Phil Tetlock is part of the study, from the Forecasting Research Institute. Obviously this is very important. From Tetlock’s email to me:
“In short, this study is the largest systematic survey of subject matter experts on the risks posed by nuclear weapons. Through a combination of expert interviews and surveys, 110 domain experts and 41 experienced forecasters predicted the possibility of a nuclear conflict, explained the basic methods of their prediction, and predicted the impact of certain controllable policies on the possibility of a nuclear disaster.
Key findings include:
- We asked experts about the likelihood of a nuclear disaster (defined as an event in which nuclear weapons cause the deaths of at least 10 million people) in 2045, the centenary of the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Experts have given an average probability of 4.5% of a nuclear disaster in 2045, while informed forecasts put the probability at 1%.
a. Respondents thought that the nuclear conflict between Russia and NATO/USA is the most likely conflict zone to cause a nuclear disaster of this scale, however the risk was evenly distributed among the other conflict zones we asked about: China/USA, North. Korea/South Korea, India/Pakistan, and Israel/Iran.
- We asked participants about their beliefs about the likely effectiveness of several policy options aimed at reducing the risk of a nuclear disaster. Two policies emerged as clear favorites for many participants: a critical communications network and nuclear-armed states implementing a security review. The average expert has estimated that a secure communication network will reduce the risk of a nuclear disaster by 25%, and a secure update will reduce it by 20%.
You will find the report here.
Source link