
– Individual vs societal benefits and consequences
Knowing, of course…