Company logo
Search
Company logo

Abstract: We describe a pattern common to three of the most consequential public policy failures of the past two decades—the 2008 financial crisis, the COVID-19 pandemic management, and the campaign for rapid decarbonization. While these involve very different sectors, they share a common pathology we call the consensus trap. Each of these failures derives from an alignment of powerful institutions and leaders in manufacturing a consensus not supported by the evidence. We trace each instance of the consensus trap through the same time course: the consensus is asserted, credible dissent is suppressed, the policy fails, and the accountability is lacking. The mechanism underlying the consensus trap in each case is strikingly uniform: rapid acceptance of flawed predictive models, aggressive discrediting of credible challenges to the accepted view, a campaign of media and political amplification, and a regressive impact of the costs of failure. While there are differences among the three cases, the dynamic common to these cases suggests that the consensus trap will spring wherever complex data and high policy stakes coincide. Institutional and societal reforms can make this less likely. Awareness of the consensus trap is particularly important in light of a 2025 revision of the Federal Judicial Center Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence, which links “widespread acceptance” to the highest form of scientific certainty. That linkage could institutionalize, in the federal courts, the confusion between a manufactured consensus and one that is earned by critical debate of evidence.

Related Article
Covid, Climate and the ‘Consensus Trap

Read the related Wall Street Journal op-ed, "Covid, Climate and the ‘Consensus Trap’.”

 

Wall Street Journal Op-Ed Preview 

Three of the costliest policy failures in recent decades—the 2008 financial crisis, the Covid lockdowns and the campaign for rapid decarbonization—share a pathology we call the Consensus Trap. Problems began with the output of complex, unvalidated models presented as facts. Institutions and public figures under pressure to appear authoritative ignored uncertainties. Along with the press, these institutions and people became arbiters of truth, amplifying the declared consensus rather than critically assessing the evidence. Once “the science” was declared, dissent was treated as misconduct... READ FULL ARTICLE

 

About the Authors

Scott W. Atlas, MD is the Robert Wesson Senior Fellow in Scientific Philosophy & Public Policy at the Hoover Institution of Stanford University. From July to December, 2020, he served as a Special Advisor to the President and a member of the White House Coronavirus Task Force. Before his appointment at Hoover Institution, he was Professor and Chief of Neuroradiology at Stanford University Medical Center for 14 years.

Terrence Keeley is Chairman and CEO of the Impact Evaluation Lab. His career in finance spans four decades, where he has advised the world's largest sovereign wealth funds, public pension plans, endowments, foundations, and family offices. He was previously a managing director at BlackRock's official institutions group.

Steven E. Koonin is the Edward Teller Senior Fellow at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution. Before joining Stanford in 2024, he was a professor at New York University, with appointments in the Stern School of Business, the Tandon School of Engineering, and the Department of Physics. He founded NYU’s Center for Urban Science and Progress, which focuses research and education on the acquisition, integration, and analysis of big data for big cities.

Expand
overlay image