02.11.2018
1
Jörg Priess, C. Schweitzer, J. Alcamo, J. Schaldach, J Hauck, R Haines-Young, R Alkemade, M Mandryk,
B Gyorgyi, R Dunford, P Berry, P Harrison, J Dick, H Keune, M Kok, L Kopperoinen, D. Lapola,
T Lazarova, J Maes, G P, E Preda, C Schleyer, C Görg, A Vadineanu, G Zulian, C Veerkamp …
GLP co-production webinar #3, Nov 1st, 2018
Participatory modelling, scenario building
and forecasting techniques in
land system science -
topic 1: participatory scenario development
at different scales
Participatory Scenario Development
• Why scenarios?
• Why participatory co-design approaches ?
Short definition:A scenario is a plausible description of how the future may
unfold
Typical scenario components:Storylines, set of drivers of change; spatio-temporal coverage;
starting year; visualization …
02.11.2018
2
Participatory Scenario Development
• Why scenarios?
… Scenario-based approaches are particularly useful
when addressing the
considerable uncertainty
about future trajectories
in complex systems …Source: Zurek & Henrichs (2007)
And not visions , forecasts and / or(technical) solutions
Participatory Scenario Development
• Why scenarios?
Scenarios are considered suitable
to assess land systems,which are complex
socio-environmental systems,
changes usually driven by
multiple factors (high uncertainty)
02.11.2018
3
Participatory Scenario Development
• Why participatory co-design approaches ?
• Credibility
• consistency, coherence, clarity and unambiguity of method & assumptions
• Legitimacy
• traceability, transparency, diversity
• Relevance (saliency)
• achieves objectives, novelty, creativity, unconventional thhinking …
• Impact
• learning, communicating, supporting governance & policy …
Like other co-design / co-development approaches contributions
of stakeholders are expected to increase:
Source: own compilation motivated by Alcamo et al. 2008; Jakeman et al. 2014
Scenario development at different scales
Study ScaleCo-design
level (0 – 3)Thematic focus Source
LUCC Sulawesi Regional 1Agric. Expansion, coffee
production, deforestationPriess et al. 2007
LUCC North
MongoliaRegional 2
CC, LUCC & water demands
of main economic sectorsPriess et al. 2010; 2015
Biofuels, Brazil Continental 0(In)direct effects of biofuel
production in BrazilLapola et al. 2010
LUCC Africa Continental 0 CC & LUCC in Africa Alcamo et al. 2011
Biofuels, India National 0Impacts of biofuel production
on land demandsSchaldach et al. 2011
Central Germany
scenariosRegional 2
CC & LUCC ((organic)
agriculture, bioenergy,
urbanisation)
Hauck & Priess 2013;
Priess and Hauck 2014;
Priess et al. 2018
LUCC, Blue Nile Regional 0Impacts of CC on agric &
livestock productionYalew et al. 2016
LUCC, Central
GermanyRegional 0
Impacts of biofuel (short
rotation coppice) on LUCCSchulze et al. 2016
LUCC Europe Cont � reg 1-2 LUCC & ecosystem servicesPriess et al. 2017; Dick et
al. 2018; Priess et al. 2018
LUCC Europe Glob � reg 1Increasing cross-scale
consistency of SSPs & RCPs(Ongoing; lead BOKU)
02.11.2018
4
Putting Scenario co-design into practise
Stakeholder selection
Representatives of land users organized
in e.g. unions, associations, NGOs or
authorities at national/state/regional level, who:
a) are engaged in sustainable land use
b) influence federal, state or regional land use decisions;
c) depend on the resource land / are affected by land use (change)
balanced across economic sectors, societal groups, regions/countries …
Scenario components to be co-designed:
a) drivers of change (identification, quantification)
b) storylines (narrative describing plausible pathways into the future)
c) scenario analysis (qualitative or quantitative e.g. simulation models)
Participatory methods (considering availability of resources and time)
Development process (ex ante surveys, workshop(s), delphi…)
Quality assurance (achieves objective; iterative procedure, expert consultation…)
Evaluation (ex-post survey, peer review …)
Example of ex ante survey to identify drivers
Major drivers of change considered relevant by regional
stakeholders (here: 24 or 27 OpenNESS cases who wanted to use scenarios)
European scale drivers
02.11.2018
5
Participatory Scenarios
enable us to …
Integrate across topics, knowledge domains and scales
1) Mongolia: farmers, herders, mining companies, ministries (agric, environ, industry); (Challenges: knowledge of local practitioners vs. planning strategies of national ministries)
2) Central Germany: regional practitioners ranked regional drivers highest, while scientists favoured national / global factors as drivers(Challenges: Knowledge & perception integration – of mostly moderate assumptions of scientists and more creative / exploartiveassumptions of some practitioners � identify critical uncertaintiesto develop plausible scenarios
Survey of farmers and herders
Stakeholder excursion during WS: water quantity & quality
Meetings with Officials
Seite 10
Participatory Scenarios
enable us to …
Assess potentially conflicting perspectives & tradeoffs in objectivesChallenges in the Mongolian process:
(1) limited land and water resources, but all sectors should expand activities (political objectives: representatives had to make these statements);
(2) strongly contrasting information about water availability and (rainfall & runoff)Quantifications of water / land demands varied up to 10 fold (OK for scenarios, problem
(3) water & land demands of key sectors agriculture, mining, livestock, urbanisation …
Scenario WS with ministries & planners
Knowledge domains /
perspectives difficult to
integrate, especially with
high level participants or
when including illegal
activities
02.11.2018
6
Seite 11
Participatory Scenarios
enable us to …
To bridge scales and develop scenarios for different purposes
a) scientific tool at EU scale
� comparative simulation studies
b) Eu level scenarios for application in European case studies (14)
Early involvement of drafts developed later involvement of high level
Regional stakeholders by scenario team EU stakeholders
Scenario WS with EU level stakeholders
Develop drafts of scenario
drivers & scenario storylines
Participatory Scenario Development
Successfully applied structure of multi-stakeholder workshops EU / national / regional levels
Briefing & input(Harmonising knowledge
levels of participants)
Group discussions (assumptions, drivers, key-
uncertainties, storylines)
Scenario adaptation
or development (storylines, set of drivers, maps, artwork)
02.11.2018
7
SEITE 13
• Storylines
• Quantified scenario
assumptions
• Brochure (process & results)
• Scenario visualisation
• Homepage
• Data bases
• Framework for multi-scale
integrative scenario
development
• Scientific papers
Products of Participatory Scenario Development
Some take home messages
Stakeholders
mostly value the scenario process (learning, communication) just as much
as the products (scenario information & data in leaflets, presentations,
policy briefs, webpages ...)
agree that scenarios are an appropriate method to assess potential (land-
related) changes and their impacts
sometimes complain (1) about the complexity of the approach (especially
when models are involved) and (2) partly the lack of data e.g. to initiate a
regional scenario process and (3) limited possibility to put new knowledge
or desired pathways into practice (no capacity; not in the position to…)
In participatory scenario processes
it is sometimes difficult (1) to handle strong or dominant personalities and
strong opinions or (2) integrate conflicting perspectives / objectives
there are limited possibilities to address illegal activities (agricultural
expansion; water extraction; (gold) mining)