Policy Analysis with Incredible Certitude

Mostly for the typology of errant certitude, but still useful in a new paper:


Analyses of public policy regularly express certitude about the consequences of alternative policy choices.Yet policy predictions often are fragile, with conclusions resting on critical unsupported assumptions or leapsof logic.  Then the certitude of policy analysis is not credible.  I develop a typology of incredible analytical practices and give illustrative cases.  I call these  practices  conventional certitude,  dueling certitudes, conflating science and advocacy, wishful extrapolation, illogical certitude, and media overreach.

Related posts:

  1. How We Came to Love (the Same) Monetary Policy
  2. The Google “No Guidance Policy” Drinking Game
  3. Technical Analysis Sucks There. There Too. And There.
  4. Carried Interest, VCs, Tobacco, and Godwin’s Law of Tax Policy
  5. Recovery, Growth and Budget Policy