Andrea Saltelli (http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4222-6975) has worked on physical chemistry, environmental sciences, applied statistics, impact assessment and science for policy. His main disciplinary focus is on sensitivity analysis of model output, a discipline where statistical tools are used to interpret the output from mathematical or computational models, and on sensitivity auditing, an extension of sensitivity analysis to the entire evidence-generating process in a policy context. Andrea is the author of the most quoted theoretical contribution on sensitivity analysis and three of his works are in the top ten of the most cited contributions on sensitivity analysis (Scopus, December 2017).
Andrea has worked at the Joint Research Centre, leading for ten years the unit of econometrics and applied statistics. He enjoyed training EC staff in impact assessment methodologies, and providing methodological and technical support to many directorates of the EC. Andrea also worked on statistical indicators and on the use of multi-criteria methodologies. He is one of the co-authors the OECD-JRC official handbook for composite indicators. His most recent papers have tackled sensitivity analysis and auditing, the future of statistics, the rational of evidence based policy, and various critiques of problematic quantifications. Andrea publishes regularly on the crisis of science and the post-truth discussion in the online journal The Conversation, and gives courses in sensitivity analysis, sensitivity auditing and ethics of quantification (see www.andreasaltelli.eu).
Andrea’s contribution to the research line of Open Evidence will cover the epistemic aspects of quantification combining sensitivity analysis and sensitivity auditing, quantitative-story telling and ethics of quantification.
Andrea Saltelli top 5 publications
Saltelli, A., Funtowicz, S., 2017, What is science’s crisis really about? FUTURES, Volume 91, Pages 5-11, http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0016328717301969
Saltelli, A., Giampietro, M., 2017, What is wrong with evidence based policy, and how can it be improved? Futures, 91, 62-71. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0016328717300472
Saltelli, A., Funtowicz, S., 2014, When all models are wrong: More stringent quality criteria are needed for models used at the science-policy interface, Issues in Science and Technology, Winter 2014, 79-85. See pdf at: http://issues.org/30-2/andrea/
Saltelli, A., M. Ratto, S. Tarantola and F. Campolongo, 2012 (Perennial Review of the 2005 paper), Sensitivity Analysis for Chemical Models, Chemical Reviews, 112 (5), pp PR1–PR21. See pdf at: http://www.andreasaltelli.eu/file/repository/cr200301u_l_def.pdf
Saltelli, A., Annoni, P., 2010, How to avoid a perfunctory sensitivity analysis, Environmental Modeling and Software, 25, 1508-1517. See pdf at: http://www.andreasaltelli.eu/file/repository/PublishedPageNumbers.pdf
Saltelli, A., D’Hombres, B., Sensitivity analysis didn’t help. A practitioner’s critique of the Stern review, 2010, Global Environmental Change, 20, 298-302. See pdf at: http://www.andreasaltelli.eu/file/repository/JGEC750.pdf