Expert Political Judgement: How Good Is It? How Can We Know?
| Author | Kristian Skrede Gleditsch |
| DOI | 10.1177/002234330604300626 |
| Date | 01 November 2006 |
| Published date | 01 November 2006 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
Tan, Andrew T. H., ed., 2006. The Politics of
Terrorism: A Survey. London: Routledge. 268 pp.
ISBN 1857433475.
Five years after the attacks of 11 September 2001,
the flood of books pouring out of the publishing
houses on the issue of terrorism shows no sign of
slowing. Within this vast spectrum of publi-
cations, the quality has varied enormously. If one
seeks a clear and comprehensive introduction to
the field, Routledge’s ‘The Politics of . . .’ series
stands out as one of the most solid starting blocks.
This volume, edited by Andrew T. H. Tan, senior
lecturer at King’s College in London and expert
on Southeast Asia, is structured in four parts. The
first, and largest, part consists of a selection of
high-quality essays that seek to cover ‘the key
facets of terrorism’ – without doubt, an ambitious
aim when having only 110 pages at its disposal.
Yet, the result comes astonishingly close to fulfill-
ing that aim, covering the core historical tenden-
cies of terrorist activity, as well as the key features
of the tactics; the weapons and targets of con-
temporary terrorism; the roots of terrorism in
relation to ethno-nationalist, political and
religious causes; the question of state terrorism;
and counter-terrorism strategies. All in all, the
result is a well-balanced selection of texts from
experts in the field that incorporates a broad and
interdisciplinary approach. The second part of
the volume is an A–Z glossary of key terrorist
groups and incidents, providing a useful analytic
reference tool. This is followed by a series of
maps, charts and tables on terrorist activity. Part
four is a select bibliography, divided into sections.
Overall, the result is impressive, providing useful
and unbiased guidance into the very core of the
vast and complex field of terrorism.
Joakim Hammerlin
Tetlock, Philip E., 2005. Expert Political
Judgement: How Good Is It? How Can We Know?
Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. 352
pp. IBSN 0691123020.
Experts are frequently asked to comment on or
evaluate likely political futures in the news media.
How reliable are their forecasts? This book reports
on a series of experiments where experts were
asked to evaluate the likelihood of various future
scenarios (e.g. likelihood of reform in the USSR),
and their predictions were later evaluated against
the historical record. The results are striking:
experts do not foresee the future particularly well,
and generally do no better than simple algorithms
and extrapolations that are not based on any
knowledge of the subject matter. Tetlock explores
whether any types of experts tend to be more
accurate than others. Whereas there are no differ-
ences based on professional background and
political orientation, experts’ cognitive style does
appear to influence the success rate. ‘Hedgehogs’,
who know one ‘big thing’ and place much weight
on a particular theory, tend to do worse than
eclectic ‘foxes’ who know many ‘little things’.
Hedgehogs are prone to see particular dramatic
changes as either close to inevitable (e.g. wars) or
impossible (e.g. political change in the Soviet
Union or South Africa) and discount information
not consistent with their beliefs. By contrast,
foxes tend to rate a wider range of outcomes as
feasible and are more likely to change their beliefs
with new information. Although the studies
require some technical assumptions, for example
how to assign probabilities, the key conclusions
seem quite robust. But, whereas prudent fore-
casters may have a higher overall success rate,
modest predictions ultimately do not sell papers.
The fact that the media reward hedgehogs who
do not shy away from strong claims may, in this
sense, bolster the tendency towards overconfident
expert statements.
Kristian Skrede Gleditsch
Turton, David, ed., 2006. Ethnic Federalism:
The Ethiopian Experience in a Comparative Per-
spective. Oxford: James Curry. x + 246 pp. ISBN
0821416979.
The creation of a federal state based on ethnic
divisions in Ethiopia in 1991 at the end of the
civil war has generated extensive scholarly
interest. The aim of this book, edited by David
Turton, is to bring a timely comparative perspec-
tive to the discussion of Ethiopian federalism.
The first part of the book provides interesting
perspectives on why Ethiopia differs from other
African countries by employing territorial decen-
tralization to accommodate ethnic diversity, an
institutional feature generally associated with the
West. This is followed up by case studies of non-
Western federal states, India and Nigeria, and dis-
cussions on how Ethiopia may learn from their
experiences. Apart from giving a contextual
understanding of Ethiopian federalism, the
latter part of the book is devoted to the specific
BOOK NOTES 759
To continue reading
Request your trial