Upload
darrell-ambrose-chandler
View
214
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
SCENARIO PROCESSfor
Put here your name,details of the workshop,
etc.
Designed byMichael BraitoMarianne Penker
KNOWLEDGE INTEGRATION
participatoryprocess
Outline
1. Sustainable development by Knowledge Integration
2. Thinking of tomorrow – Why and how?
3. Thinking of tomorrow – Scenario PlanningTheoretical introduction
4. The Scenario Process (Step 1 – 5)Step 1: Defining the project boundariesStep 2: Identifying the driving forcesStep 3: Analysing the driving forcesStep 4: Scenario generationStep 5: Scenario transfer
18.04.23 by Michael Braito, Marianne Penker 2
18.04.23 by Michael Braito, Marianne Penker 3
Thinking of tomorrow for a sustainable development!
The delegates at the RIO+20 acknowledged the importance of strengthening transdisciplinary cooperation in order to
enhance sustainable development.
1. Each discipline is important!2. Concentrating on one subject is
failing in seeing other aspects.3. Learning from each other …4. … to recognize the big picture.
Why is this so crucial for sustainable development?
Sustainable development can only be reached ifhuman beings work
together.
Sustainable development can only be reached ifhuman beings work
together.
• Decisions in the field of sustainable development have to be taken in the context of uncertain and incomplete knowledge.
• A systematic integration of a range of research-informed judgments, expertise from different disciplines and experience-based knowledge is often the best way forward.
KNOWLEDGE INTEGRATION
18.04.23 by Michael Braito, Marianne Penker 4
Methods of Knowledge Integration
• “In interdisciplinary research and transdisciplinary knowledge integration, the focus of the dialogue process is on a research question and the process aims to enable the formation of a combined judgment between the participants, with that judgment being informed by the best research evidence” (McDonald et al. 2009).
• Several methods for dialogue/participatory processes exist (see McDonald et al. 2009), for instance:– Citizens’ jury,– Conference,– Delphi technique,– Open space technology,
– Scenario Planning (THINKING OF TOMORROW).
18.04.23 by Michael Braito, Marianne Penker 5
The complexity of today and tomorrow
18.04.23 by Michael Braito, Marianne Penker 7
Our world, our socio-economic system is changing rapidly and unpredictable.
A number of issues follow their own future path, but
at the same time, they interact not only with each other but with any number of …
macro-economicmacro-economic
politicalpolitical
ruralrural
etc.etc.ecologicalecological
techno-logical
techno-logical
socialsocial regulatoryregulatory
regionalregional
The problem of limited points of views• To analyse complex systems we reduce the
complexity.
• In doing this, we tend to stop gathering detail and select one path forward that seems the most likely one.
18.04.23 by Michael Braito, Marianne Penker 8
macro-economicmacro-economic
politicalpolitical
ruralruralecologicalecological
techno-logical
techno-logical
socialsocial regulatoryregulatory
regionalregional
etc.etc.
These limited points of views may become a straitjacket, not allowing us to see the big picture.
Thinking of tomorrow – Why and How?
“A major focus is on how the future might evolve from today’s point-in-time to the horizon year of the scenario – say 15-20 years hence.
Scenario thinking analyses the relationships between:
• the critical uncertainties (as they resolve themselves);
• important predetermined trends (such as demographics), and
• the behaviour of actors who have a stake in the particular future (who tend to act to preserve and enhance their own interests)”
(Wright and Cairns 2011, 9).
18.04.23 by Michael Braito, Marianne Penker 9
Knowledge Integration – dealing with unknowns/uncertainties• Scenario planning combines possibilities to
form a manageable set of scenarios.
• It helps “to sketch a broad spectrum of possible developments options” (Penker and
Wytrzens 2005).
18.04.23 by Michael Braito, Marianne Penker 10
• Knowledge Integration (explicit scientific knowledge and implicit local knowledge)
• Following the approach of ‘intuitive logics’ (Jungermann and Thuring 1987)See the sense of complexity and ambiguity in terms of possibility and plausibility.
• Exploring the interrelationships between multiple factors in terms of cause/effect and chronologyRealise that the possibilities are not unlimited.
AIMS of ‘scenario thinking’
18.04.23 by Michael Braito, Marianne Penker 11
AIM of System Intervention
• Initiate a process of understanding (future is unpredictable and unknown).
• Highlight and understand possibilities for action (despite partial uncertainty).
• Enhance openness for new ways instead of moving always on the worn-out paths.
18.04.23 by Michael Braito, Marianne Penker 12
How to use scenarios
Scenarios can fulfill several and different functions:
•explorative and knowledge function,
•communication function,
•aim building function, and
•decision making and strategy function.
The PROCESS is as important as the OUTCOME!
18.04.23 by Michael Braito, Marianne Penker 14
The scenario funnel
Scenario thinking gives you the opportunity to set intervention today,because it shows you what will have a major impact in the future.
18.04.23 by Michael Braito, Marianne Penker 15
Scenario techniques
Trend scenario based on driving forces
Effect Analysis
Consistency Analysis
Cross-Impact-Analysis
Intuitive Logics
Normativ-narrative Scenarios
Systemic - formalised
Creative-narrative
Extrapolation of business as usual
Trend-Impact-Analyses
Extrapolation of business as usual
Trend-Impact-Analyses
18.04.23 by Michael Braito, Marianne Penker 16
Project boundaries of the exemplary scenario project
• Set the objectives. • Define boundaries and establish focus.• The objectives for the scenario planning should include
the following:
1. Thematic framework,2. Time horizon for the scenarios,3. Geographical scope of the scenarios,4. Stakeholder to be addressed by the project,5. Unavoidable constraints on future plans, and6. Definition and deadline for deliverables.
18.04.23 by Michael Braito, Marianne Penker 20
What are ‘driving forces’?
• Driving forces are attributes of a system which are most relevant at the present and cause changes in the system state over time (e.g. social, economic, environmental, political, and technological).
• Main key factors facing the research topic
• Changes in society, politics, technology etc. are often the symptoms of more fundamental transformations.
• Driving forces are indicating change, but should not indicate direction or dimension.
18.04.23 by Michael Braito, Marianne Penker 23
Methods to identify driving forces I
Identification of a MAXIMUM of 10-15 driving forces
Different methods exist:• Systemic picture (all together or as a “World Café”)• Brainstorming/Brainwriting by using cards• etc.
18.04.23 by Michael Braito, Marianne Penker 24
Methods to identify driving forces II
Systemic picture(all together or as a “World Café”)
18.04.23 by Michael Braito, Marianne Penker 25
Methods to identify driving forces III
Brainstorming/Brainwritingby using cards
18.04.23 by Michael Braito, Marianne Penker 26
Feedback
Integrate scientific knowledge with participants’ knowledge
• Literature research• Empirical research
– Field work– Interviews– Delphi Method– etc.
18.04.23 by Michael Braito, Marianne Penker 27
Identify the most relevant driving forces
RANKINGWhat is the magnitude of the impact of these driving forces on the development of the future of the system?
18.04.23 by Michael Braito, Marianne Penker 31
The ‘relevance/uncertainty’ matrix
4 dimension matrix to narrow the list of driving forces to the most relevant for differentiating scenarios.
We may be highly certain that something will happen (e.g. climate change) but highly uncertain as to what impact it may have (increasing storm activity, drought, flood?
18.04.23 by Michael Braito, Marianne Penker 32
Scenario Generation I
Select the two factors (A and B) that combine the greatest perceived relevance on the core issue with the greatest uncertainty as to what their impact will be.
4 dimensions matrix4 scenarios
Factor AFact
or B
18.04.23 by Michael Braito, Marianne Penker 35
Scenario Generation II
Factor AFact
or B
Scenario 2
Factor AFactor B
Scenarios should be:1.Plausible2.Distinctive3.Consistent4.Relevant5.Creative6.Challenging(Maack 2001, 73)
18.04.23 by Michael Braito, Marianne Penker 36
Story telling
• Add narratives to provide ‘rich descriptions’ of four possible and plausible futures (e.g. “one day of Mister X in the year 20xx”).
• Think carefully and deeply about sense making, logic, plausibility and possibility of what you are writing.
18.04.23 by Michael Braito, Marianne Penker 37
Story telling
• geographical maps• timelines• story hands• story seeds• storyboards• journeys (A to B;
A to B to A)• cumulative block
graphs• emotions graphs• story mountains
1. Creative title (highlighting the central message
2. Brief summation that explains the title and sums up the elements of the story
3. Smooth narratives that are easy to read and understand
• What is Mr. X on the 1st May 2030 doing?• How does the world look like?
18.04.23 by Michael Braito, Marianne Penker 38
Scenario Transfer I
The final stage of the Scenario Process is the dissemination of the message and its implementation on the ground.
Backcasting• Focuses on finding options that satisfy long-term targets
(Börjes et. al. 2005)
• What activities/measures have to be taken to reach the preferred scenario?
18.04.23 by Michael Braito, Marianne Penker 41
Scenario Transfer II
Scenario 1 Scenario 4Scenario 2
Scenario 3
What are the implications of
this world?
What is the best strategy
for dealing with this
situation? What are the major opportunities and
threats in this scenario?
Which scenario do we prefer?
18.04.23 by Michael Braito, Marianne Penker 42
References
Bammer, G., 2006. Integration and Implementation Sciences: Building a New Specialisation. In Perez, P. and Batten, D. (eds.). Complex Science for a Complex World. Australia: ANU E Press, The Australian National University Australia. 95-107.
Börjeson, L., Höjer, M., Dreborg, K.H., Ekvall, T. and Finnveden, G., 2005. Towards a user's guide to scenarios - a report on scenario types and scenario techniques. Stockholm: US AB Royal Institute of Technology.
Jungermann, H. and Thuring, M., 1987. The use of mental models for generating scenarios. In Wright, G. and Ayton, P. (eds.), Judgmental Forecasting. London: Wiley.
Maack, J., 2001. Scenario Analysis: A Tool for Task Managers.
McDonald, D., Bammer, G. and Deane, P., 2009. Research Integration using dialogue methods. Australia: ANU E Press, The Australian National University Australia.
Penker, M. and Wytrzens, H.K., 2005. Scenario for the Austrian food chain in 2020 and its landscape impacts. Landscape and Urban Planning. 71. 175-189.
Wright, G. and Cairns, G., 2011. Scenario Thinking: Practical approaches to the future. London, Palgrave.
18.04.23 by Michael Braito, Marianne Penker 44
Michael Braito Expertise•Environmental economics and environmental policy•Sustainable development•Rural development•Optimisation and valuation of managerial processes•Analysis and economic valuation of societal processes
Institute for Sustainable Economic DevelopmentDepartment of Economics and Social Sciences
BOKU University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, ViennaFeistmantelstr. 4, 1180 Vienna, Austria
http://www.wiso.boku.ac.at/2797.html?&L=1
Marianne Penker
Expertise•Rural development•Implementation Research •Property Rights•Rural Governance •Landscape Governance•Conservation and Environmental Policy