Participatory scenario planning in place-based social-ecological research: insights and experiences from 23 case studies

Abstract

ABSTRACT. Participatory scenario planning (PSP) is an increasingly popular tool in place-based environmental research for evaluating alternative futures of social-ecological systems. Although a range of guidelines on PSP methods are available in the scientific and grey literature, there is a need to reflect on existing practices and their appropriate application for different objectives and contexts at the local scale, as well as on their potential perceived outcomes. We contribute to theoretical and empirical frameworks by analyzing how and why researchers assess social-ecological systems using place-based PSP, hence facilitating the appropriate uptake of such scenario tools in the future. We analyzed 23 PSP case studies conducted by the authors in a wide range of social-ecological settings by exploring seven aspects: (1) the context; (2) the original motivations and objectives; (3) the methodological approach; (4) the process; (5) the content of the scenarios; (6) the outputs of the research; and (7) the monitoring and evaluation of the PSP process. This was complemented by a reflection on strengths and weaknesses of using PSP for the place-based social-ecological research. We conclude that the application of PSP, particularly when tailored to shared objectives between local people and researchers, has enriched environmental management and scientific research through building common understanding and fostering learning about future planning of social-ecological systems. However, PSP still requires greater systematic monitoring and evaluation to assess its impact on the promotion of collective action for transitions to sustainability and the adaptation to global environmental change and its challenges.

Resilience (Republished)

“…Scenario planning is a forward looking approach aimed at articulating multiple alternative futures in a way that spans a key set of critical uncertainties, using qualitative and quantitative methods and data (e.g., Peterson et al 2003b, Swart et al 2004) and engaging diverse stakeholder in participatory processes for stewardship of social-ecological systems subject to change (e.g., Enfors et al 2008, Plieninger et al 2013, Carpenter et al 2015b, Oteros-Rozas et al 2015. Scenario work is an important part of the Future Earth Programme on Ecosystem Change and Society (PECS), a program with a strong focus on social-ecological systems, resilience, and stewardship of ecosystem services in dynamic landscapes and seascapes, operating in the context of the challenges of the Anthropocene (Carpenter et al 2012b, Fischer et al 2015.…”

Programme on Ecosystem Change and Society: Knowledge for sustainable stewardship of social-ecological systems

“…They also propose a number of tools to stimulate the cooperation between different knowledge holders -including local communities. Plieninger et al (2015), argue that the long tradition of landscape research in Europe can inform projects such as PECS. The authors conclude that landscapes are a useful boundary object in studying complex interactions between human activities and the environment and an intuitive analytical unit of social-ecological research.…”

Stories in social-ecological knowledge cocreation

“…Techniques derived from a systems perspective, like system diagrams (also referred as cognitive mapping) and scenario planning, have been taken up within social-ecological systems research to support knowledge cocreation (Peterson et al 2003, Jetter and Kok 2014, Oteros-Rozas et al 2015. These techniques have been found to contribute to the construction of common understanding among participants, and by fostering learning about plausible futures, they may inform policy and enrich environmental management (Carpenter et al 2006, Rogers 2013, Oteros-Rozas et al 2015.…”

“…These techniques have been found to contribute to the construction of common understanding among participants, and by fostering learning about plausible futures, they may inform policy and enrich environmental management (Carpenter et al 2006, Rogers 2013, Oteros-Rozas et al 2015.…”