1932

Abstract

Students of public policy sometimes envision an idealized policy process where competent data collection and incisive analysis on both sides of a debate lead to reasoned judgments and sound decisions. Unfortunately, numbers that prove decisive in policy debates are not always carefully developed, credibly documented, or correct. This paper presents four widely cited examples of numbers in the energy field that are either misleading or wrong. It explores the origins of these numbers, how they missed the mark, and how they have been misused by both analysts and the media. In addition, it describes and uses a three-stage analytical process for evaluating such statistics that involves defining terms and boundaries, assessing underlying data, and critically analyzing arguments.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1146/annurev.energy.27.122001.083458
2002-11-01
2024-10-03
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/content/journals/10.1146/annurev.energy.27.122001.083458
Loading
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev.energy.27.122001.083458
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Review Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error