IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/tefoso/v154y2020ics0040162519308753.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Policy scenarios as an instrument for policymakers

Author

Listed:
  • Wright, David
  • Stahl, Bernd
  • Hatzakis, Tally

Abstract

Scenarios are a methodology of futures and foresight research that has been established for more than half a century. Despite the rich literature on scenarios and ways of constructing them, the current scenario methodologies, current approaches to scenario constructions are often not well aligned with the needs of policymakers. Emerging technologies that are likely to achieve high social relevance in the short to mid-term future and that call for quick policy interventions are difficult to reflect using current scenario approaches. We have therefore developed a new type of scenario that we call a policy scenario. This paper develops the principles and justification for policy scenarios. We provide a detailed description of how they can be constructed, focusing on their key characteristics of policy requirements, plausibility, probability, credibility, expertise, objectivity and legitimacy. Following our stakeholder-based approach allows researchers to construct scenarios that are uniquely suited to inform policymakers and, in effect, the policy development process.

Suggested Citation

  • Wright, David & Stahl, Bernd & Hatzakis, Tally, 2020. "Policy scenarios as an instrument for policymakers," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:tefoso:v:154:y:2020:i:c:s0040162519308753
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2020.119972
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0040162519308753
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techfore.2020.119972?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lehoux, P. & Miller, F.A. & Williams-Jones, B., 2020. "Anticipatory governance and moral imagination: Methodological insights from a scenario-based public deliberation study," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    2. Goodpaster, Kenneth E., 1991. "Business Ethics and Stakeholder Analysis," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 1(1), pages 53-73, January.
    3. Derbyshire, James, 2017. "Potential surprise theory as a theoretical foundation for scenario planning," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 77-87.
    4. Philippe Durance & Michel Godet, 2010. "Scenario building: Uses and abuses," Post-Print hal-02864615, HAL.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Chulok Alexander, 2021. "Applying blended foresight methods for revealing incentives and future strategies of key national innovation system players," Engineering Management in Production and Services, Sciendo, vol. 13(4), pages 160-173, December.
    2. Oughton, Edward J. & Comini, Niccolò & Foster, Vivien & Hall, Jim W., 2022. "Policy choices can help keep 4G and 5G universal broadband affordable," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    3. Ehlers, Melf-Hinrich & Finger, Robert & El Benni, Nadja & Gocht, Alexander & Sørensen, Claus Aage Grøn & Gusset, Markus & Pfeifer, Catherine & Poppe, Krijn & Regan, Áine & Rose, David Christian & Wolf, 2022. "Scenarios for European agricultural policymaking in the era of digitalisation," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    4. Stahl, B.C. & Andreou, A. & Brey, P. & Hatzakis, T. & Kirichenko, A. & Macnish, K. & Laulhé Shaelou, S. & Patel, A. & Ryan, M. & Wright, D., 2021. "Artificial intelligence for human flourishing – Beyond principles for machine learning," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 374-388.
    5. Douglas, Conor M.W. & Panagiotoglou, Dimitra & Dragojlovic, Nick & Lynd, Larry, 2021. "Methodology for constructing scenarios for health policy research: The case of coverage decision-making for drugs for rare diseases in Canada," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
    6. Pablo E. Carvajal & Asami Miketa & Nadeem Goussous & Pauline Fulcheri, 2022. "Best Practice in Government Use and Development of Long-Term Energy Transition Scenarios," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-21, March.
    7. Oughton,Edward J. & Comini,Niccolo & Foster,Vivien & Hall,Jim W., 2021. "Policy Choices Can Help Keep 4G and 5G Universal Broadband Affordable," Policy Research Working Paper Series 9563, The World Bank.
    8. Edward J Oughton & Niccol`o Comini & Vivien Foster & Jim W Hall, 2021. "Policy choices can help keep 4G and 5G universal broadband affordable," Papers 2101.07820, arXiv.org, revised Feb 2021.
    9. Stahl, Bernd Carsten & Brooks, Laurence & Hatzakis, Tally & Santiago, Nicole & Wright, David, 2023. "Exploring ethics and human rights in artificial intelligence – A Delphi study," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    10. Amorim-Lopes, Mário & Oliveira, Mónica & Raposo, Mariana & Cardoso-Grilo, Teresa & Alvarenga, António & Barbas, Marta & Alves, Marco & Vieira, Ana & Barbosa-Póvoa, Ana, 2021. "Enhancing optimization planning models for health human resources management with foresight," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 103(C).
    11. Burt, George & Mackay, David & Mendibil, Kepa, 2021. "Overcoming multi-stakeholder fragmented narratives in land use, woodland and forestry policy: The role scenario planning and ‘dissociative jolts’," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 166(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Bowman, Gary & Parks, Ryan W., 2024. "Between episodes of strategy: Sociomateriality, sensemaking, and dysfunction in a scenario planning process," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 179(C).
    2. Mariya Georgieva, 2020. "About the Corporate Social Responsibility Beyond the Framework of Charity," Izvestia Journal of the Union of Scientists - Varna. Economic Sciences Series, Union of Scientists - Varna, Economic Sciences Section, vol. 9(1), pages 35-44, April.
    3. Pies, Ingo & Hielscher, Stefan & Beckmann, Markus, 2008. "Corporate citizenship as stakeholder management: An ordonomic approach to business ethics," Discussion Papers 2008-4, Martin Luther University of Halle-Wittenberg, Chair of Economic Ethics.
    4. Francesco Di Maddaloni & Roya Derakhshan, 2019. "A Leap from Negative to Positive Bond. A Step towards Project Sustainability," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-19, June.
    5. Sheida Abdoli & Farah Habib & Mohammad Babazadeh, 2018. "Making spatial development scenario for south of Bushehr province, Iran, based on strategic foresight," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 20(3), pages 1293-1309, June.
    6. Lee, Eun Mi & Park, Seong-Yeon & Rapert, Molly I. & Newman, Christopher L., 2012. "Does perceived consumer fit matter in corporate social responsibility issues?," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 65(11), pages 1558-1564.
    7. Heidbrink Ludger, 2012. "Unternehmen als politische Akteure. Eine Ortsbestimmung zwischen Ordnungsverantwortung und Systemverantwortung / Companies as political actors. Locating regulatory responsibility and systemsresponsibi," ORDO. Jahrbuch für die Ordnung von Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft, De Gruyter, vol. 63(1), pages 203-232, January.
    8. Ana Esteves & Mary-Anne Barclay, 2011. "New Approaches to Evaluating the Performance of Corporate–Community Partnerships: A Case Study from the Minerals Sector," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 103(2), pages 189-202, October.
    9. Jose Luis Retolaza & Maite Ruiz & Leire San‐Jose, 2009. "CSR in business start‐ups: an application method for stakeholder engagement," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(6), pages 324-336, November.
    10. Martin Sandbu, 2012. "Stakeholder Duties: On the Moral Responsibility of Corporate Investors," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 109(1), pages 97-107, August.
    11. Marina Bianchi & Sergio Nisticò, 2018. "Shackle: an enquirer into choice," Working Papers 2018-03, Universita' di Cassino, Dipartimento di Economia e Giurisprudenza.
    12. Viveros, Hector, 2017. "Unpacking stakeholder mechanisms to influence corporate social responsibility in the mining sector," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 1-12.
    13. Bazlur RAHMAN, & Idris ALI, & Alexandru Mircea NEDELEA, 2017. "Greenwashing In Canadian Firms: An Assessment Of Environmental Claimsgreenwashing In Canadian Firms: An Assessment Of Environmental Claims," EcoForum, "Stefan cel Mare" University of Suceava, Romania, Faculty of Economics and Public Administration - Economy, Business Administration and Tourism Department., vol. 6(2), pages 1-8, july.
    14. Samantha Miles, 2017. "Stakeholder Theory Classification: A Theoretical and Empirical Evaluation of Definitions," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 142(3), pages 437-459, May.
    15. Massimiliano Mazzanti & Ugo Rizzo, 2014. "Moving'diversely'towards'the'green'economy.'CO2'abating'techno organisational'trajectories'and'environmental'policy'in'EU'sectors," SEEDS Working Papers 0914, SEEDS, Sustainability Environmental Economics and Dynamics Studies, revised May 2014.
    16. Robbin Derry, 2012. "Reclaiming Marginalized Stakeholders," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 111(2), pages 253-264, December.
    17. Alma Acevedo, 2012. "Personalist Business Ethics and Humanistic Management: Insights from Jacques Maritain," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 105(2), pages 197-219, January.
    18. James Derbyshire & Mandeep Dhami & Ian Belton & Dilek Önkal, 2023. "The value of experiments in futures and foresight science as illustrated by the case of scenario planning," Futures & Foresight Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 5(2), June.
    19. Duckett, Dominic George & McKee, Annie J. & Sutherland, Lee-Ann & Kyle, Carol & Boden, Lisa A. & Auty, Harriet & Bessell, Paul R. & McKendrick, Iain J., 2017. "Scenario planning as communicative action: Lessons from participatory exercises conducted for the Scottish livestock industry," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 138-151.
    20. Bianka Shoai Tehrani & Pascal da Costa & Danièle Attias, 2016. "Three investment scenarios for future nuclear reactors in Europe," Post-Print hal-00997005, HAL.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:tefoso:v:154:y:2020:i:c:s0040162519308753. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/00401625 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.