TY - JOUR
T1 - Promoting articulated action from diverse stakeholders in response to public policy scenarios
T2 - a case analysis of the use of 'scenario improvisation' method
AU - Cairns, George
AU - Wright, George
AU - Fairbrother, Peter
PY - 2016/2/1
Y1 - 2016/2/1
N2 - In this paper we present a novel application of scenario methods to engage a diverse constituency of senior stakeholders, with limited time availability, in debate to inform planning and policy development. Our case study project explores post-carbon futures for the Latrobe Valley region of the Australian state of Victoria. Our approach involved initial deductive development of two ‘extreme scenarios’ by a multi-disciplinary research team, based upon an extensive research program. Over four workshops with the stakeholder constituency, these initial scenarios were discussed, challenged, refined and expanded through an inductive process, whereby participants took ‘ownership’ of a final set of three scenarios. These were both comfortable and challenging to them. The outcomes of this process subsequently informed public policy development for the region. Whilst this process did not follow a single extant structured, multi-stage scenario approach, neither was it devoid of form. Here, we seek to theorise and codify elements of our process – which we term ‘scenario improvisation’ – such that others may adopt it.
AB - In this paper we present a novel application of scenario methods to engage a diverse constituency of senior stakeholders, with limited time availability, in debate to inform planning and policy development. Our case study project explores post-carbon futures for the Latrobe Valley region of the Australian state of Victoria. Our approach involved initial deductive development of two ‘extreme scenarios’ by a multi-disciplinary research team, based upon an extensive research program. Over four workshops with the stakeholder constituency, these initial scenarios were discussed, challenged, refined and expanded through an inductive process, whereby participants took ‘ownership’ of a final set of three scenarios. These were both comfortable and challenging to them. The outcomes of this process subsequently informed public policy development for the region. Whilst this process did not follow a single extant structured, multi-stage scenario approach, neither was it devoid of form. Here, we seek to theorise and codify elements of our process – which we term ‘scenario improvisation’ – such that others may adopt it.
KW - scenario method
KW - stakeholders
KW - improvisation
KW - reframing
KW - policy
UR - https://www.sciencedirect.com/journal/technological-forecasting-and-social-change
U2 - 10.1016/j.techfore.2015.10.009
DO - 10.1016/j.techfore.2015.10.009
M3 - Article
SN - 0040-1625
VL - 103
SP - 97
EP - 108
JO - Technological Forecasting and Social Change
JF - Technological Forecasting and Social Change
ER -