in the European Commission Impact assessment guidelines[2] and by the European Science Academies[3]- when a sensitivity analysis (SA) of a model-based study is meant to demonstrate the robustness of the evidence provided by the model in the context whereby the inference feeds into a policy or decision-making process.
In settings where scientific work feeds into policy, the framing of the analysis, its institutional context, and the motivations of its author may become highly relevant, and a pure SA - with its focus on quantified uncertainty - may be insufficient.
Most often the framing includes implicit assumptions, which could be political (e.g. which group needs to be protected) all the way to technical (e.g. which variable can be treated as a constant).
It takes inspiration from NUSAP,[4] a method used to communicate the quality of quantitative information with the generation of `Pedigrees' of numbers.
Post-normal science (PNS) is a concept developed by Silvio Funtowicz and Jerome Ravetz,[5][7][8] which proposes a methodology of inquiry that is appropriate when “facts are uncertain, values in dispute, stakes high and decisions urgent” (Funtowicz and Ravetz, 1992:[8] 251–273).
These rules are meant to help an analyst to anticipate criticism, in particular relating to model-based inference feeding into an impact assessment.
Here is a possible list: Sensitivity auditing is described in the European Commission Guidelines for impact assessment.