IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/tefoso/v80y2013i1p1-10.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Scenario method and stakeholder engagement: Critical reflections on a climate change scenarios case study

Author

Listed:
  • Cairns, George
  • Ahmed, Iftekhar
  • Mullett, Jane
  • Wright, George

Abstract

Scenario method is presented in the literature as a means for engaging heterogeneous stakeholder groups to explore climate change futures and to inform policy and planning for adaptation responses. We discuss a case study project investigating possible interactions between climate change impacts and a proposed major port expansion in Australia. The study engaged participants from the private sector, government and environmental groups, with input from college students from the local area. Semi-structured interviews and a scenario workshop were employed, creating individual space for expression of ideas, then a collaborative space for sharing these, exploring differences of perception and meaning, and developing a set of possible and plausible scenarios. Whilst the workshop resulted in consensus on key issues and proposed actions, intended to inform policy formation and planning, there was an unforeseen lack of short term follow up and of the groups working more closely together. We discuss the reasons for this through reflective critical analysis of both our own process and of contingent factors in the wider contextual environment. We conclude that the basic scenario approach is valuable, but does not itself act as a catalyst for effecting change when multiple agencies, interests and agendas and strong contingent factors are present.

Suggested Citation

  • Cairns, George & Ahmed, Iftekhar & Mullett, Jane & Wright, George, 2013. "Scenario method and stakeholder engagement: Critical reflections on a climate change scenarios case study," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 80(1), pages 1-10.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:tefoso:v:80:y:2013:i:1:p:1-10
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2012.08.005
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0040162512001874
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techfore.2012.08.005?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.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Cheng, M.N. & Wong, Jane W.K. & Cheung, C.F. & Leung, K.H., 2016. "A scenario-based roadmapping method for strategic planning and forecasting: A case study in a testing, inspection and certification company," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 44-62.
    2. Andersen, Per Dannemand & Hansen, Meiken & Selin, Cynthia, 2021. "Stakeholder inclusion in scenario planning—A review of European projects," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    3. Heinonen, Sirkka & Minkkinen, Matti & Karjalainen, Joni & Inayatullah, Sohail, 2017. "Testing transformative energy scenarios through causal layered analysis gaming," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 101-113.
    4. Wright, George & Cairns, George & O'Brien, Frances A. & Goodwin, Paul, 2019. "Scenario analysis to support decision making in addressing wicked problems: Pitfalls and potential," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 278(1), pages 3-19.
    5. Klein, T.M. & Celio, E. & Grêt-Regamey, A., 2015. "Ecosystem services visualization and communication: A demand analysis approach for designing information and conceptualizing decision support systems," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 13(C), pages 173-183.
    6. Cairns, George & Wright, George & Fairbrother, Peter, 2016. "Promoting articulated action from diverse stakeholders in response to public policy scenarios: A case analysis of the use of ‘scenario improvisation’ method," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 97-108.
    7. Tiberius, Victor & Siglow, Caroline & Sendra-García, Javier, 2020. "Scenarios in business and management: The current stock and research opportunities," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 235-242.
    8. Cairns, George & Wright, George & Fairbrother, Peter & Phillips, Richard, 2017. "‘Branching scenarios’ seeking articulated action for regional regeneration – A case study of limited success," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 189-202.
    9. Lauren Rickards & John Wiseman & Taegen Edwards & Che Biggs, 2014. "The Problem of Fit: Scenario Planning and Climate Change Adaptation in the Public Sector," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 32(4), pages 641-662, August.
    10. Panahi, Roozbeh & Ng, Adolf K.Y. & Pang, Jiayi, 2020. "Climate change adaptation in the port industry: A complex of lingering research gaps and uncertainties," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 10-29.
    11. O'Brien, Frances A. & Meadows, Maureen & Griffiths, Sam, 2017. "Serialisation and the use of Twitter: Keeping the conversation alive in public policy scenario projects," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 26-40.
    12. Hussain, M. & Tapinos, E. & Knight, L., 2017. "Scenario-driven roadmapping for technology foresight," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 160-177.
    13. Meadows, Maureen & O'Brien, Frances A., 2020. "The use of scenarios in developing strategy: An analysis of conversation and video data," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    14. 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).

    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:80:y:2013:i:1:p:1-10. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.