IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/tefoso/v169y2021ics0040162521002341.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Stakeholder inclusion in scenario planning—A review of European projects

Author

Listed:
  • Andersen, Per Dannemand
  • Hansen, Meiken
  • Selin, Cynthia

Abstract

Stakeholder inclusion is a core element of many scenario planning practices. The literature on this topic is vast and has documented that involving stakeholders in such processes is crucial to secure an impact on actual decision making and produce positive societal outcomes. However, few studies have homed in on more detailed questions about exactly why, how and to what ends engaging diverse stakeholders matters to scenario planning. This study of stakeholder inclusion in scenario planning for policy making reflects on four detailed key arenas. We first investigate the concept of stakeholders and how the scenario planning literature considers them. We explore the different types of relevant actors to include in a participatory scenario process, and we probe which methods are used to identify stakeholders to engage. Second, we investigate the role or function of stakeholders in the scenario planning process and find that stakeholder involvement has specific and detailed functions in particular phases of scenario planning. Third, we explore which methods are used to include stakeholders in scenario planning processes. Finally, in a synthesis across the study, we explore some of the key tensions and open questions related to including stakeholders in scenario planning processes.

Suggested Citation

  • Andersen, Per Dannemand & Hansen, Meiken & Selin, Cynthia, 2021. "Stakeholder inclusion in scenario planning—A review of European projects," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:tefoso:v:169:y:2021:i:c:s0040162521002341
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2021.120802
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0040162521002341
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techfore.2021.120802?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bourgeois, Robin & Penunia, Esther & Bisht, Sonali & Boruk, Don, 2017. "Foresight for all: Co-elaborative scenario building and empowerment," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 178-188.
    2. Videira, Nuno & Antunes, Paula & Santos, Rui, 2009. "Scoping river basin management issues with participatory modelling: The Baixo Guadiana experience," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(4), pages 965-978, February.
    3. Kasper Kok & Ilona Bärlund & Martina Flörke & Ian Holman & Marc Gramberger & Jan Sendzimir & Benjamin Stuch & Katharina Zellmer, 2015. "European participatory scenario development: strengthening the link between stories and models," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 128(3), pages 187-200, February.
    4. Nuno Videira & Paula Antunes & Rui Santos & Sofia Gamito, 2003. "Participatory Modelling in Environmental Decision-Making: The Ria Formosa Natural Park Case Study," Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management (JEAPM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 5(03), pages 421-447.
    5. Anonymous, 2013. "Introduction to the Issue," Journal of Wine Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 8(3), pages 243-243, December.
    6. Jonathan Calof & Jack E Smith, 2010. "Critical success factors for government-led foresight," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 37(1), pages 31-40, February.
    7. Hughes, Nick, 2013. "Towards improving the relevance of scenarios for public policy questions: A proposed methodological framework for policy relevant low carbon scenarios," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 80(4), pages 687-698.
    8. Madlener, Reinhard & Kowalski, Katharina & Stagl, Sigrid, 2007. "New ways for the integrated appraisal of national energy scenarios: The case of renewable energy use in Austria," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(12), pages 6060-6074, December.
    9. Upham, Paul & Carney, Sebastian & Klapper, Rita, 2014. "Scaffolding, software and scenarios: Applying Bruner's learning theory to energy scenario development with the public," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 131-142.
    10. Markmann, Christoph & Darkow, Inga-Lena & von der Gracht, Heiko, 2013. "A Delphi-based risk analysis — Identifying and assessing future challenges for supply chain security in a multi-stakeholder environment," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 80(9), pages 1815-1833.
    11. Anonymous, 2013. "Introduction to the Issue," Journal of Wine Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 8(2), pages 129-130, November.
    12. Cairns, George & Wright, George & Fairbrother, Peter, 2016. "Promoting articulated action from diverse stakeholders in response to public policy scenarios: A case analysis of the use of ‘scenario improvisation’ method," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 97-108.
    13. Soste, Leon & Wang, Q.J. & Robertson, David & Chaffe, Robert & Handley, Selina & Wei, Yongping, 2015. "Engendering stakeholder ownership in scenario planning," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 250-263.
    14. Carlsson, Julia & Eriksson, Ljusk Ola & Öhman, Karin & Nordström, Eva-Maria, 2015. "Combining scientific and stakeholder knowledge in future scenario development — A forest landscape case study in northern Sweden," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 122-134.
    15. Cairns, George & Ahmed, Iftekhar & Mullett, Jane & Wright, George, 2013. "Scenario method and stakeholder engagement: Critical reflections on a climate change scenarios case study," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 80(1), pages 1-10.
    16. Samantha Miles, 2017. "Stakeholder Theory Classification: A Theoretical and Empirical Evaluation of Definitions," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 142(3), pages 437-459, May.
    17. Cairns, George & Goodwin, Paul & Wright, George, 2016. "A decision-analysis-based framework for analysing stakeholder behaviour in scenario planning," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 249(3), pages 1050-1062.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Kraus, Sascha & Kumar, Satish & Lim, Weng Marc & Kaur, Jaspreet & Sharma, Anuj & Schiavone, Francesco, 2023. "From moon landing to metaverse: Tracing the evolution of Technological Forecasting and Social Change," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    2. Lisa A. Pace & Kristian Borch & Alan Deidun, 2023. "Bridging Knowledge Gaps towards 2030: The Use of Foresight for the Strategic Management of a Sustainable Blue Economy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-20, June.
    3. Per Dannemand Andersen, 2023. "Constructing Delphi statements for technology foresight," Futures & Foresight Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 5(2), June.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Cairns, George & Wright, George & Fairbrother, Peter, 2016. "Promoting articulated action from diverse stakeholders in response to public policy scenarios: A case analysis of the use of ‘scenario improvisation’ method," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 97-108.
    2. Hussain, M. & Tapinos, E. & Knight, L., 2017. "Scenario-driven roadmapping for technology foresight," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 160-177.
    3. Ramboarison-Lalao, Lovanirina & Gannouni, Kais, 2019. "Liberated firm, a leverage of well-being and technological change? A prospective study based on the scenario method," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 129-139.
    4. Burt, George & Mackay, David & Mendibil, Kepa, 2021. "Overcoming multi-stakeholder fragmented narratives in land use, woodland and forestry policy: The role scenario planning and ‘dissociative jolts’," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 166(C).
    5. Gordon, Adam Vigdor, 2020. "Limits and longevity: A model for scenarios that influence the future," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    6. Cairns, George & Wright, George & Fairbrother, Peter & Phillips, Richard, 2017. "‘Branching scenarios’ seeking articulated action for regional regeneration – A case study of limited success," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 189-202.
    7. Wright, George & Cairns, George & O'Brien, Frances A. & Goodwin, Paul, 2019. "Scenario analysis to support decision making in addressing wicked problems: Pitfalls and potential," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 278(1), pages 3-19.
    8. Trutnevyte, Evelina & Barton, John & O'Grady, Áine & Ogunkunle, Damiete & Pudjianto, Danny & Robertson, Elizabeth, 2014. "Linking a storyline with multiple models: A cross-scale study of the UK power system transition," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 26-42.
    9. Ranjana Raghunathan, 2022. "Everyday Intimacies and Inter-Ethnic Relationships: Tracing Entanglements of Gender and Race in Multicultural Singapore," Sociological Research Online, , vol. 27(1), pages 77-94, March.
    10. Balint, T. & Lamperti, F. & Mandel, A. & Napoletano, M. & Roventini, A. & Sapio, A., 2017. "Complexity and the Economics of Climate Change: A Survey and a Look Forward," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 252-265.
    11. Lamperti, Francesco & Bosetti, Valentina & Roventini, Andrea & Tavoni, Massimo & Treibich, Tania, 2021. "Three green financial policies to address climate risks," Journal of Financial Stability, Elsevier, vol. 54(C).
    12. Songsore, Emmanuel & Buzzelli, Michael, 2014. "Social responses to wind energy development in Ontario: The influence of health risk perceptions and associated concerns," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 285-296.
    13. Tapsuwan, Sorada & Polyakov, Maksym & Bark, Rosalind & Nolan, Martin, 2015. "Valuing the Barmah–Millewa Forest and in stream river flows: A spatial heteroskedasticity and autocorrelation consistent (SHAC) approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 98-105.
    14. Omar Al-Ubaydli & John List & Claire Mackevicius & Min Sok Lee & Dana Suskind, 2019. "How Can Experiments Play a Greater Role in Public Policy? 12 Proposals from an Economic Model of Scaling," Artefactual Field Experiments 00679, The Field Experiments Website.
    15. Nepomuceno, Marcelo Vinhal & Laroche, Michel, 2015. "The impact of materialism and anti-consumption lifestyles on personal debt and account balances," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(3), pages 654-664.
    16. Bertschek, Irene & Kesler, Reinhold, 2022. "Let the user speak: Is feedback on Facebook a source of firms’ innovation?," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    17. Avelino, Flor & Wittmayer, Julia M. & Pel, Bonno & Weaver, Paul & Dumitru, Adina & Haxeltine, Alex & Kemp, René & Jørgensen, Michael S. & Bauler, Tom & Ruijsink, Saskia & O'Riordan, Tim, 2019. "Transformative social innovation and (dis)empowerment," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 195-206.
    18. Gigi Foster, 2020. "The behavioural economics of government responses to COVID-19," Journal of Behavioral Economics for Policy, Society for the Advancement of Behavioral Economics (SABE), vol. 4(S3), pages 11-43, December.
    19. Audoly, Richard & Vogt-Schilb, Adrien & Guivarch, Céline & Pfeiffer, Alexander, 2018. "Pathways toward zero-carbon electricity required for climate stabilization," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 225(C), pages 884-901.
    20. Gerards, Ruud & Welters, Ricardo, 2016. "Impact of financial pressure on unemployed job search, job find success and job quality," ROA Research Memorandum 008, Maastricht University, Research Centre for Education and the Labour Market (ROA).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:tefoso:v:169:y:2021:i:c:s0040162521002341. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/00401625 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.