自然灾害预报、科学家的表现、职业道德和透明度的必要性。

IF 3.5 2区 物理与天体物理 Q2 PHYSICS, APPLIED
Applied Physics Letters Pub Date : 2016-10-20 Epub Date: 2015-04-14 DOI:10.1080/02772248.2015.1030664
Fausto Guzzetti
{"title":"自然灾害预报、科学家的表现、职业道德和透明度的必要性。","authors":"Fausto Guzzetti","doi":"10.1080/02772248.2015.1030664","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Landslides are one of several natural hazards. As other natural hazards, landslides are difficult to predict, and their forecasts are uncertain. The uncertainty depends on the poor understanding of the phenomena that control the slope failures, and on the inherent complexity and chaotic nature of the landslides. This is similar to other natural hazards, including hurricanes, earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, floods, and droughts. Due to the severe impact of landslides on the population, the environment, and the economy, forecasting landslides is of scientific interest and of societal relevance, and scientists attempting to forecast landslides face known and new problems intrinsic to the multifaceted interactions between science, decision-making, and the society. The problems include deciding on the authority and reliability of individual scientists and groups of scientists, and evaluating the performances of individual scientists, research teams, and their institutions. Related problems lay in the increasing subordination of research scientists to politics and decision-makers, and in the conceptual and operational models currently used to organize and pay for research, based on apparently objective criteria and metrics, considering science as any other human endeavor, and favoring science that produces results of direct and immediate application. The paper argues that the consequences of these problems have not been considered fully.</p>","PeriodicalId":8094,"journal":{"name":"Applied Physics Letters","volume":"84 1","pages":"1043-1059"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2016-10-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5020329/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Forecasting natural hazards, performance of scientists, ethics, and the need for transparency.\",\"authors\":\"Fausto Guzzetti\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/02772248.2015.1030664\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Landslides are one of several natural hazards. As other natural hazards, landslides are difficult to predict, and their forecasts are uncertain. The uncertainty depends on the poor understanding of the phenomena that control the slope failures, and on the inherent complexity and chaotic nature of the landslides. This is similar to other natural hazards, including hurricanes, earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, floods, and droughts. Due to the severe impact of landslides on the population, the environment, and the economy, forecasting landslides is of scientific interest and of societal relevance, and scientists attempting to forecast landslides face known and new problems intrinsic to the multifaceted interactions between science, decision-making, and the society. The problems include deciding on the authority and reliability of individual scientists and groups of scientists, and evaluating the performances of individual scientists, research teams, and their institutions. Related problems lay in the increasing subordination of research scientists to politics and decision-makers, and in the conceptual and operational models currently used to organize and pay for research, based on apparently objective criteria and metrics, considering science as any other human endeavor, and favoring science that produces results of direct and immediate application. The paper argues that the consequences of these problems have not been considered fully.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8094,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Applied Physics Letters\",\"volume\":\"84 1\",\"pages\":\"1043-1059\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-10-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5020329/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Applied Physics Letters\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/02772248.2015.1030664\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"物理与天体物理\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2015/4/14 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PHYSICS, APPLIED\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied Physics Letters","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02772248.2015.1030664","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"物理与天体物理","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2015/4/14 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PHYSICS, APPLIED","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

山体滑坡是多种自然灾害之一。与其他自然灾害一样,山体滑坡难以预测,预测结果也不确定。这种不确定性取决于人们对控制斜坡崩塌的现象了解甚少,以及山体滑坡固有的复杂性和混乱性。这与其他自然灾害类似,包括飓风、地震、火山爆发、洪水和干旱。由于山体滑坡对人口、环境和经济的严重影响,预测山体滑坡既具有科学意义,也具有社会意义,而试图预测山体滑坡的科学家面临着科学、决策和社会之间多方面互动所固有的已知问题和新问题。这些问题包括决定科学家个人和科学家团体的权威性和可靠性,以及评估科学家个人、研究团队及其机构的表现。相关的问题在于科研人员日益从属于政治和决策者,以及目前用于组织和支付研究费用的概念和运作模式,这些模式以明显客观的标准和衡量标准为基础,将科学视为任何其他人类活动,并偏向于产生直接和即时应用成果的科学。本文认为,这些问题的后果尚未得到充分考虑。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Forecasting natural hazards, performance of scientists, ethics, and the need for transparency.

Landslides are one of several natural hazards. As other natural hazards, landslides are difficult to predict, and their forecasts are uncertain. The uncertainty depends on the poor understanding of the phenomena that control the slope failures, and on the inherent complexity and chaotic nature of the landslides. This is similar to other natural hazards, including hurricanes, earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, floods, and droughts. Due to the severe impact of landslides on the population, the environment, and the economy, forecasting landslides is of scientific interest and of societal relevance, and scientists attempting to forecast landslides face known and new problems intrinsic to the multifaceted interactions between science, decision-making, and the society. The problems include deciding on the authority and reliability of individual scientists and groups of scientists, and evaluating the performances of individual scientists, research teams, and their institutions. Related problems lay in the increasing subordination of research scientists to politics and decision-makers, and in the conceptual and operational models currently used to organize and pay for research, based on apparently objective criteria and metrics, considering science as any other human endeavor, and favoring science that produces results of direct and immediate application. The paper argues that the consequences of these problems have not been considered fully.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Applied Physics Letters
Applied Physics Letters 物理-物理:应用
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
10.00%
发文量
1821
审稿时长
1.6 months
期刊介绍: Applied Physics Letters (APL) features concise, up-to-date reports on significant new findings in applied physics. Emphasizing rapid dissemination of key data and new physical insights, APL offers prompt publication of new experimental and theoretical papers reporting applications of physics phenomena to all branches of science, engineering, and modern technology. In addition to regular articles, the journal also publishes invited Fast Track, Perspectives, and in-depth Editorials which report on cutting-edge areas in applied physics. APL Perspectives are forward-looking invited letters which highlight recent developments or discoveries. Emphasis is placed on very recent developments, potentially disruptive technologies, open questions and possible solutions. They also include a mini-roadmap detailing where the community should direct efforts in order for the phenomena to be viable for application and the challenges associated with meeting that performance threshold. Perspectives are characterized by personal viewpoints and opinions of recognized experts in the field. Fast Track articles are invited original research articles that report results that are particularly novel and important or provide a significant advancement in an emerging field. Because of the urgency and scientific importance of the work, the peer review process is accelerated. If, during the review process, it becomes apparent that the paper does not meet the Fast Track criterion, it is returned to a normal track.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信