Paper short abstract:

In a survey, we investigated how modellers perceive their role in creating energy and climate scenarios. Based on our findings, this input will discuss who truly has the power to shape the knowledge that is fed into policymaking processes, especially in North-South cooperation projects.

Paper long abstract:

Computer-based models are widely used to guide decisions in energy and climate policymaking. Different experts and organisations develop various modelling frameworks to generate scenarios – often in collaboration with other actors, in highly international and interdisciplinary projects, and in a politically charged environment. In doing so, modellers have substantial flexibility in configuring complex models based on their understanding of the world – which significantly shapes the resulting scenarios. This raises the question of who is responsible for critical assumptions, for value-laden narratives, and for meaningful scenario use in informing political decisions: whose power makes the knowledge?

So far, the model-policy interface remains largely underexplored. To get a better understanding of how modellers perceive their role in the design of models and scenarios, we conducted an online survey in November and December 2023. Informed by principal-agent theory and research on epistemic beliefs, the questionnaire covered aspects such as the information asymmetry between modellers and decision-makers, and the division of responsibility for different aspects of the modelling process between the two. Over 160 respondents from all continents and different disciplines participated.

In the presentation, we will share the main survey results and illustrate how modellers from different backgrounds perceive their role in the modelling process. Based on these insights, we will discuss implications for science-informed energy and climate policymaking, especially in international cooperation between the Global North and the Global South. Finally, we will make suggestions for increasing transparency and accountability at the model-policy interface and propose entry points for further research.