Using qualitative scenarios to understand regional environmental change in the Canadian North

Abstract

This paper discusses the application of qualitative scenarios to understand community vulnerability and adaptation responses, based on a case study in the Slave River Delta region of the Northwest Territories, Canada. Three qualitative, graphic scenarios of possible alternative futures were developed, focusing on two main drivers: climate change and resource development. These were used as a focal point for discussions with a crosssection of residents from the community during focus groups, interviews and a community workshop. Significant overlap among the areas of perceived vulnerability is evident among scenarios, particularly in relation to traditional land use. However, each scenario also offers insights about specific challenges facing community members. Climate change was perceived to engender mostly negative livelihood impacts, whereas resource development was expected to trigger a mix of positive and negative impacts, both of which may be more dramatic than in the ''climate change only'' scenario. The scenarios were also used to identify adaptation options specific to individual drivers of change, as well as more universally applicable options. Identified adaptation options were generally aligned with five sectors-environment and natural resources, economy, community management and development, infrastructure and services, and information and training-which effectively offer a first step towards prioritization of ''no regrets'' measures. From an empirical perspective, while the scenarios highlighted the need for bottom-up measures, they also elucidated discussion about local agency in adaptation and enabled the examination of multi-dimensional impacts on different community subgroups. An incongruity emerged between the suite of technically oriented adaptation options and more socially and behaviourally oriented barriers to implementation. Methodologically, the qualitative scenarios were flexible, socially inclusive and consistent with the Indigenous worldview; allowed the incorporation of different knowledge systems; addressed future community vulnerability and adaptation; and led to the identification of socially feasible and bottom-up adaptation outcomes. Despite some caveats regarding resource requirements for participatory scenario development, qualitative scenarios offer a versatile tool to address a range of vulnerability and adaptation issues in the context of other Indigenous communities.

Climate change and Canada’s north coast: research trends, progress, and future directions

“…For instance, few, if any, integrated vulnerability assessments have examined what different climate projections mean for vulnerability of sectors and (or) communities on the north coast. Participatory scenario planning is one approach that holds promise for engaging communities and decision makers in creating future scenarios to identify future risks and adaptation options (Wesche and Armitage 2014). A failure to sufficiently account for future vulnerabilities risks maladaptation, where policies, programs, and behaviour increase vulnerability in the long term.…”

Bridging knowledge systems to enhance governance of environmental commons: A typology of settings

“…Scenario planning is an example of a method that engages with multiple processes such as interviews, monitoring, mapping, workshops and creation of imagery (Peterson et al 2003;Peterson 2007;Wesche and Armitage 2014). Bundling methods and processes is a robust way to connect knowledge systems.…”

Uncertainties in Arctic Socio-economic Scenarios

“…The studies addressing uncertainties with dimensions of uncertainty techniques include AMSA (2009) Beach and Clark (2015), and Haavisto et al (2016). Also three judgement based studies, (Arbo et al 2007;Brigham 2007, Wesche andArmitage 2014) expressed that there are uncertainties related to the development trends but in the final scenarios (narratives) these might not be addressed. Loe et al (2014) did not discuss uncertainties.…”

“…In Cavalieri et al (2010), Brigham (2007) and Wesche and Armitage (2014), climate change was appointed as critical uncertainty or key factor, and in Beach and Clark (2015) it was included in critical uncertainty cluster named as "changing ecological-social interactions". In van Oort et al (2015) and Nilsson et al (2015), climate change was ranked based on its perceived importance and uncertainty by stakeholders, the ranking depending on the region in question.…”