Co-design of national-scale future scenarios in Japan to predict and assess natural capital and ecosystem services

Mapping the Policy Interventions on Marine Social-Ecological Systems: Case Study of Sekisei Lagoon, Southwest Japan

“…Also, intertidal area will be shrunken by the sea level rise, which will again give negative effects to the traditional uses by the local people, as well as the environmental education, research and conservation activities. The cumulative effects to the total well-being and inclusive wealth (Ikeda and Managi 2018) are to be analyzed, but the SES Schematic is again a useful tool to share the knowledge with wide-ranging stakeholders, discuss about the vulnerable part of the SES, and codesign the possible future scenarios (Saito et al 2018) or the adaptation plans. Finally, after the development of the Sekisei Lagoon Social-Ecological Systems Schematic, the coauthor found that this type of co-research activity participated widely from both the natural and social sciences was a good opportunity for researchers to build a common sense at the larger conceptual level, and to create the knowledge base for working closely.…”

Future scenarios for socio-ecological production landscape and seascape

“…PANCES project develops national scale future scenarios for exploring potential changes in natural capital and ecosystem services, as well as human wellbeing, up to 2050 using key direct and indirect drivers, including demographic changes, economic globalization and technological innovation (Saito et al 2018). Four national scale future scenarios are created for Japan through a two-round Delphi survey, namely ''Natural capital-based compact society'', ''Natural capital-based dispersed society'', ''Produced capital-based compact society'', and ''Produced capital based dispersed society'', in addition to the business-as-usual scenario with qualitative storylines and a visual illustration of the developed scenarios.…”

Exploring the relationship between ecosystems and human well-being by understanding the preferences for natural capital-based and produced capital-based ecosystem services

“…This is a 5-year research project to predict and assess the natural capitals and ES in Japan. As part of the PANCES project, national-scale future scenarios for exploring potential changes in the natural capitals and ES as well as human well-being were developed up to 2050 considering any significant direct and indirect drivers (Saito et al 2018). On the basis of the Delphi survey and discussion with researchers and policymakers participating in the PANCES project, two drivers for scenario axes were identified: (1) Will future society go in the direction of the "natural capital base" that promotes ecosystem-based infrastructure development and land management, or will it change to the "produced capital base" that depends more on manmade infrastructures and technologies?…”

“…(2) Will the population concentration advance to promote "urban compaction" in compact cities that hold large populations while rewilding or greening underutilized land, or will the population concentration lessen and lead to a decentralized society with a "dispersed population" that maintains rural communities? Natural capital can be defined as everything in nature (biotic and abiotic) that is capable of providing human beings with various ecosystem services, either directly or through production processes, while traditional definition of produced capital is capital of human/industrial elements presupposing natural capitals including roads, buildings, ports, machinery, equipment, and technologies (Jamieson 1998;Saito et al 2018;Schaubroeck 2018). According to these two axes, four future scenarios were created: "natural capital-based compact society," "natural capital-based dispersed society," "produced capital-based compact society," and "produced capital-based dispersed society.…”

“…The PANCES scenarios were designed by researchers and policymakers, thus the public perception was not taken into account (Saito et al 2018). Oteros-Rozas et al (2015) stated that involving diverse stakeholders with influence and interest in the social-ecological system, including those potentially most affected, might foster social learning and collective action to achieve the desired goals.…”