The global political and media elites descending on Paris for talks on climate policy might want to consider the Golden Rule of Forecasting.

The Golden Rule derives from many decades of experimental research on forecasting across diverse fields and all kinds of forecasting problem. The Golden Rule of Forecasting "requires forecasters to be conservative by forecasting in a way that is consistent with cumulative knowledge about the situation and about forecasting."

Ignoring the Golden Rule has important practical consequences: The size of forecast errors is typically increased by more than 40%.

The Paris climate talks are predicated on the dangerous manmade global warming scenarios and projections of the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). These projections are being treated as forecasts by the policy makers and media attending the Paris talks.

In anticipation of the Paris talks, Scott Armstrong and Kesten Green delivered a paper at this year's International Symposium on Forecasting assessing whether the IPCC's procedures are consistent with the Golden Rule. They found that the IPCC's procedures violated all 20 of the relevant Golden Rule guidelines.

The abstract and slides of their paper, titled "Are dangerous warming forecasts consistent with the Golden Rule?" are available from ResearchGate, here. A supporting flyer is available, here.

The 36th International Symposium on Forecasting is to be held in Santander, Spain, from the 19th to 22nd of June, 2016, at Palace of La Magdalena. 

The International Symposium on Forecasting (ISF) is the premier forecasting conference, attracting the world's leading forecasting researchers, practitioners, and students. Through a combination of keynote speaker presentations, academic sessions, workshops, and social programs, the ISF provides many excellent opportunities for networking, learning, and fun. 

Important Dates:
Invited Session Proposals: January 31 2016
Abstract Submissions: March 16 2016
Early Registration Ends: May 15 2016

For more information on the 2016 ISF see here. Keynote & Feature Speakers are listed here.

At the recent International Symposium of Forecasting in Riverside, Scott Armstrong and Kesten Green presented three papers illustrating the effects of simplicity and conservatism in forecasting. In one example, with Andreas Graefe, they described applying three Golden Rule checklist items to improving eight established election forecasting models. Their resulting simple model reduced forecast error by 45% compared to the original models. To see the slides for their papers, visit the pages at and, and scroll down.

The 19 papers of the Special Issue of the Journal of Business Research guest edited by Kesten Green and Scott Armstrong and devoted to evidence on the effect of simplicity versus complexity in forecasting are now available online. We have provided a Table of Contents for the Special Issue, with links to the papers. The eagle-eyed among you will notice that the ordering of our table of contents is at odds with page number order. A miss-step in the production process saw the editors' logical ordering of the papers ignored. We have used the editors' intended order in our Table of Contents, available from the Papers Page. Please tell your colleagues about this important Special Issue; one that is relevant to all forecasting researchers and practitioners. 

Frequent visitors to may have noticed that the Forecasting Methodology Tree and the Forecasting Method Selection Tree have changed. Earlier this year, we replaced the Trees with versions that better represent the current state of forecasting knowledge. Since then, we have been fixing and revising the pop-up windows so that they are consistent with the new Trees. The Trees remain a work in progress--we will continue to improve the pop-up descriptions and add relevant links--so please let us know if you spot any problems or have any suggestions for improvements. See the links to the new Trees in the menu bar at the top of the screen.