Preliminary evaluation of the benefits of a participatory regional integrated assessment software

Abstract

This paper provides a preliminary evaluation of the Regional Impact Simulator-a user-friendly, PC-based tool designed with stakeholders for stakeholders wishing to assess the effects of climate and/or socio-economic change on the important sectors and resources in the UK at a regional scale, in particular, impacts to coastal and river flooding, agriculture, water resources and biodiversity. While integrated assessments are relatively new, simulators that help stakeholders visualize and think about potential changes in the environment or society at a regional scale are very new. An earlier project, RegIS1, was the first local/regional integrated assessment conducted in the UK. It developed a method for engaging stakeholders in a "stakeholder-led" integrated assessment process. The RegIS2 project developed a simulation tool and followed the same "stakeholder-led" principle in designing and testing the tool. The role of stakeholders in informing the design of the simulator is discussed here, as is a stakeholder evaluation survey on its success in meeting its objectives. We also reflect on the need and desire of stakeholders to have such a tool. And because the Steering Committee -made up of stakeholders -was so invaluable in ensuring the usefulness of research outputs, a series of Steering Committee 'rules' is proposed intending to maximise the benefits of this valuable resource. Finally, we outline how our experience with the 'Regional Impact Simulator' serves as a test-bed for further studies of stakeholder-led, regional, integrated assessment.

Combining qualitative and quantitative understanding for exploring cross-sectoral climate change impacts, adaptation and vulnerability in Europe

“…Participatory IA platforms such as CLIMSAVE should seek to explore choices which inform the integration of adaptation actions and policies across sectors, such that unintentional adaptation resulting from actions in one sector does not reduce the effectiveness of purposeful adaptation in another sector, and to identify robust adaptation strategies which are scenario-independent or no-regret strategies (i.e. adaptation responses which will be beneficial for all future scenarios) (Holman and Harman 2008). However, it is recognised that complex human-environmental problems such as climate change are not solely defined by uncertainty and choice but bounded by real-world constraints (Salter et al 2010).…”

“…Based upon the examination of other participatory model interfaces (e.g. the Regional Impact Simulator (Holman and Harman 2008;, CLIMPACTS (Kenny et al 2000), SimCLIM (Warrick et al 2005), MULINO (Giupponi 2007;Giupponi et al 2004), GB-QUEST (Carmichael et al 2004), Climate Wizard (www.climatewizard.org/)) and potential user requirements, a list of design concepts and design functionality were identified for the user interface (Holman and Cojocaru 2010):…”

“…At one level, these may be the policy-makers at EU, national and regional levels who are the target audience for the European Climate Adaptation Platform (CLIMATE-ADAPT) and who are represented by the demographic which participated within the CLIMSAVE stakeholder workshops. At the other end of the spectrum, it is envisaged that the CLIMSAVE IA Platform will be extensively used as a teaching tool in a similar manner to the Regional Impact Simulator (Holman and Harman 2008;). However, in both cases, it is anticipated that the IA Platform will primarily facilitate users in exploring the complex intersectoral issues associated with climate impacts, adaptation and vulnerability, that will ultimately lead to a better adapted Europe through enhancing the adaptive capacity of current and future decision-makers.…”

“…However, despite recent advances, many IA-related projects continue to provide results or interpretations to stakeholders based on the outputs of particular simulations of an IA model. This is not sufficient to test the sensitivity of the human-environment system, to engender organisational or behavioural change or to enable knowledge creation as a learning process (Holman and Harman 2008). The focus has remained too much on a one-way flow of information from researchers to stakeholders, rather than a two-way iterative process of dialogue and exploration of 'what if's'.…”

Assessing cross-sectoral climate change impacts, vulnerability and adaptation: an introduction to the CLIMSAVE project

“…This implies moving away from participatory design approaches (Dittrich and Lindeberg 2004) that focus on software-based issues of user and usability requirements (Pahl 2004;Dempsey and Fisher 2005;Hanson et al 2006) to a stakeholder-led research paradigm where stakeholders are embedded in and through the research process such that the necessary trust in, and legitimacy of, the tool is developed. Although there have been a very small number of previous participatory modelling projects (such as the Regional Impact Simulator; Holman and Harman 2008) that have attempted such an approach, the depth of stakeholder engagement throughout CLIMSAVE is unlike earlier studies. The CLIMSAVE process (Fig.…”