Rarely pure and never simple: Exploring perceptions of truth and objectivity in energy modelling and scenarios

Abstract

Model-based scenarios are widely used to guide energy planning and climate policy decisions. While the mathematical and physical foundations of many techno-economic models assume universal truth and objectivity, their application to explore a yet unwritten future demands a more nuanced understanding of these concepts. Although modellers' beliefs about the certainty and universality of knowledge may influence how they present their findings to decision-makers, the matter has received little empirical attention to date. Here, we address this gap and investigate modellers' epistemic beliefs concerning energy modelling and scenarios, as well as their perspectives on the communication of model outputs and expert authority. To that end, we conducted a survey with over 160 experts from a broad range of geographical regions and disciplines. Our results show significant polarisation in the participants' beliefs, revealing the two stylised profiles of a Positivist and a Postpositivist Modeller. While there are few differences in the respondents' attitudes based on educational level and background or model usage, we find significant variation particularly based on geographic location. In an effort to overcome this polarisation, we consider our study a call for diversity in modelling teams and argue for fostering the discussion of epistemic beliefs within the broader modelling community. Finally, we recommend incorporating key topics beyond technical aspects into the training and education of future modellers.