Modellantagelser

Modellantagelser is a term used in Danish analysis to denote counter-assumptions or opposing premises introduced to challenge a given argument, model, or plan. The idea is to test the robustness of conclusions by considering alternative starting points, constraints, or conditions that could change the outcome.

In practice, modellantagelser are employed to probe weaknesses and uncertainties in reasoning or modelling. Analysts formulate plausible alternatives to the base assumptions, such as different parameter values, probability estimates, external triggers, or structural choices within a model. By evaluating how results change under these alternatives, they assess the resilience of recommendations or decisions.

Examples of use include policy analysis, where base assumptions about costs, benefits, and discount rates are scrutinized with counter-assumptions about alternative costs, benefits, or market responses. In climate or technological modelling, modellantagelser might explore higher or lower emission trajectories, different climate sensitivities, or alternative technology adoption rates. In project planning, counter-assumptions about timelines, resource availability, or stakeholder behavior can reveal potential risks to schedules or budgets.

Process-wise, practitioners first identify the prevailing assumptions, then brainstorm plausible counter-assumptions, and finally assess the impact of these alternatives on outcomes. The results are documented to inform decision-makers about sensitivity and risk.

Modellantagelser relate to sensitivity analysis, scenario planning, and robust decision-making, yet they emphasize explicitly comparing base assumptions with competing premises. Limitations include the potential for biased or impractical counter-arguments and the resource demand of examining many alternatives.