Evidence
Evidence: sTEM foundation of the platform. GRF brings evidence into institutional dialogue.
- Institution
- The Global Risks Forum (GRF)
- Service level
- R0: information and enquiries
Action week
Nexus Universe · GRF · Week 21
Tracks
controlled sessions
Observer notes
- O-1Escalation path unclear between cellsTrack 19 h
- O-2Data hand-off worked as designedTrack 28 h
- O-3Public message drafted before verificationTrack 39 h
GRF · Action weekAction week, in outline: domain structure with placeholder names and illustrative values, not a record.
The short answer.
Evidence is step two of the eight-step Nexus cycle: the step at which methods from the STEM Commons and labelled data are brought to the question. It is owned by the STEM foundation of each platform. At this step GRF brings evidence into institutional dialogue, and the decision at the end of the cycle stays with the competent authority.
Jurisdictions in Western Europe.
The jurisdictions that hold authority over this question: countries, their first-level divisions and capitals, shown for Western Europe as an example geography for this subject.
Who owns the evidence step.
STEM foundation of the platform
What GRF asks for, and what it may not ask for.
At the evidence step GRF writes an evidence request to GCRI: the question, the decision it serves, the deadline and the form the institutions can use. The request may ask for a synthesis, a model run or a data review. It may not ask for a conclusion. Science advice norms, from the INGSA principles to national codes for scientific advice, separate the framing of a question from the content of the answer for exactly this reason.
| Request element | Why it is needed |
|---|---|
| Decision served | So the evidence is scoped to what can change the decision |
| Form needed | A map, a range, a ranked list or a narrative synthesis |
| Uncertainty expected | So the brief states confidence in terms the audience can use |
| What is out of scope | To prevent the brief drifting into advice |
How evidence is read in a dialogue.
Evidence briefs reach participants before the dialogue. In the session, the author presents the findings and their limits, and then leaves the deliberation to institutions. Disagreements about evidence are recorded separately from disagreements about values or priorities, a distinction that keeps the record usable later.
The labels used in briefs are described on GCRI's evidence step.
Each pillar's contribution.
Then: build.
Terms used on this page.
Each term as this page uses it. Where a standard-setting body defines the term, the wording follows that body.
| Term | Definition |
|---|---|
| Evidence label | A tag naming the kind of evidence, such as observed or modelled, that should survive every summary. |
| Evidence synthesis | A structured review that collects, appraises and combines studies on one question, such as a systematic review, rapid review or evidence map. |
| Certainty of evidence | A judgement of how confident one can be in a body of evidence, made with a stated framework such as GRADE. |
Where this page's references lead.
The bodies and documents this page is read against. Status and editions change; each link goes to the issuing body.
Around GRF.
Start with an enquiry.
The current service level is R0: information and enquiries. An enquiry receives a reference and names the next step; applications, payments, compute allocations and registrations open only when their team, terms and review capacity exist.