Energy Scenarios: Science-Theoretical Aspects of Energy Forecasting

NOT FOR QUOTATION WITHOUT PERMlSSION OF THE AUTHOR

ENERGY SCENAFUOS:

SCIENCE-THEOFWI3CA.L ASPECTS OF ENERGY FORECASlWG

M. Kraus

May 1985 WP-85-34

Working Papers a r e interim r e p o r t s on work of t h e International l n s t i t u t e for Applied Systems Analysis and have received only limited review. Views or opinions expressed h e r e i n do not necessarily r e p r e s e n t those of t h e l n s t i t u t e or of i t s National Member Organizations.

INTERNATIONAL lNSTITUTE FOR APPLIED SYSTEMS ANALYSlS 2361 Laxenburg, Austria

Preface

Long-term e n e r g y forecasting h a s traditionally been a major c o n c e r n of applied systems analysis. In inter-disciplinary r e s e a r c h a p p r o a c h e s , economists, e n g i n e e r s , n a t u r a l a n d social s c i e n t i s t s have developed complex models t o assess systems' behavior in t h e f u t u r e . Influenced by t h e t e c h n i c a l n a t u r e of systems analysis, u n c e r t a i n t i e s in a model a n d i t s predictions have primarily been understood a s a function of t h e quality of t h e model design. Deviations observed between forecasts a n d a c t u a l developments have t h u s been considered a s a p r o p e r t y of t h e model.

Although over t h e p a s t decade h o w l e d g e of s y s t e m s h a s been increasing a n d forecasting t e c h n i q u e s have been improved, t h i s progress was n o t always reflected in a h i g h e r f o r e c a s t accuracy. Deviations often r e s u l t e d from i m p o r t a n t c h a n g e s in t h e exogenous e n v i r o n m e n t of t h e forecasting model: t h e s e h a v e been more pro- n o u n c e d in t h e past decade t h a n in previous periods. As a response t o mounting exogenous u n c e r t a i n t i e s t h e s c e n a r i o t e c h n i q u e h a s b e e n developed. This t e c h - nique h a s sometimes been i n t e r p r e t e d as a m e a n s of immunizing t h e modeler from criticism, a s with an increasing number of exogenous variables t h e responsibility for t h e f o r e c a s t ' s a c c u r a c y could be assigned t o t h e forecast environment.

It is t h e i n t e n t i o n of t h e p r e s e n t paper t o c o n t r i b u t e t o t h i s discussion by a b s t r a c t i n g from t h e more technical understanding of e n e r g y forecasting a n d look- ing upon basic s t r u c t u r a l f e a t u r e s of any forecast.

The r e s u l t s p r e s e n t e d h e r e a r e p a r t of a d o c t o r a l dissertation a n d were con- d u c t e d during a fellowship a t IIASA in 1983. The a u t h o r would like t o t h a n k t h e Energy Group for t h e i r warm support. The fellowship was g e n e r o u s l y sponsored by t h e Alfried Krupp von Bohlen und Halbach Foundation, Essen, F.R.G. Very valuable aid a n d comments were also provided by Dr. E. Jochem (Fraunhofer-Institut fiir Sys- t e m t e c h n i k u n d Jnnovationsforschung, Karlsruhe, F.R.G.), Dr. M. H a r t e r

(Gemeinsame Forschungsstelle der Europaischen Gemeinschaften, Karlsruhe, F.R.G.). and E. Fulda (Institut f u r Philosophie, Universitat Karlsruhe. F.R.G.). The a u t h o r would be grateful for any comments and criticism on t h e paper which may be addressed to: Michael Kraus, International Energy AgencyIOECD, 2, r u e Andre- Pascal, F-75775 Paris Cedex 16, France.

Abstract

S t a r t i n g off with t h e historical development of energy forecasting, C h a p t e r 1 d e s c r i b e s t h e e m e r g e n c e of conditional prognosis - so-called if-then s t a t e m e n t s - from a n increasingly politicized e n e r g y environment. I n h e r e n t limits of e n e r g y d e m a n d forecasts a r e shown a s stemming from basic s t r u c t u r a l differences between economic a n d social s c i e n c e s a n d n a t u r a l sciences. The s c e n a r i o a p p r o a c h is dis- c u s s e d in g r e a t e r detail. To clarify t h e various s c e n a r i o t e r m s a distinction is made between a narrower a n d b r o a d e r s c e n a r i o c o n c e p t . The IIASA e n e r g y model of 1980 is u s e d a s a n example t o show specific c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of t h e s c e n a r i o t e c h n i q u e a n d t h e problems arising during i t s application.

A g e n e r a l definition of prognosis is given a t t h e beginning of C h a p t e r 2, based on t h e deduction s c h e m e of Hempel a n d Oppenheim. Thereafter, t h e s t r u c t u r a l i d e n t i t y of explanation a n d prognosis is disussed. In response t o t h e c u r r e n t lack of universal laws in t h e economic a n d social sciences, a n a t t e m p t is made t o develop a pragmatic u n d e r s t a n d i n g of f o r e c a s t i n g laws. The e x t e n t t o which prognosis c a n e v e r be founded is investigated t h r o u g h t h e example of t h e "Miinchhausen- Trilemma". Two i m p o r t a n t f e a t u r s of prognosis a r e analyzed, conditionality a n d reflexivity, a n d t h e i r political implications a r e discussed. Finally, t h e problem of f o r e c a s t evaluation is i n v e s t i g a t e d a n d methodological c r i t e r i a for a n evaluation a r e p r e s e n t e d .

Contents

1. I n t r o d u c i n g t h e Problem

1.1 The Limits of E n e r g y Demand E s t i m a t e s 1.2 The S c e n a r i o Approach

2. I n t r o d u c t i o n t o t h e P r o b l e m s of P r o g n o s i s 2.1 'I'he Definition of P r o g n o s i s

2.2 S t r u c t u r a l I d e n t i t y of Explanation a n d Prognosis 2.3 A P r a c t i c a l U n d e r s t a n d i n g of F o r e c a s t i n g Laws 2.4 Can P r o g n o s e s be F o u n d e d ?

2.5 'I'he Condit.ionality of P r o g n o s i s 2.6 The Reflexivity of P r o g n o s i s

2.7 P r o b l e m a t i c s of Evaluatiori C r i t e r i a

List of Figures

Figure 1.1 Figure 1.2 Figure 1.3 Figure 2.1 Figure 2.2 Figure 2.3 Figure 2 . 4 Figure 2.5 Figure 2.6 Figure 2 . 7

Description of t h e S c e n a r i o Method IIASA E n e r g y Model 1980

Model Operation of t h e IIASA Energy Model 1980 Deduction Scheme of Hempel a n d Oppenheim S t r u c t u r a l Identity of Explanation a n d P r o g n o s i s Explanation, Prognosis, a n d Testing

P r o g n o s t i c Feedback

I n h e r e n t Dynamics of Prognosis

P r o g n o s t i c Causal Chain a n d M e a s u r e m e n t Concepts Prognosis T r u t h Table

Energy Scenarios

Science-theoretical A s p e c t s of Energy F o r e c a s t i n g

Michael Kraus

1. Introducing the Roblern

T h e demand for f o r e c a s t s in t h e field of energy economy is m e t by various sides. P r i v a t e firms, r e s e a r c h i n s t i t u t e s of t h e e c o n o m i c and engineering sciences, a d m i n i s t r a t i v e authorities, and supranational organizations t r y t o m a k e f u t u r e developments transparent. T h e methods p r a c t i c e d t h e r e b y r a n g e from t h e classic methods of t h e e c o n o m i c sciences t o t h e newer s y s t e m s ana- lysis approaches of t h e n a t u r a l and engineering sciences.

Along with t h e increase in prognostic a c t i v i t y over t h e last d e c a d e substan- tial c h a n g e s have occurred in t h e p r a c t i c e of forecasting. While until t h e end of t h e '60s a l t e r n a t i v e variants of energy prognoses w e r e rareIy published, a s of approximately 1974 a l t e r n a t i v e e s t i m a t e s , so-called scenarios, began to b e published in order to d o c u m e n t t h e precariousness of e n e r g y demand estima- tion.

T h e switch to scenarios was partly a r e a c t i o n to progress which has been m a d e in epistemology. A concious s e p a r a t i o n of t h e predictable from t h e u n p ~ . e d i ~ & l e . c a u s e d t h e w i t h d r a w a l from t h e p r a c t i c e of formulating predomi- nantly c a t e g o r i c a l forecasts. Conditional prognoses, so-called if - t h e n projec- tions, whose a c c u r a c y d e o e n d s explicitly on t h e fulfillment of c e r t a i n postu- lations, now intend t o e m p h a s i z e t h e u n c e r t a i n t i e s always present in "scienti- fic" prognoses. "Scientific prognosis is distinguished from prophecy by i t s con- ditionality" [ 1

].

T h e limits of prognostic efficiency w e r e thus m a d e m o r e

t r a n s p a r e n t f o r t h e prognosis user, b u t simultaneously t h e i n f o r m a t i o n v a l u e of t h e s e f o r e c a s t s diminished in c o m p a r i s o n t o t h e a l l e g e d informational v a l u e of a n unconditional ( c a t e g o r i c a l ) prognosis.

However, world and e n e r g y politics, p a r t i c u l a r l y both oil p r i c e c r i s e s in t h e '70s, w e r e a l s o responsible f o r t h e e v e r increasing u s e of s c e n a r i o approaches.

D u e to t h e r e l a t i v e l y s t a b l e f u n d a m e n t a l c o n d i t i o n s in e n e r g y policy a n d e c o - nomics, until t h e e a r l y '70s a n e n e r g y prognosis w a s a planning i n s t r u m e n t f o r t h e e n e r g y business a n d g o v e r n m e n t a u t h o r i t i e s , in o r d e r t o m e e t t h e e x p e c t e d e n e r g y d e m a n d w i t h a well-balanced e n e r g y supply. D u e t o t h e o p e n d e v e l o p m e n t of t h e m i n e r a l oil p r i c e a n d t h e possible r e a c t i o n of t h e e n e r g y c o n s u m e r , t h i s supply o r i e n t e d e n e r g y policy n e e d e d t o b e r e p l a c e d by a m o r e c o m p r e h e n s i v e policy, which placed m o r e e m p h a s i s on t h e r a t i o n a l u s e of energy. Administra- t o r s had t o widen t h e i r c o n c e p t s and m e a s u r e s to i n c l u d e t h e d e m a n d a s p e c t , in o r d e r to r e a c t s u i t a b l y to t h e a l t e r e d f u n d a m e n t a l c o n d i t i o n s w i t h a ration- a l u s e of e n e r g y a n d m i n e r a l oil substitutes. This c r e a t e d n e w c o n f l i c t s in t h e goals of political levels as w e l l as s u b s t a n t i a l u n c e r t a i n t y a m o n g f o r e c a s t e r s , w h o t r i e d to c o m p e n s a t e t h e imponderabilities w i t h n e w a p p r o a c h e s of m e t h o d (scenario: a n d s i m u l t a t i o n t e c h n i q u e s , s y s t e m s analysis). In addition, c l i m a t e a n d e n v i r o n m e n t f a c t o r s , c o m b i n e d w i t h t h e c o n s t a n t l y growing world e n e r g y consumption, i n c r e a s e in political i m p o r t a n c e .

T o g e t h e r w i t h t h e t u r n t o if-then s t a t e m e n t s

,

t h e d a n g e r of a c e r t a i n

-

d e s i r e d - i m m u n i z a t i o n also r o s e a n d t h e professionals w e r e f a c e d w i t h pub- l i c c r i t i c i s m . T h e d e b a t e s on n u c l e a r e n e r g y a n d e n v i r o n m e n t p a r t i c u l a r l y led t o a d e m a n d f o r m o r e t r a n s p a r e n c y when p r e s e n t i n g postulations, c a l - c u l a t i o n s a n d e s t i m a t i o n p r o c e d u r e s a n d t h e i r results. In c o n s e q u e n c e , a s e r i e s of n e w p r o g n o s t i c a t i n g groups developed a t u n i v e r s i t i e s a n d o t h e r in- s t i t u t i o n s , while in a c o u n t e r - m o v e m e n t t h e prognostic d e p a r t m e n t s o f f i r m s a n d t h e t r a d i t i o n a l e n e r g y I n s t i t u t e s improved t h e i r i n s t r u m e n t s a n d e m p h a s i z e d t h e conditionality of t h e i r own prognoses. Thus e n e r g y prog- n o s e w e r e given t h e c h a r a c t e r of suggestions f o r a c t i o n , f o r which t h e a d - d r e s s e e m a y o r may n o t a g r e e w i t h t h e premisses.

As a result, politicians a n d t h e public a l i k e b e c a m e f u r t h e r doubtful: "Possibly hidden values nourished a m i s t r u s t of p o t e n t i a l c o n s u m e r s in political p r a c t i c e , as well as t h e c o l l e a g u e s of t r a d i t i o n a l s c i e n t i f i c institutionsM/ 2 /. Instead of obtaining c l e a r s c i e n t i f i c s t a t e m e n t s a b o u t t h e f u t u r e , d i v e r s e prognostic values a c c u m u l a t e d . T h e s p a n a m o n g t h e p r o g n o s t i c v a r i a n t s a n d t h e p r o g n o s t i c v a l u e s of individual i n s t i t u t i o n s h a v e p r e s e n t l y t a k e n s u c h a n e x t e n t , t h a t t h e a p p a - r e n t i n f o r m a t i v e v a l u e of e n e r g y d e m a n d e s t i m a t e s h a s b e e n r e d u c e d substan- tially.

1.1 T h e l i m i t s of e n e r g y d e m a n d e s t i m a t e s

Up t o t h e p r e s e n t , c r i t i c i s m of e n e r g y d e m a n d e s t i m a t e s had b e e n b a s e d o n t h e f a c t t h a t p r o g n o s t i c v a l u e s d e v i a t e d f r o m t h e c o n s u m p t i o n a c t u a l l y observed.

Although t h i s d e v i a t i o n is c e r t a i n l y t h e t a r g e t v a r i a b l e t o b e minimized, i t should n o t r e v e r s e l y b e t a k e n f o r a m e a s u r e of prognosis' q u a l i t y w i t h o u t f u r - t h e r consideration. Most of t h e past c r i t i q u e s of e n e r g y d e m a n d e s t i m a t e s w e r e in e r r o r by u n c r i t i c a l l y t r a n s f e r r i n g t o e n e r g y prognosis t h e c o m p a r i s o n of t h e o r y w i t h e m p i r i c a l findings ( a m e t h o d usually possible in t h e n a t u r a l scien- ces), eg. a s t r i c t c o m p a r i s o n of t h e p r e d i c t e d w i t h t h e a c t u a l e n e r g y consump- t i o n variables. S u c h p r o c e d u r e m u s t e i t h e r banish prognosis t o t h e r e a l m of c o m p l e t e i r r a t i o n a l i t y , b e c a u s e r a t i o n a l l y found d e v i a t i o n s of t h e a c t u a l v a l u e f r o m t h e p r o g n o s t i c a t e d v a l u e a r e n o t recognizued, o r t h e prognosis is only s u f f i c i e n t f o r a f e w t r i v i a l r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s .

Application o r i e n t e d prognoses'should not b e m e a s u r e d with t h e s t a n d a r d s of c l a s s ~ c a l n a t u r a l science. T h e r e r e m a i n g r a v e differences, e v e n if t h e e c o n o m - i c a n d social s c i e n c e s h a v e partially a d o p t e d t h e a n a l y t i c a l p r o c e d u r e of t h e n a t u r a l sciences. Both s c i e n t i f i c disciplines start w i t h a simplified model of re- a l i t y by reducing i t t o a n e t w o r k of e f f e c t r e l a t i o n s h ~ p s . But t h e d e g r e e of a b s t r a c t i o n in n a t u r a l s c i e n c e models is generally less t h a n t h a t of t h e e c o n o m i c a n d s o c i a l sciences, for which n e i t h e r t h e f u n d a m e n t a l conditions of t h e o b j e c t under s t u d y c a n b e presumed c o n s t a n t , nor t h e g r e a t number of e x i s t i n g o r e x p e c t e d relationships b e r e p r e s e n t e d by a model / 3

1.

T h e s u c c e s s enjoyed in physics in t h e l a s t t w o c e n t u r i e s h a s b e e n s o g r e a t b e c a u s e t h e f u n d a m e n t a l conditions of a n i n a n i m a t e s y s t e m c a n b e r e p r o d u c e d

relatively simply flaboratory prognosis) a n d t h e r a n g e of e f f e c t relationships is relatively ]in comparison to socio-economic systems.

In t h e energy s e c t o r t h e socially, economically and technically r e l e v a n t pro- plems overlap. T h e "laws'1 of socio-economic and t e c h n i c a l s y s t e m s c a n claim no s t r i c t universal validity, but a r e understood r a t h e r as limited in t i m e and s p a c e and m o r e as quasi-causal relationships (for e x a m p l e t h e hy- pothesis which links energy consumption to e c o n o m i c growth). They c a n n o t b e universally valid because t h e presumptions a n d marginal conditions, as well as t h e complex s t r u c t u r e s underlying t h e rough model c a n never b e ex- plicitly recorded completely. They c a n b e used, however, until t h e y a r e questioned empirically: "Quasi t h e o r i e s contain a n essential r e f e r e n c e t o a particular s p a t i a l and t e m p o r a l region, t h e limitation of their application is d u e to being thistorically' r e s t r i c t e d t o c e r t a i n objectstt / 4 /. Thus, for ex- ample, in t h e e a r l y '70s t h e majority of energy demand e s t i m a t e s turned o u t too high, because t h e prognosticators e x t r a p o l a t e d relationships- and fun- d a m e n t a l conditions which w e r e t r u e for t h e '60s, b u t which n o longer ap- plied t o t h e '70s. T h e regional variability b e c o m e s e v i d e n t in a n internation- a l comparison of t h e e n e r g y e c o n o m i c development of c o u n t r i e s which c a n b e considered to have similarities. For example, t h e comparison of t h e F e d e r a l Republic of Germany with t h e United S t a t e s , being popular in t h e '60-s, and t h e view i t expressed, namely t h a t t h e development in t h e USA leads t h e way f o r G e r m a n y a t a c e r t a i n distance, could b e proven only f o r particular s e c t o r s ( t r a f f i c development, t r e n d t o w a r d s a s e r v i c e sector).

T h e p r o b 1 e m of t h e lack of knowledge a b o u t relationships of e f f e c t is intensified by a lack of knowledge about tk initial situation. Again, t h e s t a n d a r d s of m w a l s c i e n c e c a n n o t be applied. I t is basically t r u e f o r all sciences, t h a t i t is n o t feasible to m a k e m e a s u r e m e n t s o r c o l l e c t d a t a without a n underlying theory. "The t h e o r y supplies t h e instructions f o r measuring t h e phenomenon. This is a m a t t e r of c o u r s e in physics, but still n o t t h e case in t h e e c o n o m i c s c i e n c e s a n d even less so in sociology, w h e r e t h e o r i e s aE s t i l l predominantly speculative" / 5 /. This has reper- cussions on prognosis, which c a n n o t b e b e t t e r t h a n t h e description a n d analysis of t h e p a s t development of t h e o b j e c t under study and t h e f a c t o r s of influence o r their p r e s e n t state (diagnosis).

T o p r e d i c t t h e e n e r g y c o n s u m p t i o n i n individual s e c t o r s t h e fore- c a s t e r for example, requires q u a n t i t a t i v e d a t a concerning individual techni- c a l energy consumers, such as industrial equipment and machines o r house- hold appliances. But this information problem could still not b e solved, even if empirical d a t a w e r e available; t h e question would remain concerning t h e reliability and representativeness of t h e s e data. Even if t h e d a t a w e r e satis- f a c t o r y in t h e s e t e r m s , i t would still remain open, which influences should b e removed.

For example, t h e general state of business influences t h e e x t e n t t o which capacities a r e utililzed and thus indirectly influences t h e energy consumption of many b r a n c k s o f industry, ^or t h e c l i m a t e influences t h e demand for room heatlrg i n private households per t e m p e r a t u r e , precipitation and wind. The analyst c a n reduce or e l i m i n a t e p a r t of t h e s e inadequacies by removing d a t a appropriately. Nevertheless, substantial uncertainty remalns as t o whether t h e d a t a employed represent t h e initial situation sufficiently / 6 1.

1.2 The scenario approach

With t h e t u r n from c a t e g o r i c a l prognosis t o conditional prognosis in t h e '70s t h e formally identified hypothetical c h a r a c t e r of predictions increased at the

expense of practi~al usefulness. This finally led t o a "new method" of anticipa- ting t h e f u t u r e called'kcenario technique1'/ 7 /. I t is less a new method t h a n a more concious methodical handling of problems concerning t h e provability and t h e conditionality of prognoses

The original notion of scenario developed by Kahn and Wiener comprised t h e description of one or m o r e hypothetical chains of events, which resulted from t h e following questions:

-

How does a hypothetical situation cam about, s t e p by s t e p (rational prova- bility)?

-

Which a l t e r n a t i v e s are possible at e a c h s t a g e for e a c h participant, w i f i which h e c a n prevent t h e f u r t h e r process or guide i t in another direction (conditionality)?

Along with giving t h e f u t u r e development of t h e study object i t is t h e aim of scenario techniques t o e x p l i c i t l ~ s t a t e t h e assumptions of a n interrupted re-

gressus a d infinitum. "Besides t h e b e t t e r understanding of forecasting t h e r e a r e new a s p e c t s for dealing with problems, particularly b e t t e r conceptions of t h e margin in which t h e values of i n t e r e s t c a n plausibly develop " 1 8

1.

A very broad c o n c e p t of "scenario" led t o a diffuse s t a t e of t e r m s in t h e dis- cussion on prognosis. Misunderstanding and e r r o r s occur especially when scen- arios a r e t a k e n for conventional prognoses or when prognoses a r e labeled scenarios as uncertainties become evident.

To clarify t h e t e r m , in t h e following we shall distinquish a n a r r o w r from a broader scenario term. Both have in common t h a t their result depends on t h e explicit assumption of particular f u t u r e developments, similarly t o conven- tional prognosis. However, not t h e most probable suppositions a r e assumed, but r a t h e r postulation conditions a r e varied independently of their probability, in order t o observe t h e e f f e c t s t h e s e have on t h e results.

T h e r e is no unanimity among f o r e c a s t e r s on t h e question of which conditions should b e varied most meaningfully. The narrower c o n c e p t of scenario allows solely variations of suppostition constellations

-

which must also satisfy plauSi- bility a n d consistency controls

-

in t h e r a n g e of exogenous f a c t o r s of in- fluence. Ho?wever, in t h e a c t u a l a r e a of study, for e x a m p l e energy, as al- ways, only exclusively empirically proven relationships may b e used. Thus this is a conventional prognosis technique, in which however t h e values of ex- ogemus variables are combined t o very d i f f e r e n t conceivable bundles of pre- sumptions. It is f u t h e r of methodical importance, t h a t t h e very s t r i c t defini- tion of scenario is generally founded on qualitative-intuitive a r g u m e n s for t h e exogenous environs and/or employs prognosis results f r o m o t h e r dis- ciplines and institutions (such as prognoses on economic growth o r t h e availa- bility of mineral oil), but usesquantitative f o r m a l methods in t h e main a r e a of study (Fig. 1.1).

T h e broad concept of s c e n a r i o not only begins with t h e variation of exogen- ous secondary conditions, but also varies t h e conditions of t h e o b j e c t under study with qualitative-argumentative methods. Usually t h e s e a r e less complicated, but difficult, if not impossible, for third p a r t i e s t o under- stand..

Exogenous suppositions

b.

R e s u l t s

t

qualitative-for ma1 m e t h o d s

Fig. 1.1 Description of t h e s c e n a r i o method

Finally, in a c c o r d with Kahn a n d Wiener's second question, t h e r e s u l t s c a n b e normatively defined by desirable conceptions. In t h i s case t h e problem is n o t to find t o which r e s u l t s s p e c i f i c constellations of suppositions may lead, but reversely, which presumed values will lead to s p e c i f i c goals. S t a r t i n g with a n y m o m e n t in t h e future. t h e examination is d o n e s t e p by s t e p back to t h e p r e s e n t to see if and how t h e given goal c a n b e achieved. In t h i s case t h e s c e n a r i o h a s t h e c h a r a c t e r of a technological prognosis. Not t h e an- t i c i p a t e d f u t u r e development is sought, but instead t h e constellation of exo- g e n ' a variables which politicians, for example, must f i r s t c r e a t e , in order to a c h i e v e a particular goal / 9 /.

O n e e x a m p l e f o r t h i s t y p e of policy s c e n a r i o is t h e Energy Model of t h e In- t e r n a t i o n a l I n s t i t u t e f o r S y s t e m s Analysis (IW 1401, whose structural make- up is shown in Fi5ur-e 1.2.

But also energy studies which c l a i m t o o f f e r a n a l t e r n a t i v e to conventional methods of observation a n d d e m o n s t r a t e "soft energy paths" a r e partially

Scenario Definition

r---

(economic, popu- I

I

r

I I

I

I Economic Structure,

Energy Demand Llfesry les,

I ^Model Technical Efficiencies

I I

I

I Secondary Fuel MIX

I and Subst~tutions M a x ~ m u m

I Bulld-up

I Rates. Costs

Impact Model

Resources Production L ~ m ~ t s for each

l nterregional

(

Energy Trade

Formal mathematical models

( )

Assumptions, judgments, manual calculations -b Direct flow of information (only major flows shown)

---

Feedback flow of information (only major flows shown)

Fig. 1.2 IIASA Energy Model 1980 / 1 0/

founded on t h i s so-called "backcastingN/l 1,121. Backcasting projections though have t h e s a m e difficulties as forwards oriented prognoses, because relation- ships must b e described for which t h e conditions and network complexity a r e unknown and a r e handled with simplifying hypotheses, quasi laws o r empirical generalizations such as t r e n d extrapolations.

Independent of t h e question, whether scenarios a r e only m n c e r n e d with t h e environs in which t h e a c t u a l e v e n t s of t h e energy s e c t o r occur, or whether t h e y include t h e fundament, t h e y d o not s p a r e t h e trouble t o give reasons for t h e d a t a used and t h e f o r m a l relationships involved. T h u s t h e y introduce difficulties into t h e prognosis which should n o t b e underestimated, because t h e y c o n c e r n a n e n t i r e bundle of values and dependencies, although in addi

-

tion t h e demand f o r consistency among, all i n t e r d e p e n d e n c i e s r e q u i r e s fulfill- ment. This c a n n o t b e fulfilled, b e c a u s e it would i q i y t h e c o m p l e t e endogene- zation of all observed values. T h e t h e o r e t i c a l pretension a n d t h e p r a c t i c a l in- t e n t i o n linked with t h e c o n c e p t of s c e n a r i o technique t h u s d o n o t lessen t h e a c t u a l problems of prognosis

/

131.

In t h e most unfavorable case

-

which w e usually h a v e in t h e energy s e c t o r

-

t h e r e s u l t s a r e so s e n s i t i v e t o t h e assumed variables, t h a t s e v e r a l scenarios placed s i d e by s i d e show nothing m o r e t h a n t h e s p e c t r u m of possible develop- m e n t paths. And f o r t h e s e i t nevertheless r e m a i n s unclear, which a r e t h e un- c e r t a i n t i e s of t h e various developments, when n o s t a t e m e n t is m a d e with r e s p e c t t o probability. This is occasionally used as a n a r g u m e n t f o r t h e prac- t i c a l worthlessness of scenarios, because t h e r e s u l t s pass on t h e major ~ r o h l e m a n d c a n a p p a r e n t l y a l s o p r o d u c e a r b i t r a r y r e s u l t s 191.

This judgment at m o s t applies

-

if i t does not implicitly suppress t h e dilem- m a of t h e prediction's limitations

-

to a n understanding of s c e n a r i o which ope- r a t e s exclusively with qualitative-intuitive methods (see above). However, i t e n t i r e l y f a i l s t o r e c o g n i z e t h e implications of a c o m p l e x t o p i c s u c h as e n e r g y consumption, in which problems of social, economical and t e c h n i c a l r e l e v a n c e overlap.

Thus t h e g r e a t d e g r e e of complexity of energy models found in t h e backcast- ing approach does n o t allow t h e d i r e c t calculation of t h e normatively d e t e r - mined f u t u r e values to t h u s c o m p a t i b l e scenarios. T h e compatibility of t h e base scenario's p a r a m e t e r s (which to begin with d e f i n e t h e essential i m p a c t factors, which a c t u a l l y m u s t y e t b e found in t h e f o r m of consistent scenarios) with t h e normatively d e t e r m i n e d t a r g e t variables m u s t b e examined ( c o m p a r e F i g u r e 1.3).

Compatibility is usually n o t given at t h e beginning of model calculation, so t h a t in a f u r t h e r s e r i e s of model r u n s t h e exogen.ous s c e n a r i o p a r a m e t e r s a r e varied r e p e a t e d l y until a r e l a t i v e model stability is a c h i e v e d with r e s p e c t to i m p o r t a n t f a c t o r s of i m p a c t ( z e r o o r d e r results). T h e s e provisional r e s u l t s must t h e n b e examined in t e r m s of their t e c h n i c a l a n d e c o n o m i c plausibility, t h e i r social e x e c u t i o n ( a c r z p t a n c e of nuclear energy) a n d t h e i r political desir- ableness (dependence on c r u d e oil). In succeeding i t e r a t i v e model r u n s n o t

only f u r t h e r (exogenous) scenario and (endogenous) model parameters, but also t h e t a r g e t variables a r e varied, in order t o finally obtain consis- t e n t result scenarios.

T h e problem of this i t e r a t i v e procedure is d e m o n s t r a t e d by t h e following e l e m e n t a r y calculation. x d i f f e r e n t constellations c a n be arranged f o r n n exogenous scenario (or t a r g e t ) variables with x a l t e r n a t i v e values each.

With only t w o a l t e r n a t i v e values (such as high a n d low) and 15 exogenous variables t h e r e are 32,768 possible a l t e r n a t i v e variants. For practi- c a l reasons i t is absolutely necessary to a c h i e v e s t a b l e provisional solu- tions which reduce t h i s multitude of a l t e r n a t i v e s t o a s i z e which c a n b e easily handled. Such provisional solutions, which must a l s o s a t i s f y a l a r g e number of technical, economic and political r e s t r i ctions, c a n c e r t a i n l y not b e found with f o r m a l m a t h e m a t i c a l methods. They a r e t h e result of vast experience with energy models and t h e e n e r g y f i e l d . - H e r e t o w e should mention a f u r t h e r a s p e c t of models, which has r e c e n t l y gained in- c r e a s e d attention: "the c o m p u t e r as mediator" 114 /.

Start

- - -

I

Iterations

- - - 7

1

I

I

(3) Reduce Estimates:

consumers,

growth rates (2) Increase

Estimates:

Global (resource estimates,

potential production

/energy resources

IT

limits)

/ Energy imports/

/'.

^/ exports beween

- / regions

lnvemont ~ l a * i c j t j a

I--,. '

rates; water,

energy, land, Primary energy Energy trade materials, and allocation balancing

manpower procedure

1 ^----

^{L / energy} consumption

L /

Two sets of scenarios: time series of state variables

Fig. 1.3 Model Operation of t h e IIASA Energy h l o d e l 1980

/

10a/

2. Introduction to the Problems of Prognosis 2.1 The definition of prognosis

The s c i e n t i f i c discussion of prognostics is by n o means complete; t h e r e still lacks a sufficiently explained, generally a c c e p t e d definition of prognosis.

The prerequisite f o r a s a t i s f a c t o r y analysis of prognosis however, is a suf- ficiently c l e a r definition of prognosis, which would render possible t h e for- mulation of a d e q u a t e evaluation c r i t e r i a for prognoses.

A narrow, initial, operable definition of " s i e n t i f i c prognosis" was given by Hempel and Oppenheim (1948). I t claims t h a t a s c i e n t i f i c prognosis e x i s t s when t h e o c c u r r e n c e (or existence) of a single e v e n t is derived with t h e aid of a law (nomological hypothesis) or laws and through a logical deductive conclusion. Logical deductive means a truth-conserving deduction, in which no information is given which e x c e e d s t h e information s t a t e d in t h e premis- ses. The prognosis process can be described schematically in Figure 2.1.

4

= A l , A2, A3,

...,

Am Initial and boundary r e s t r i c t i o n s ( a n t e c e d e n t restrictions

G_ = G1, G2, G3,

...,

^{G n} General restsrictions ( t h e o r e t i c a l laws) P Prognosis (explanation)

-

Fig. 2.1 Deduction s c h e m a of Hempel and Oppenheim

T h e prognosis P is t h e r e s u l t of t h e logical deduction f r o m Al, A2,

...

^A _m ^and

GI," GZ,

...,

Gn. The symbols A and P e a c h r e p r e s e n t s t a t e m e n t s which describe single e v e n t s (singular s t a t e m e n t s ) , G r e p r e s e n t s a

Reneral

(or generalizing) s t a t e m e n t . T h e minimal requirement of t h e hypotheses and postulation sy- s t e m ist t h a t of being f r e e of contradiction and logically sufficient f o r t h e desired results / 15

I.

A closer look a t t h e e l e m e n t s of t h i s definition is advisable. T h e laws named a b o v e (nomological hypotheses) are s t a t e m e n t s , whose validity

-

^ac-

cording t o their formulation

-

is not limited t o a c e r t a i n realm of t i m e and

s p a c e i n a n y respect. Albert coins t h e s e "always-and-everywhere-if-then- s t a t e m e n t s " and t h u s also particularly emphasizes t h e i r universal c h a r a c t e r , a- long with t h e i r conditional n a t u r e 116

/.

Such "all'l-statements include a b o v e all t h e laws of n a t u r e , f o r e x a m p l e Newton's law of gravity; but also various s t a t e m e n t s f r o m t h e social s c i e n c e s are o f t e n considered t o b e universal hy- potheses, viz. t h e hypotheses of learning theory, behavior r e s e a r c h o r t h e "law"

of supply a n d d e m a n d in economics

/

17

/.

Universal s t a t e m e n t s assert c e r t a i n s t r u c t u r a l invariances in t h e e v e n t s of na- t u r e , which should b e v a l i d a t all t i m e s in all places. This c l a i m simultan- eously implies however, t h a t such a s t a t e m e n t

-

if n o additional assump tions a r e made,- s a y s nothing a b o u t t h e e x i s t e n c e of individual f a c t s , as Eucken per- tinently formulated:

"

I t c o n t a i n s no judgments a b o u t t h e o c c u r r e n c e of c e r t a i n facts a t c e r t a i n places a t c e r t a i n times. I t does n o t a n s w e r t h e question of when and where. I t describes nothing"

/

181.

In c o n t r a s t , t h e singular s t a t e m e n t s - A mentioned a b o v e a s s e r t t h e e x i s t e n c e of c e r t a i n conditions with a well-defined r e f e r e n c e to p l a c e and time. Such spa- tially a n d temporally limited s t a t e m e n t s f o r t h e e x i s t e n c e of f a c t s a r e of a purely descriptive c h a r a c t e r and are also called "there-is-statements". In prog- nosis t h e y m e a n t h a t a t a p a r t i c u l a r t i m e a t a particular p l a c e conditions be- c o m e a c t u a l , s o t h a t combined with t h e universal laws, in consequence a par- t i c u l a r : s i n g l e ~ . e v e n t - P will o c c u r (forecasts). The technological a s p e c t of laws lies in t h e f a c t t h a t t h e y c a n b e usedoby c r e a t i n g c e r t a i n c o n d i t i o n s to induce their e f f e c t s (for t h e t e r m "technological prognosisa-see 119

1).

2.2 S t r u c t u r a l identity of explanation: and, prognosis

The deduction s c h e m a of Hempel a n d Oppenheim demands t h a t t h e explana- t i o n supply single t e s t a b l e s t a t e m e n t s a b o u t a p a r t of r e a l i t y ( s e e Fig. 2.1).

I t is n o t s t a t e d , w h e t h e r t h i s is a f u t u r e or p r e s e n t reality; t h e t i m e a s p e c t is a p p a r e n t l y of no importance. We t a c i t l y assume, t h a t t h e explanation re- f e r s t o a f u t u r e point in t i m e and t h u s gives a prognosis which o v e r c o m e s t i m e and s p a c e (successive prognosis). This is n o t binding, however, b e c a u s e t h e prognostic s t a t e m e n t c a n a c t u a l l y r e f e r t o a y e t unobserved p a r t of t h e present, which r e m a i n e d unknown b e c a u s e t h e conditions required t o recog- n i z e i t w e r e insufficient ( c o e x i s t e n c e prognosis).

Independent of w h e t h e r t h e t i m e at which a prognosis w a s produced lies b e f o r e o r a f t e r t h e o c c u r r e n c e of t h e e x p l a n a t o r y e v e n t , w e m u s t also dis- tinguish b e t w e e n a n e x a n t e prognosis (overcoming t i m e a n d s p a c e ) a n d a n e x post prognosis (for t h e d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n of p r a g m a t i c a n d ontological t i m e r e l a t i o n s see

/

201).

T o p r o d u c e prognoses a n d supply explanations, as well as to p r o d u c e a n d test g e n e r a l hypotheses n e e d e d t h e r e b y , is considered to b e t h e m o s t impor- t a n t t a s k of p r a c t i c a l s c i e n t i f i c a c t i v i t y . This is t h e purpose of

-

t h e logical conclusion f r o m p a s t e v e n t s a n d g e n e r a l (law) h y p o t h e s e s to fu- t u r e e v e n t s of s c i e n t i f i c f o r e c a s t s ( e x a n t e prognosis)

,

^{a n d}

-

t h e logical conclusion f r o m a n t e c e d e n t e v e n t s a n d g e n e r a l (law) h y p o t h e s e s to a l r e a d y known e v e n t s of explanation, a n d e v e n t u a l l y a l s o t h e h y p o t h e s e s test.

S e v e r a l s c i e n t i s t s i n t e r p r e t t h i s to m e a n t h a t t h e r e is n o logical s t r u c t u r a l d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n e x p l a n a t i o n a n d prognosis. For m o r e t h a n t h i r t y y e a r s t h e question of t h e logical s t r u c t u r a l i d e n t i t y of e x p l a n a t i o n a n d prognosis h a s b e e n discussed w i t h varying intensity. P a r t i c u l a r l y H e m p e l 1 a n d P o p p e r

1

11 a r e of t h e opinion t h a t f o r e a c h (successful) e x p l a n a t i o n t h e r e is a prognosis w i t h t h e s a m e logical s t r u c t u r e a n d v i c e versa'..This means:

"The d i f f e r e n c e is n o t o n e of logical s t r u c t u r e , but r a t h e r o n e of emphasis; it depends on w h a t w e consider t o b e our problem a n d what w e d o not s o consi- der. If it is not our problem t o find a prognosis, while w e t a k e i t t o b e our problem t o f i n d t h e initial conditions or s o m e of t h e universal laws (or both) f r o m which w e may d e d u c e a given "prognosis", t h e n w e a r e looking f o r a n explanation

... .

If w e consider t h e laws a n d initial conditions a s given ( r a t h e r t h a n a s t o b e found) a n d use t h e m m e r e l y f o r deducing t h e prognosis, in o r d e r t o g e t t h e r e b y s o m e new information, t h e n w e a r e trying t o m a k e a prediction" 111.

In t h i s c o n c e p t s c i e n t i f i c e x p l a n a t i o n t h u s possesses t h e s a m e logical s t r u c - t u r e as prognosis a n d is distinguishable solely in t e r m s of t h e p r a g m a t i c t e m p o r a l c i r c u m s t a n c e s ; n a m e l y n o t when t h e problem is given a n d t h e ex- planation sought, but r e v e r s e l y , t h e problem is sought a n d t h e e x p l a n a t i o n given (cf. Fig. 2.2).

Fig. 2.2 S t r u c t u r a l i d e n t i t y of prognosis

and explanation ^C

Law hypotheses

Explanans

*

given.

tautology explanation given

sought

L sought prognosis nonsense

This opinion has not r e m a i n e d uncontradicted, however. S t a r t i n g with t h e assumption t h a t i t is principally possible t o give r a t i o n a l reasons (not neces- sarily just explanations a s for Hempel and Oppenheim), t h e c r i t i c i s m of t h e s t r u c t u r a l i d e n t i t y thesis begins with t h e question of t h e n a t u r e which such reasons m u s t have, in order t o b e allowed in t h e development of a r a t i o n a l prognosis. Previously i t was implicitly derived f r o m t h e Hempel-Oppenheim deduction schema, t h a t exclusively so-called reasons of r e a l i t y o r being could supply a s t u r d y foundation f o r prognoses which a s s u m e a c a u s e f o r a n e v e n t / 20

1.

The opponents of t h e s e t h e s e s however, also view f o r m s of reasons f o r progno- ses as e x i s t e n t and a c c e p t a b l e

-

so-called a r g u m e n t s of reason o r belief

-

which would n o t b e sufficient f o r a n explanation as Hempel a n d Oppen

-

heim d e f i n e it. Arguments of reason

-

although t h e y d o n o t m a k e a n ade- q u a t e explanation possible

-

^are sufficient as a r g u m e n t s of r a t i o n a l progno- sis, which m e a n s t h a t r a t i o n a l prognoses are possible on t h e grounds of m e r e convincing a r g u m e n t s

/

201. For example, t h e e c o n o m i c f o r e c a s t i n g with t h e indicative method of "Harvardts Barometer" t u r n e d o u t to b e trust- worthy, without having t h e power of explanation

/

22

/.

A r e v e r s e e x a m p l e isDarwin's t h e o r y of evolution, which explains t h e selection a n d variatiqn of t h e species, but c a n n o t predict them. Thus w e must a t l e a s t distinquish between (structurally identical) prognoses f o r t h e purpose of study (reasons of being) and prognoses as decision-making aids ( a r g u m e n t s of reason). A- long w i t h K u t t n e r 122.4' w e should n o t e t h e d i f f e r e n t c i r c u m s t a n c e of t h e e x i s t e n c e of test a r g u m e n t s which confront prognosis a n d explana- tion in t h e s a m e manner. T h e general (law) hypotheses a r e given a n d appro- p r i a t e singular e v e n t s a r e sought for t h e a n t e c e d e n c e as well as t h e conse- quence. This e n a b l e s a new order of explanation, prognosis a n d (indepen- d e n t ) t e s t i n g as follows (Fig. 2.3):

Prognosis Explanation

-

^{T e s t}

given are ^A P G

sought are P, G

As long as theories of s c i e n c e c a n n o t d i f f e r e n t i a t e with sufficient precision between universal (natural) laws a n d o t h e r law-like s t a t e m e n t s , t h e thesis of s y m m e t r i c a l s t r u c t u r e s c a n b e a d v o c a t e d a t t h e m o s t as a n o r m a t i v e challenge. T h e resulting liberalization, however, m e e t s t h e n e e d s of t h e empirical sciences.

2.3 A p r a c t i c a l understanding of forecasting laws

The science-theoretical conception described above only lends t h e predi- c a t e "scientific" t o prognoses which fulfill t h e r e q u i r e m e n t s of t h e Hem- pel-Oppenheim deduction schema. Thus t h e question of t h e s c i e n t i f i c na- t u r e of a prognosis is a c t u a l l y reduced t o t h e fulfillment of t h e require- m e n t of spatial-temporal invariance of t h e underlying law (nomological hy- pothesis). With t h e e x c e p t i o n of s o m e limiting examples, t h e traditional view is t h a t n a t u r a l laws s a t i s f y t h e s e requirements. But t h i s is usually n o t t h e case for t h e "law-barren" social s c i e n c e s anyway.

Theoretically, a n e x c e p t i o n is planning theory, in which t h e planner him- self defines t h e f u t u r e values and tends t o t h e i r a c h i e v e m e n t (technologi- cal prognosis). 'This claim c a n n o t be supported by p r a c t i c a l work, however, because single individuals r e m a i n a substantial f a c t o r ,.of uncertainty in t h e i r roles a s p e r f o r m e r s a n d consumers. P a s t e x p e r i e n c e shows t h a t a n in- c r e a s e in living s t a n d a r d s is accompanied by a n i n c r e a s e in t h e i m p o r t a n c e of t h e "incalculable consumer" 1231. In a highly developed planned econ- omy t h e r e q u i r e m e n t s for prognosis a r e t h u s not much m o r e favorable t h a n in a m a r k e t economy / 241. If t a k e n s t r i c t l y , a c a t e g o r i c a l demand of t h e prerequisites a n d conditions mentioned a b o v e would h a v e had t h e consequence t h a t e v e n today no o n e could have spoken of s c i e n t i f i c prognosis in t h e social s e c t o r / 3

1.

T h e c u r r e n t d e f i c i t on t h e o r y in this s e c t o r f o r c e s t h e u s e of law-like hy- p o t h e s e

,

whose linguistic formulation itself a l r e a d y r e f e r s t o individuals, particular epochs or e v e n only t o empirical generalizations ( t r e n d s ) 122 /.

such general hypotheses with limited spatial and t e m p o r a l validity a r e called quasi laws (for e x a m p l e t h e so-called linked hypothesis of energy consumption and e c o n o m i c growth in t h e e n e r g y sector).

Of course, t h e y have no claim to universal validity, b u t should neverthe- less be used until t h e y a r e empirically questionable: "Quasi t h e o r i e s con- t a i n a n essential r e f e r e n c e t o a particular spatial a n d t e m p o r a l region, t h e limitation of their application is d u e t o being 'historically' r e s t r i c t e d to c e r t a i n objects" / 4 /. T h e r e s t r i c t i o n of quasi t h e o r i e s and quasi laws t o

-

^{1 6}

-

t o c e r t a i n e p o c h s a n d regions, however, i s a f o r m a l logic q u e s t i o n of essen- t i a l l y g e n e r a l s t a t e m e n t s .

In f a c e of t h e c u r r e n t lack of universal laws in t h e e c o n o m i c a n d social sci- e n c e s t h e i m p o r t a n c e of t h e H e m p l e - O p p e n h e i m definition is r e d u c e d t o a d e s i r a b l e guiding s t a n d a r d , whose ideal r u l e s m u s t a c t u a l l y b e broken a n d r e - placed by a r e d u c e d p r e r e q u i s i t e level. This c a n n o t o c c u r w i t h o u t repercus- sions o n t h e s c i e n t i f i c self-understanding of prognostics. L i m i t e d by p u r e sci- e n c e o n t h e o n e s i d e and s p e c u l a t i o n o n t h e o t h e r , prognostics is localized in t h e r e a l m of "not-yet-science" /25 /. It is a t r a d e o r technology, which c o u n t s as o n e of t h e a p p l i c a t i o n s of s c i e n c e , b u t d o e s not belong t o i t s es- sence: "If f o r e c a s t i n g t e c h n i q u e s a r e successful, t h a t is o n e f a c t m o r e which scientists m u s t and p e r h a p s c a n explain" / 2 6 / .

2.4 C a n prognoses b e founded?

C h a p t e r s 2.1 and 2.2 h a v e shown t h a t s c i e n t i f i c prognosis is distinguishable f r o m prophecy by being founded r a t i o n a l l y a n d methodically. P a r t i c u l a r l y w h e n t h e prognosis' r e a s o n s include g e n e r a l laws (hypotheses), t h e e x i s t e n c e of r e s t r i c t i o n s c o n c e r n i n g t h e i r application must in t u r n b e p r e d i c t e d f o r c a t e g o r i c a l prognoses. But t h i s is only possible when t h e e x i s t e n c e of indi- vidual r e s t r i c t i o n s a r e o n t h e i r p a r t d e d u c t e d f r o m laws a n d n e w a n t e c e - d e n t restrictions. S i n c e t h e s e in t u r n a l s o partially r e f e r t o things of t h e fu- t u r e , o n e finds himself c o n f r o n t e d

-

in t h e case of c a t e g o r i c a l prognosis founded s t r i c t l y nomologically- w i t h a n infinite prognostic recourse. "If w e d e m a n d justification by r e a s o n e d a r g u m e n t , in t h e logical sense, t h e n w e a r e c o m m i t t e d t o t h e view t h a t s t a t e m e n t s c a n b e justified only by s t a t e m e n t s . T h e d e m a n d t h a t - a l l s t a t e m e n t s a r e t o b e logically j u s t ~ f i e d (...) is t h e r e f o r e bound t o lead t o a n i n f i n i t e regress" /27/.

Concerning t h i s problem, Albert r e f e r s t o t h e so-called "Munchhausen Tri- lemma", s i n c e a r s e a r c h f o r a conclusive r e a s o n allows only t h e c h o i c e be- t ween:

1. a n infinite r e c o u r s e , which a p p e a r s t o be given by t h e n e e d t o find f i r s t reasons, although t h i s c a n p r a c t i c a l l y not b e a c h i e v e d and t h u s supplies n o solid foundation,

2. a logical c i r c l e of d e d u c t i o n in t h e a r g u m e n t p r o c e s s c a u s e d by using s t a t e m e n t s which w e r e a l r e a d y used though lacking reasons. T h i s logically e r r o n e o u s c i r c l e a l s o d o e s n o t supply a foundation. And finally,

3. breaking o f f t h e p r o c e d u r e at a particular point, which in principle s e e m s practical, but would involve suspending t h e principle of sufficient argument arbitrarily

/

28

/.

Since in practical prognosis an infinite recourse is not feasible a n d a logi- cal c i r c l e is inacceptable, t h e only choice remaining for s t r i c t nomologi- cal prognoses is t o break off t h e p r o c e d u r e . Of c o u r s e , t h e inevit- able break-off a t particular points of t h e prognoses' argumentation c a n b e considered t o be temporary, but i t is not possible t o clearly distinguish i t from dogmatism.

In t h e discussion on energy f o r e c a s t i n g t h e break-off point h a s n o t i c e b l y s h i f t e d in t h e p a s t y e a r s . C r i t i c i s m of t h e s i m p l e s l o b a l r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n p r i m a r y e n e r g y c o n s u m p t i o n and t h e g r o s s n a t i o n a l p r o d u c t l e d t o a n e x t e n - sion and differentiation of this linking hypothesis. T h e result was a n endo- geny of variables which w e r e previously held for exogenous or which w e r e not explained by t h e t h e o r e t i c a l approach. Such variables a r e , for exam- ple, t h e n e t production values of economic sectors, t h e a c t u a l energy price level or t h e relation of energy prices t o t h e prices of other produc- tion factors. The endogeny of p~.eviousl~exogenous variables substantially improved t h e s t r e n g t h of prognoses' s t a t e m e n t s

/

9

/.

Furthermore, various consumer s e c t o r s w e r e improved, f o r example, private households with their stock of appliances for e l e c t r i c i t y prognoses.

The endogeny of previously exogenous variables and t h e improvement of t h e interwoven s t r u c t u r e o f energy consumption s e c t o r s causes a n in- c r e a s e in t h e number of t h e model's elements and their relationships.

This not only quantitatively, but also qualitatively increases t h e complex- ity of prognoses. New exogenous variables make i t necessary t o assume more theoretical relationships in t h e model, which o f t e n lie in scientific fields lacking empirically secured theories

/

291. In open s y s t e m s

-

inclu- ding t h e energy sector

-

it is impossible t o achieve c o m p l e t e endogeny.

2.5 The conditionality of prognosis

The pragmatic solution for t h e conflict of a i m s between rational and me- thodical argumentation on t h e one hand (as shown in t h e previous sec- tions 2.1 and 2.2) and t h e c o m p l e t e nomological argumentation on t h e other (prognostic infinite recourse (2.4)) can be found in t h e definition of

a "sufficiently" advanced break-off point in t h e a r g u m e n t process. This

"degree to which a problem is solved", which m e a n s t h e conditionality of t h e prognosis, c a n b e drawn upon as a n indicator of t h e s c i e n t i f i c n a t u r e of a prognosis.

In common usage, a prognosis is a s t a t e m e n t f o r m u l a t e d with practically no restrictions. In principle, f o r e c a s t s c a n be of unconditional o r condi- tional nature. In t h e second case t h e y a r e also called if - t h e n s t a t e m e n t s

/

301. T h e question of whether a prognosis should b e formula- t e d unconditionally or conditionally c a n be handled depending on w h e t h e r t h e o c c u r r e n c e of t h e prerequisites c a n b e e x p e c t e d w i t h g r e a t c e r t a i n - t y , or w h e t h e r t h e i r o c c u r r e n c e is of a m o r e hypothetical n a t u r e 126 /.

In t h e e n e r g y discussion conditional prognoses have been c a l l e d projec- tions since t h e e a r l y '70s, in o r d e r t o distinguish t h e m f r o m t h e m o r e ca- tegorical prognoses of t h e '50s and '60s. (In c o n t r a s t , Schanz, with re- f e r e n c e to Albert 131

/,

d e f i n e s projections as f o r e c a s t s lacking a n expli- c i t r e f e r e n c e t o t h e o r e t i c a l regularities, while Vajna / 321 uses projec- tions f o r f u t u r e developments as t h e y should occur according to political goals.)

Unconditional, c a t e g o r i c a l prognoses contain s t a t e m e n t s which c a n b e founded rationally o r irrationally (for example: "Energy consumption will increase by x%!). C a t e g o r i c a l prognoses n o t based on laws of succession m a k e i t necessary to additionally assume t h a t c e r t a i n secondary condi- t i o n s r e m a i n stable. This is commonly expressed in t h e f o r m of a predo- minantly unspecified c e t e r i s paribus clause, s t a t i n g f o r example, t h a t un- f o r e s e e n disturbances originating outside t h e s y s t e m a r e n o t considered, if t h e s y s t e m is n o t closed and sufficiently isolated. Actually e v e r y cate- gorical f o r e c a s t depends on hidden, assumed c o n s t a n t s a n d secondary con- ditions

/

331. An explicit explanation of t h e s e assumptions is especially a- bandoned when t h e prognosis user desires uncomplicated a n d binding s t a t e m e n t s a b o u t t h e f u t u r e . S t r i c t assumptions of constants, however, o f t e n collide with t h e a c t u a l facts found in t h e social sector.

Thus only t h e e x t e n t t o which t h e conditions of t h e assumptions c a n b e investigated g u a r a n t e e s t h a t anyone

-

at l e a s t any s c i e n t i s t in t h e s a m e

field

-

c a n understand t h e a r g u m e n t s and e v a l u a t e t h e prognosis. For social problems

-

and t h i s is particularly t r u e for t h e energy s e c t o r

-

^{t h e}

lack of empirically secured theories creates t h e need for additional t h e o r e t i c a l assumptions in t h e model and thus makes t h e s t a t e m e n t s con- siderably hypothetical

/

3

/.

Categorically formulated prognoses c a n thus only b e scientifically accounted for in exceptional cases, when all a n t e c e d e n t conditions a r e fulfilled and t h e necessary laws a r e known

.

T k s e conditions a r e certainly not siven in t h e energy sector.

T h e second kind of f o r e c a s t mentioned at t h e o u t s e t is a conditional prognosis (for example: "Energy consumption will increase by x%, if t h e gross social product increases by y%!").It does justice t o cropping uncertainties by disclosing i t s premisses and g u a r a n t e e s t h a t i t c a n be understood. Only t h e most c o m p l e t e revelation of t h e a r g u m e n t ' s pre- misses will permit a n a d e q u a t e evaluation and criticism of t h e prog- nosis. Thus conditionality is t h e f i r s t c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of a scientific prog- nosis as distinguished f r o m pure speculation and prophecy. Particularly in t h e energy s e c t o r , prognoses claiming t o b e s c i e n t i f i c must keep their d i s t a n c e f r o m categorical formulations. They must b e much m o r e careful t o discover a n d disclose t o which e x t e n t results a r e influenced by uncertainties in conclusion-making, insufficient d a t a o r t h e diff i cul- t i e s in defining r e a l processes and mechanisms / 3 4

/.

This also does jus- t i c e t o t h e experience t h a t many energy prognoses w e r e founded quite

"correctly" and solely neglected t o consider a secondary e f f e c t suf- f iciently.

Although t h e r e is commonly assent, t h a t scientifically serious prognoses must b e conditional, conditionality is limited by t h e require- m e n t of practical application. A prognosis which c a n b e used must be conditional, but i t s informative value is reduced by e a c h additional con- dition, s o t h a t in a n e x t r e m e case i t d e g e n e r a t e s t o just a tautology:

"Prognoses of energy economics c a n n o t usually g e t by with o n e secon- dary condition, t h e y require several asssumptions, b u t when f i r s t a combination of numerous assumptions must b e fulfilled t o render t h e validity of a prognosis, t h e r e is t h e danger t h a t , t a k e n strictly, t h e prognosis cannot be t e s t e d a n d is thus irrefutable, because t h e com-

p l e t e particular constellation of assumptions will hardly e v e r o c c u r /35 /.

S o m e r e f l e c t i o n s on method a l s o justify t h e demand f o r prognoses which a r e only partially conditional, to c o u n t e r p r o t e c t i v e endeavors: "If t h e f o r e c a s t e r is n o t held responsible f o r t h e predictive evaluation of exogen- ous f a c t o r s , h e c a n g r e a t l y simplify his t a s k by drawing t h e line adeptly, although t h i s a l s o limits t h e v a l u e of t h e s t a t e m e n t to t h e s a m e degree:

By shifting t h e burden of prognosis to t h e exogenous variables o n e c a n shirk responsibility f o r f a l s e prognoses in a n unseemly manner" /36 /.

This objection is superfluous, however, when t h e user of t h e prognosis c a n influence t h e given conditions himself.

T h e reciprocality of r e s t r i c t e d n e s s a n d s t a t e m e n t v a l u e also brings politi- c a l implications. As long as prognoses s e r v e t h e p r e p a r a t i o n of decisions f o r a c t i o n solely, a g r e a t a m o u n t of e m p i r i c a l information is requisite f o r t h e i r p r a c t i c a l application. As t h e political r e l e v a n c e of t h e s e decisions in- c r e a s e s , however, t h i s a s p e c t f a d e s and is replaced by t h e a t t a i n m e n t of psychological motivational e f f e c t s . "Under conditions of s c i e n t i f i c p l i t i c s , t h e usefulness of analysis and prognoses f o r politicians a n d a d m i n i s t r a t o r s c a n b e measured n o t only by t h e i r contribution to t h e development o r evaluation of political programs, but a l s o by t h e aid which t h e y o f f e r in daily political business, in t h e w a y in which t h e y e x t e r n a l l y support initia- tives, how t h e y c a n b e "sold", and f o r investigation a n d c r i t i c i s m (possibly of t h e political opponent's initiatives which endanger one's own position)"

/ 2/. For t h i s reason i t c a n b e considered a s t r a t e g y , when poli- t i c a l groups defending c e r t a i n i n t e r e s t s partially a t t e m p t to f o r m u l a t e . . t h e i r prognoses in such a way as t o b e irrefutable, a n d a c c e p t a loss of in- f o r m a t i v e value.

2.6 'The reflexivity of prognosis

T h e f a c t t h a t political implications c a n a l s o b e linked t o a prognostic s t a t e m e n t d r a w s a n i m p o r t a n t c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of prognoses to our a t t e n - tion: t h e i r inherent dynamics. Prognoses as decision-making a i d s a r e in- s t r u c t i o n s f o r a c t i o n in p r a c t i c e , a n d t h u s t h e y e x e r t a m o r e o r less s t r o n g influence on t h e o b j e c t s with which t h e y a r e concerned. 'This

means t h a t forecasts in social systems a r e social events themselves, which c a n induce reciprocal e f f e c t s with t h e events covered by t h e prog- nosis. Via decision rules and procedures t h e prognosis has a n effect on t h e objects under study a t a f u t u r e point of time. With reference t o a n ancient example, this phenomenon of reflexivity or inherent dynamics is also called t h e "Oedipus effect" 127

/.

The prognostic e f f e c t s can be understood a s feedback mechanisms, a s shown in Figure 2.4

Fig. 2. 4 Prognostic feedback

Since t h e publication of Merton's classic essay (19481,two different forms of this phenomenon a r e distinguished: t h e self-fulfilling prophecy and t h e seif-destroying prophecy. In t h e first c a s e the prognosis itself contributes t o t h e actual occurrence of t h e event which i t predicted. In t h e second case, t h e prognostic s t a t e m e n t causes a change in t h e object of progno- sis, s o t h a t i t refutes itself (see Fig. 2.5).

prognosis

model 4

Fig. 2.5 Inherent dynamics of prognoses

I v information

Prognostic reflexivity

decision

Without publication t h e prognosis would be

After publication t h e prognosis becomes

t r u e neutral

self-destroying t r u e

false

A

false

self-fulfilling neutral

-

object of study 4