Vanessa Schweizer

Plausibility indications in future scenarios

Quality criteria for generating future-oriented knowledge and future scenarios are different from those developed for knowledge about past and current events. Such quality criteria can be defined relative to the intended function of the knowledge. Plausibility has emerged as a central quality criterion of scenarios that allows exploring the future with credibility and saliency. But what exactly is plausibility vis-a-vis probability, consistency, and desirability? And how can plausibility be evaluated and constructed in scenarios? Sufficient plausibility, in this article, refers to scenarios that hold enough evidence to be considered ‘occurrable’. This might have been the underlying idea of scenarios all along without being explicitly elaborated in a pragmatic concept or methodology. Here, we operationalise plausibility in scenarios through a set of plausibility indications and illustrate the proposal with scenarios constructed for Phoenix, Arizona. The article operationalises the concept of plausibility in scenarios to support scholars and practitioners alike.

From meta-studies to modeling: Using synthesis knowledge to build broadly applicable process-based land change models

This paper explores how meta-studies can support the development of process-based land change models (LCMs) that can be applied across locations and scales. We describe a multi-step framework for model development and provide descriptions and examples of how meta-studies can be used in each step. We conclude that meta-studies best support the conceptualization and experimentation phases of the model development cycle, but cannot typically provide full model parameterizations. Moreover, meta-studies are particularly useful for developing agent-based LCMs that can be applied across a wide range of contexts, locations, and/or scales, because meta-studies provide both quantitative and qualitative data needed to derive agent behaviors more readily than from case study or aggregate data sources alone. Recent land change synthesis studies provide sufficient topical breadth and depth to support the development of broadly applicable process-based LCMs, as well as the potential to accelerate the production of generalized knowledge through model-driven synthesis.

Choosing small sets of policy-relevant scenarios by combining vulnerability and diversity approaches

Computer simulation models can generate large numbers of scenarios, far more than can be effectively utilized in most decision support applications. How can one best select a small number of scenarios to consider? One approach calls for choosing scenarios that illuminate vulnerabilities of proposed policies. Another calls for choosing scenarios that span a diverse range of futures. This paper joins these two approaches for the first time, proposing an optimization-based method for choosing a small number of relevant scenarios that combine both vulnerability and diversity. The paper applies the method to a real case involving climate resilient infrastructure for three African river basins (Volta, Orange and Zambezi). Introducing selection criteria in a stepwise manner helps examine how different criteria influence the choice of scenarios. The results suggest that combining vulnerability- and diversity-based criteria can provide a systematic and transparent method for scenario selection. Describes an optimization-based method for choosing a small number of scenarios.A combination of criteria related to vulnerability and diversity is used.The method is applied to a real case involving climate resilient infrastructure.

Weathercaster Views on Informal Climate Education: Similarities and Differences According to Climate Change Attitudes

ABSTRACT Surveys have found that weathercaster views on climate change are diverse, with a large majority agreeing that climate change is happening but most remaining unconvinced that human activities are the principal cause. We hypothesized that these differences in climate change views could have implications for weathercasters acting as informal climate change educators, as well as for professional development training for weathercasters attempting to serve such roles. We asked weathercasters at a professional society meeting to provide brief statements on climate change and their roles to educate viewers about climate. We then pooled these statements for an online card-sort activity completed by 29 weathercasters and used network analysis to study the epistemologies of groups according to climate change attitudes. Despite different views on climate change, all weathercasters had a shared ethos for developing their climate change views through consulting observational data and multiple sources of information. Additionally, all weathercasters shared the concern that informal climate education focus on “the science and only the science.” Looking specifically at factual statements on climate change, all weathercasters classified the statement, “Climate is always changing,” as significant for informal climate education. However, there were differences in how weathercasters perceived the importance of changes in the atmospheric concentration of CO2 and how it relates to human activities. The implications of these findings are twofold. First, without interventions to empower all weathercasters as science communicators, the community may split into communicators explaining the contributions of human activities to climate change versus those who question it. Second, professional societies can play important roles to confront this schism through forums that address conflict, the science–policy interface, and scientific discussions around climate. By appealing to values and codes of conduct shared by all weathercasters, professional development activities can help them build confidence in making public statements about climate change as well as to develop appropriate conceptual scaffolding for relationships between human activities, greenhouse gas emissions, global warming, and climate change.

What Scenarios Are You Missing? Poststructuralism for Deconstructing and Reconstructing Organizational Futures

For organizations, the main rationale for exploring possible future developments is the imperative to sustain achievements and further progress towards organizational objectives. Deep uncertainty about the future, however, means that those hypothetical future developments are products of organizations’ sense-making processes. Much effort in organizational and methodological research is focused on questions that look into the future, to explore the possible future contextual environment for organizations (scenarios) and to draw out implications. However, less attention is often paid to how methodological choices for developing scenarios influence the way organizations make sense of their future.

A few scenarios still do not fit all

For integrated climate change research, the Scenario Matrix Architecture provides a tractable menu of possible emissions trajectories, socio-economic futures and policy environments. However, the future of decision support may lie in searchable databases.