when asked to make an informed choice, do people prefer nuclear
TRANSCRIPT
YEA
RS20WHEN ASKED TO MAKE AN INFORMED CHOICE, DO PEOPLE PREFER NUCLEAR POWER?DR. JOE ÁRVAI, Erb Institute for Global Sustainable Enterprise
e: [email protected] ▪︎ @DecisionLab
YEA
RS20
BIG IMPACT / BOLD IDEAS @ D e c i s i o n L a b
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
▸ Doug Bessette
▸ Joule Bergerson
▸ Victoria Campbell
▸ Robin Gregory
▸ Richard Grogan
▸ Robyn Wilson
▸ Carbon Management Canada
▸ Compass Resource Management
▸ Insightrix Research
▸ Knowledge Networks
▸ Michigan State University Board of Trustees
▸ National Science Foundation
▸ Suncor Energy
YEA
RS20
BIG IMPACT / BOLD IDEAS @ D e c i s i o n L a b
ENERGY TRANSITIONS: A COMMON NARRATIVE
▸ Consultation involving decision-makers, key stakeholders, and content area experts.
▸ Deliberation, negotiation, and if necessary, conflict resolution.
▸ Transparency and trust with respect to the participants and the process.
▸ Great science upon which to base choices; a.k.a. “science-based decision-making”.
YEA
RS20
BIG IMPACT / BOLD IDEAS @ D e c i s i o n L a b
ENERGY TRANSITIONS: A COMMON NARRATIVE
PhysicsChemistry
EngineeringMedicine
Public HealthPolitical Science
Public PolicyEconomicsSociology
CommunicationsApplied Psychology
JDM?
YEA
RS20
BIG IMPACT / BOLD IDEAS @ D e c i s i o n L a b
THE SCIENCE OF JUDGMENT & DECISION-MAKING
▸ Focuses on the what and the why.
▸ There are dozens — at least — of questions we could ask…1. To what extent to people account for “technical” information when
making decisions? 2. To what extent do people make decisions that are in line with their
values and priorities?
YEA
RS20
BIG IMPACT / BOLD IDEAS @ D e c i s i o n L a b
THE SCIENCE OF JUDGMENT & DECISION-MAKING
▸ Focuses on the what and the why.
▸ There are dozens — at least — of questions we could ask…1. To what extent to people account for “technical” information when
making decisions? 2. To what extent do people make decisions that are in line with their
values and priorities?
YEA
RS20
BIG IMPACT / BOLD IDEAS @ D e c i s i o n L a b
THE SCIENCE OF JUDGMENT & DECISION-MAKING
Hsee, C. K. 1998. Less is better: When low-value options are valued more highly than high-value options. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making 11:107-121.
YEA
RS20
BIG IMPACT / BOLD IDEAS @ D e c i s i o n L a b
THE SCIENCE OF JUDGMENT & DECISION-MAKING
Crime Deer Overpop.
Human Health Risk Lower Higher
Environmental Risk Lower Higher
>Separate Evaluation
Joint Evaluation >Wilson, R. S., and J. L. Arvai. 2006. When less is more: How affect influences preferences when comparing low and high-risk options. Journal of Risk Research 9:165-178.
YEA
RS20
BIG IMPACT / BOLD IDEAS @ D e c i s i o n L a b
THE SCIENCE OF JUDGMENT & DECISION-MAKING
▸ Focuses on the what and the why.
▸ There are dozens — at least — of questions we could ask…1. To what extent to people account for “technical” information when
making decisions? 2. To what extent do people make decisions that are in line with their
values and priorities?
YEA
RS20
BIG IMPACT / BOLD IDEAS @ D e c i s i o n L a b
CARS
Attribute UnitsToyota Camry
Ford Fusion
Volkswagen Passat
Hyundai Sonata
Volvo S60
Price Dollars (⇣) $27,850 $27,095 $34,100 $23,995 $37,750
Fuel Consumption L/100km (⇣) 7.8 9 7.7 7.3 10.2
GHG Emissions Tonnes CO2/yr. (⇣) 4.7 5.1 4.4 4.8 5.4
Safety Rating Consumer Reports (⇡) 4.7 4.3 4.8 4.8 5.0
Quality & reliability Consumer Reports: 0-5 (⇡) 4.3 3.3 4.3 3.7 3.0
YEA
RS20
BIG IMPACT / BOLD IDEAS @ D e c i s i o n L a b
CARS
Version W [95% CI]
Rank: Exposed 0.73 (+/- 0.02)
Rank: Blind 0.81 (+/- 0.02)
Quality
Safety
GHGsL/100km
Price
YEA
RS20
BIG IMPACT / BOLD IDEAS @ D e c i s i o n L a b
ENERGY & CLIMATE CHANGE
Version W [95% CI]
Rank: Exposed 0.63 (+/- 0.02)
Rank: Blind 0.62 (+/- 0.02)
Cost
Public Opposition
CatastopheTemp.
GHG
YEA
RS20
BIG IMPACT / BOLD IDEAS @ D e c i s i o n L a b
CALIBRATION ACROSS CONTEXTS
Calib
ratio
n (W
)
0.6
0.68
0.76
0.84
0.92
1
CARS APARTMENT RENTAL INVESTMENTS SYRIA ENERGY & CLIMATE CHANGE
Exposed Blind
YEA
RS20
BIG IMPACT / BOLD IDEAS @ D e c i s i o n L a b
DECISION SCIENCE AND ENERGY STRATEGY▸ These results point to a couple of potential pitfalls (among a great many) for
decision makers:
▸ Affective responses (emotions) are powerful drivers of judgment and preference.
▸ Decision-makers have a tendency to anchor on certain cues, and use these as the basis for their judgments and preferences, even if they do not help to adequately characterize decisions at hand.
▸ There appears to be a persistent lack of internal consistency in evaluations of alternatives.
YEA
RS20
BIG IMPACT / BOLD IDEAS @ D e c i s i o n L a b
DECISION SCIENCE AND ENERGY STRATEGY
▸ What we think we know:
▸ When we make important decisions, our affective and analytic systems should be working in unison.
▸ Anchoring on a small set of important attributes is okay if prioritization is the product analyzing of key tradeoffs.
▸ Decisions that require greater accuracy, also require greater effort.
▸ A hallmark of decision quality is internal consistency.
YEA
RS20
BIG IMPACT / BOLD IDEAS @ D e c i s i o n L a b
DECISION SCIENCE AND ENERGY STRATEGY
1
Define decision problems (o
r
opportunitie
s) and constr
aints
2
Identify objective
s and appropriate
perform
ance measures
3
Develop creative, a
nd substa
ntially
different a
lternatives
4
Forecast consequences
and key u
ncertainties
5
Confront tr
adeoffs
directly
↷↶ ↷↶ ↷↶ ↷↶ ↷↶ 6
Adaptive
management
YEA
RS20
BIG IMPACT / BOLD IDEAS @ D e c i s i o n L a b
DECISION SCIENCE AND ENERGY STRATEGY▸ An applied research effort to design and test a
decision-aiding approach for energy transitions.
▸ Initial test site was MSU’s TB Simon Power Plant. Subsequent research in partnership with industry partners in Canada.▸ Highly interdisciplinary research.▸ Multi-party research involving corporate,
government, and public stakeholders.
YEA
RS20
BIG IMPACT / BOLD IDEAS @ D e c i s i o n L a b
DECISION SCIENCE AND ENERGY STRATEGY1. Meet demand.2. Increase demand-side efficiency.3. Increase fraction of renewable energy.4. Minimize capital and operating costs.5. Create full-time jobs.6. Reduce GHG emissions.7. Minimize land-use impacts.8. Reduce air pollution.9. Consider alternatives perceived as being highly innovative.
YEA
RS20
BIG IMPACT / BOLD IDEAS @ D e c i s i o n L a b
DECISION SCIENCE AND ENERGY STRATEGY
▸ Next Gen. Nuclear
▸ Biofuel
▸ Biofuel+CCS
▸ DNG
▸ NG
▸ NG+CCS
▸ Coal
▸ Coal+CCS
▸ NG+Coal (CF)
▸ Biofuel+Coal (CF)
▸ Solar Farm
▸ Dist. Solar
▸ Wind Farm
▸ Dist. Wind
▸ Fuel Cells
▸ Small Hydro
▸ Green Grid
▸ Reg. Grid
YEA
RS20
BIG IMPACT / BOLD IDEAS @ D e c i s i o n L a b
DECISION SCIENCE AND ENERGY STRATEGYGrid
Options
Interactive software developed by Compass Resource Management, Vancouver, BC, Canada. Database from Black & Veatch, Overland Park, KS, USA.
$
YEA
RS20
BIG IMPACT / BOLD IDEAS @ D e c i s i o n L a b
DECISION SCIENCE AND ENERGY STRATEGY
Innovation 0.04
Jobs 0.09
Land Use 0.14
Cost 0.18
Air Quality 0.25
GHG Es. 0.30
GHG Es. Cost Air Quality Innovation Jobs Land Use
additional cost / yr
YEA
RS20
BIG IMPACT / BOLD IDEAS @ D e c i s i o n L a b
SO, HOW DOES NUCLEAR FARE?
Nuclear Biofuel+CCS DNG NG Coal+CCS Solar Biofuel+Coal (CF) Wind Farm BiofuelSolar Farm Coal Dist. Wind Green Grid NG+CCS Fuel Cells NG+Coal (CF) Sm. Hydro Reg. Grid
YEA
RS20
BIG IMPACT / BOLD IDEAS @ D e c i s i o n L a b
OTHER RESULTS▸ Positive evaluations from users:
▸ Significant increases in learning about energy transitions
▸ High self-reported ease-of-use (of decision-support tools)
▸ High overall self-reported satisfaction with process
▸ High self-reported comfort with final decisions
▸ A paired-down version of this decision-support platform is on display in the NAS’s Koshland Science Museum in Washington, DC.
▸ https://koshland-science-museum.org/sites/all/exhibits/mitigationsim/index.html
YEA
RS20
BIG IMPACT / BOLD IDEAS @ D e c i s i o n L a b
SELECTED PAPERSShi, J., V. H. M. Visschers, M. Siegrist, and J. Arvai. 2016. Knowledge as a driver of public perceptions about climate change reassessed. Nature Climate Change 6:759-762.
Bessette, D. L., V. Campbell-Arvai, and J. Arvai. 2016. Expanding the Reach of Participatory Risk Management: Testing an Online Decision-Aiding Framework for Informing Internally Consistent Choices. Risk Analysis 36:992-1005.Kenney, L., D. Bessette, and J. Arvai. 2015. Improving decisions about energy strategies in developing communities: A case study from Canada’s north. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 58:855-873.Kenney, L., J. Arvai, M. Vardhan, and D. Catacutan. 2015. Bringing stakeholder values into climate risk management programs: Decision aiding for REDD in Vietnam. Society and Natural Resources 28:261-279.Bessette, D., J. Arvai, and V. Campbell-Arvai. 2014. Decision support framework for developing regional energy strategies. Environmental Science & Technology 48:1401–1408.Arvai, J. 2014. An appeal for smarter decisions. Policy Options 35:40-43.
Arvai, J., R. Gregory, D. Bessette, and V. Campbell-Arvai. 2012. Decision support for the development of energy strategies. Issues in Science and Technology 28:43-52.
YEA
RS20
BIG IMPACT / BOLD IDEAS @ D e c i s i o n L a b
THANKS AND CONTACT INFO.
Dr. Joe Árvai Director, Erb Institute for Global Sustainable Enterprise
Max McGraw Professor of Sustainable Enterprise
School of Natural Resources & Environment, and Ross School of Business
University of Michigan
E [email protected] • Tel +1 734 647 3891 www erb.umich.edu • Twitter @DecisionLab