Predicting Paris: Multi-Method Approaches to Forecast the Outcomes of Global Climate Negotiations
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2016 |
Outros Autores: | , , , , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
Texto Completo: | https://doi.org/10.17645/pag.v4i3.654 |
Resumo: | We examine the negotiations held under the auspices of the United Nations Framework Convention of Climate Change in Paris, December 2015. Prior to these negotiations, there was considerable uncertainty about whether an agreement would be reached, particularly given that the world’s leaders failed to do so in the 2009 negotiations held in Copenhagen. Amid this uncertainty, we applied three different methods to predict the outcomes: an expert survey and two negotiation simulation models, namely the Exchange Model and the Predictioneer’s Game. After the event, these predictions were assessed against the coded texts that were agreed in Paris. The evidence suggests that combining experts’ predictions to reach a collective expert prediction makes for significantly more accurate predictions than individual experts’ predictions. The differences in the performance between the two different negotiation simulation models were not statistically significant. |
id |
RCAP_75ffc6e823c804f2b37b75a4c2a4dd07 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:ojs.cogitatiopress.com:article/654 |
network_acronym_str |
RCAP |
network_name_str |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
repository_id_str |
7160 |
spelling |
Predicting Paris: Multi-Method Approaches to Forecast the Outcomes of Global Climate Negotiationsclimate policy; climate regime; expert survey; forecasting; global negotiations; Paris agreement; prediction; simulationWe examine the negotiations held under the auspices of the United Nations Framework Convention of Climate Change in Paris, December 2015. Prior to these negotiations, there was considerable uncertainty about whether an agreement would be reached, particularly given that the world’s leaders failed to do so in the 2009 negotiations held in Copenhagen. Amid this uncertainty, we applied three different methods to predict the outcomes: an expert survey and two negotiation simulation models, namely the Exchange Model and the Predictioneer’s Game. After the event, these predictions were assessed against the coded texts that were agreed in Paris. The evidence suggests that combining experts’ predictions to reach a collective expert prediction makes for significantly more accurate predictions than individual experts’ predictions. The differences in the performance between the two different negotiation simulation models were not statistically significant.Cogitatio2016-09-08info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleapplication/pdfhttps://doi.org/10.17645/pag.v4i3.654oai:ojs.cogitatiopress.com:article/654Politics and Governance; Vol 4, No 3 (2016): Climate Governance and the Paris Agreement; 172-1872183-2463reponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãoinstacron:RCAAPenghttps://www.cogitatiopress.com/politicsandgovernance/article/view/654https://doi.org/10.17645/pag.v4i3.654https://www.cogitatiopress.com/politicsandgovernance/article/view/654/654Copyright (c) 2016 Detlef F. Sprinz, Bruce Bueno de Mesquita, Steffen Kallbekken, Frans Stokman, Håkon Sælen, Robert Thomsonhttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessSprinz, Detlef F.Bueno de Mesquita, BruceKallbekken, SteffenStokman, FransSælen, HåkonThomson, Robert2022-10-21T16:03:48Zoai:ojs.cogitatiopress.com:article/654Portal AgregadorONGhttps://www.rcaap.pt/oai/openaireopendoar:71602024-03-19T16:13:46.835861Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãofalse |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Predicting Paris: Multi-Method Approaches to Forecast the Outcomes of Global Climate Negotiations |
title |
Predicting Paris: Multi-Method Approaches to Forecast the Outcomes of Global Climate Negotiations |
spellingShingle |
Predicting Paris: Multi-Method Approaches to Forecast the Outcomes of Global Climate Negotiations Sprinz, Detlef F. climate policy; climate regime; expert survey; forecasting; global negotiations; Paris agreement; prediction; simulation |
title_short |
Predicting Paris: Multi-Method Approaches to Forecast the Outcomes of Global Climate Negotiations |
title_full |
Predicting Paris: Multi-Method Approaches to Forecast the Outcomes of Global Climate Negotiations |
title_fullStr |
Predicting Paris: Multi-Method Approaches to Forecast the Outcomes of Global Climate Negotiations |
title_full_unstemmed |
Predicting Paris: Multi-Method Approaches to Forecast the Outcomes of Global Climate Negotiations |
title_sort |
Predicting Paris: Multi-Method Approaches to Forecast the Outcomes of Global Climate Negotiations |
author |
Sprinz, Detlef F. |
author_facet |
Sprinz, Detlef F. Bueno de Mesquita, Bruce Kallbekken, Steffen Stokman, Frans Sælen, Håkon Thomson, Robert |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Bueno de Mesquita, Bruce Kallbekken, Steffen Stokman, Frans Sælen, Håkon Thomson, Robert |
author2_role |
author author author author author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Sprinz, Detlef F. Bueno de Mesquita, Bruce Kallbekken, Steffen Stokman, Frans Sælen, Håkon Thomson, Robert |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
climate policy; climate regime; expert survey; forecasting; global negotiations; Paris agreement; prediction; simulation |
topic |
climate policy; climate regime; expert survey; forecasting; global negotiations; Paris agreement; prediction; simulation |
description |
We examine the negotiations held under the auspices of the United Nations Framework Convention of Climate Change in Paris, December 2015. Prior to these negotiations, there was considerable uncertainty about whether an agreement would be reached, particularly given that the world’s leaders failed to do so in the 2009 negotiations held in Copenhagen. Amid this uncertainty, we applied three different methods to predict the outcomes: an expert survey and two negotiation simulation models, namely the Exchange Model and the Predictioneer’s Game. After the event, these predictions were assessed against the coded texts that were agreed in Paris. The evidence suggests that combining experts’ predictions to reach a collective expert prediction makes for significantly more accurate predictions than individual experts’ predictions. The differences in the performance between the two different negotiation simulation models were not statistically significant. |
publishDate |
2016 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2016-09-08 |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
https://doi.org/10.17645/pag.v4i3.654 oai:ojs.cogitatiopress.com:article/654 |
url |
https://doi.org/10.17645/pag.v4i3.654 |
identifier_str_mv |
oai:ojs.cogitatiopress.com:article/654 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
https://www.cogitatiopress.com/politicsandgovernance/article/view/654 https://doi.org/10.17645/pag.v4i3.654 https://www.cogitatiopress.com/politicsandgovernance/article/view/654/654 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Cogitatio |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Cogitatio |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Politics and Governance; Vol 4, No 3 (2016): Climate Governance and the Paris Agreement; 172-187 2183-2463 reponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação instacron:RCAAP |
instname_str |
Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação |
instacron_str |
RCAAP |
institution |
RCAAP |
reponame_str |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
collection |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
|
_version_ |
1799130591234359296 |