Quantifying Experts' Uncertainty About the Future Cost of Exotic Diseases

Risk Analysis

Volumn 32, Issue 5, 2012, Pages 881-893

  Gosling, John Paul ^a   Hart, Andy ^b   Mouat, David C ^c   Sabirovic, Mirzet ^c   Scanlan, Simon ^c   Simmons, Alick ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LEEDS   (United Kingdom)

^b FOOD AND ENVIRONMENT RESEARCH AGENCY   (United Kingdom)

^c Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs ^*  (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Exotic infectious disease; Expert elicitation; Group consensus; Subjective judgment; Subjective probability

Indexed keywords

EXPERT ELICITATION; GROUP CONSENSUS; INFECTIOUS DISEASE; SUBJECTIVE JUDGMENT; SUBJECTIVE PROBABILITY;

AGRICULTURE; COST ACCOUNTING; COST ESTIMATING; MANAGEMENT SCIENCE; VETERINARY MEDICINE;

COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS;

COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DECISION MAKING; DISEASE PREVALENCE; HEALTH POLICY; INFECTIOUS DISEASE; STATE ROLE; UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS;

ARTICLE; COMMUNICABLE DISEASE; EPIDEMIC; HUMAN; UNCERTAINTY; UNITED KINGDOM;

COMMUNICABLE DISEASES; DISEASE OUTBREAKS; GREAT BRITAIN; HUMANS; UNCERTAINTY;

UNITED KINGDOM;

EID: 84860487281     PISSN: 02724332     EISSN: 15396924     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2011.01704.x     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. Department for Food, Environment and Rural Affairs. Impact assessment of an independent body for animal health in England, consultation document, 2009. Available at:, Accessed on September 2, 2011.
2. Garabed RB, Perez AM, Johnson WO, Thurmond MC. Use of expert opinion for animal disease decisions:An example of foot-and-mouth disease status designation. Preventive Veterinary Medicine, 2009; 92:20-30.
3. Janssen J, Marchant B. Risks related to the introduction of exotic diseases: A European view. Revue scientifique et technique (International Office of Epizootics), 1995; 14:957-961.
4. Lysons RE, Gibbens N. International disease surveillance. Veterinary Record, 2004; 154:212-213.
5. Department for Food, Environment and Rural Affairs. Draft Animal Health Bill. Norwich, UK : Stationery Office, Draft Bill, Cm 7784, January, 2010. Available at:, Accessed on September 2, 2011.
6. Tversky A, Kahneman D. Judgments under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 1974; 185:1124-1131.
7. Hogarth RM. Cognitive processes and the assessment of subjective probability distributions. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 1975; 70:271-294.
8. O' Hagan A, Buck CE, Daneshkhah A, Eiser JE, Garthwaite PH, Jenkinson DJ, Oakley JE, Rakow T. Uncertain Judgements: Eliciting Expert Probabilities. Chichester, UK : John Wiley and Sons, 2006.
9. Boatman N, Gosling JP. Estimating the quantitative environmental impacts of a package of potential set-aside mitigation options, phase 2, quantifying benefits and uncertainty: Report of expert elicitation workshops. London, UK : Final Defra report IF0170, April, 2009. Available at:, Accessed on September 2, 2011.
10. Raiffa H. Decision Analysis. Reading. MA : Addison-Wesley, 1968.
11. Garthwaite PH, Dickey JM. Double- and single-bisection methods for subjective probability assessments in a location-scale family. Journal of Econometrics, 1985; 29:149-163.
12. Garthwaite PH, O'Hagan A. Quantifying expert opinion in the UK water industry: An experimental study. Statistician, 2000; 49:455-477.
13. French S. Aggregating expert judgement. Revista de la Real Academia de Ciencias Exactas, Fisicas y Naturales, 2011; 105:181-206.
14. O'Hagan A. Eliciting expert beliefs in substantial practical applications. Statistician, 1998; 47:21-35.
15. Robert CP, Casella G. Monte Carlo Statistical Methods, 2nd ed. New York : Springer, 2004.
16. Winkler RL. The assessment of prior distributions in Bayesian analysis. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 1967; 62:776-800.
17. van der Sluijs JP, Petersen AC, Janssen PHM, Risbey JS, Ravetz JR. Exploring the quality of evidence for complex and contested policy decisions. Environmental Research Letters, 2008; 3:1-9.