Tailor-made scenario planning for local adaptation to climate change

  • Henrik Carlsen
  • Karl Henrik Dreborg
  • Per Wikman-Svahn
Original Article

Abstract

This paper presents a tailor-made scenario approach for climate change adaptation planning, which emphasises involvement of stakeholders in the development of socioeconomic scenarios and relates to the planning situation and interest of the planning entity. The method was developed and tested in case studies in three different sectors in Sweden (the health sector, the tourism sector and water resource management). The result of the case studies is that the tailor-made scenario approach facilitated the engagement of the local planning body in climate change adaptation and helped them to analyse consequences and possible solutions in a structured way. However, the scenarios that emerged mainly focused on socioeconomic drivers on which the planning body had a large impact or drivers that can be influenced through cooperation with other actors at the local or regional level. While this result underlines the need for local stakeholder involvement in scenario processes, it also indicates a local bias that could be remedied by a stronger representation of national and global perspectives in the scenario development process. Finally, we discuss how a “bottom-up” approach could be combined with a “consistency” approach, which points towards a possible way forward to a hybrid methodology that is compatible with the scenario framework currently being developed in connection to the fifth assessment report of the IPCC.

Keywords

Adaptation Climate change Local planning Socioeconomic scenarios Participatory methods 

References

  1. Amara R (1981) The futures field: searching for definitions and boundaries. Futurist 15:25–29Google Scholar
  2. Arnell N, Kram T, Carter T et al (2011) A framework for a new generation of socioeconomic scenarios for climate change impact, adaptation, vulnerability and mitigation research. Working Paper, August 15. http://www.isp.ucar.edu/sites/default/files/Scenario_FrameworkPaper_15aug11_0.pdf Cited 4 sep 2012
  3. Baard P, Carlsen H, Edvardsson Björnberg K et al (2012) Scenarios and sustainability: tools for alleviating the gap between municipal means and responsibilities in adaptation planning. Local Environment 17(6–7):641–662. doi:10.1080/13549839.2011.646969
  4. Bartholomew K (2007) Land use-transportation scenario planning: promise and reality. Transportation 34:397–412CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Basu R, Samet JM (2002) Relation between elevated ambient temperature and mortality: a review of the epidemiologic evidence. Epidemiol Rev 24:190–202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Berkhout F, Hertin J, Jordan A (2002) Socio-economic futures in climate change impact assessment: using scenarios as learning machines. Glob Environ Chang 12:83–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bizikova L, Dickinson T, Pintér L (2009) Participatory scenario development for climatechange adaptation. In: Reid H (ed) Community-based adaptation to climate change (Participatory Learning and Action 60). IIED, LondonGoogle Scholar
  8. Börjeson L, Höjer M, Dreborg KH et al (2006) Scenario types and techniques: towards a user’s guide. Futures 38:723–739CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bradfield R, Wright G, Burt G et al (2005) The Origins and Evolution of Scenario Techniques in Long Range Business Planning. Futures 37:795–812CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Burch S, Sheppard SRJ, Shaw A, Flanders D (2010) Planning for climate change in a flood prone community: municipal barriers to policy action and the use of visualizations as decision-support tools. J Flood Risk Manag 3:126–139CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Carter TR, Jylhä K, Perrels A et al (2005) FINADAPT scenarios for the 21st century. Alternative futures for considering adaptation to climate change in Finland, FINADAPT Working Paper no. 2, Finnish Environment Institute Mimeographs 332, Helsinki. http://www.environment.fi/download.asp?contentid=44018&lan=en Cited 4 sep 2012
  12. Chermack TJ (2004) Improving decision-making with scenario planning. Futures 36:295–309CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Emery FE, Trist EL (1965) The causal texture of organizational environments. Hum Relat 18:21–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Fouillet A, Rey G, Laurent F et al (2006) Excess mortality related to the August 2003 heat wave in France. Int Arch Occup Environ Health 80:16–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gidley JM, Fien J, Smith JA, Thomsen DC, Smith TF (2009) Participatory future methods: towards adaptability and resilience in climate-vulnerable communities. Environ Pol Govern 19:427–440CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hallegatte S (2009) Strategies to adapt to an uncertain climate change. Glob Environ Chang 19:240–247CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Höjer M, Dreborg KH, Engström R et al (2011) Experience of the Development and use of scenarios for evaluating Swedish national environmental objectives. Futures 43:498–512CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hughes N, Tomei J, Ekins P (2009) Critical review of the Application of the UKCIP Socioeconomic Scenarios: Lessons Learnt and Future Directions. Department of Geography, King’s College London. http://ukcip-main.clustered.net/wordpress/wp-content/PDFs/UKCIP_SRES_review.pdf Cited 4 sep 2012
  19. IPCC (2012) Summary for Policymakers. In: Field CB, Barros V, Stocker TF (eds) Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation A Special Report of Working Groups I and II of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  20. Jacques P (2006) Downscaling climate models and environmental policy: From global to regional politics. J Environ Plan Manag 49:301–307CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kok K, Biggs R, Zurek M (2007) Methods for Developing Multiscale Participatory Scenarios: Insights from Southern Africa and Europe. Ecol Soc 12:8–23Google Scholar
  22. Kriegler E, O’Neill B, Hallegatte S et al (2010) Socioeconomic scenario development for climate change analysis. CIRED Working Paper. DT/WP No 2010-23, October 2010. http://www.centre-cired.fr/IMG/pdf/CIREDWP-201023.pdf Cited 4 sep 2012
  23. Lorenzoni I, Jordan A, Hulme M et al (2000) A co-evolutionary approach to climate change impact assessment: Part 1. Integrating socio-economic and climate change scenarios. Glob Environ Chang 10:57–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Meehl GA, Stocker TF, Collins WD et al (2007) Global Climate Projections. In: Solomon S, Qin D, Manning M et al (eds) Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  25. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005) Ecosystems and human well-being: synthesis. Island Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  26. Morgan DL (1997) Focus groups as qualitative research. Sage Publications, Thousand OaksGoogle Scholar
  27. Moss RH, Edmonds JA, Hibbar KA et al (2010) The next generation of scenarios for climate change research and assessment. Nature 463:747–756CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Nakićenović N, Alcamo J, Davis G et al (2000) Emission scenarios. Special Report of Working Group III of the Intergovernmental Panel of Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  29. O’Neill B, Pulver S, Van Deveer S et al (2008) Where next with global environmental scenarios? Environ Res Lett 3(4):045012. doi:10.1088/1748-9326/3/4/045012 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Ritchey T (2011) Wicked Problems—Social Messes: Decision Support Modelling with Morphological Analysis. Springer Verlag, Berlin HeidelbergCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Rocklöv J, Forsberg B (2008) The effect of temperature on mortality in Stockholm 1998–2003—a study of lag structures and heat wave effects. Scand J Public Health 36:516–523CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Rounsevell MDA, Metzger MJ (2010) Developing qualitative scenario storylines for environmental change assessment. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Clim Chang 1:606–619CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Schär C, Vidale PL, Luthi D et al (2004) The role of increasing temperature variability in European summer heat waves. Nature 427:332–336CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Schenk NJ, Lensink M (2007) Communicating uncertainty in the IPCC’s greenhouse gas emissions scenarios. Clim Chang 82:292–308CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Shaw A, Sheppard S, Burch S et al (2009) Making local futures tangible—Synthesizing, downscaling, and visualizing climate change scenarios for participatory capacity building. Glob Environ Chang 19:447–463CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. SMHI (2011) Sveriges klimat i framtiden. http://www.smhi.se/sgn0106/leveranser/sverigeanalysen/ Cited 4 sep 2012
  37. Svenfelt Å, Engström R, Höjer M (2010) Use of explorative scenarios in environmental policy making—evaluation of policy instruments for management of land, water and the bulit environment. Future 42:1166–1175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Swedish Commission on Climate and Vulnerability (2007) Sweden facing climate change—threats and opportunities [in Swedish], Final report from the Swedish Commission on Climate and Vulnerability SOU 2007:60. Swedish Government Official Reports, StockholmGoogle Scholar
  39. Trenberth KE, Jones PD, Ambenje P et al (2007) Observations: Surface and Atmospheric Climate Change. In: Solomon S, Qin D, Manning M et al (eds) Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  40. UK Government Offices for Science (2011) Blacket Review of High Impact Low Probability Risks. Department for Business, Innovation and Skills, LondonGoogle Scholar
  41. UKCIP (2001) Socio-economic scenarios for climate change impact assessment: a guide to their use in the UK Climate Impacts Programme. UK Climate Impacts Programme, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  42. UNEP (2002) Global Environment Outlook 3: Past, Present and Future Perspectives. UNEP, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  43. van der Heijden K (2005) Scenarios: The Art of Strategic Conversation, 2nd edn. Wiley, ChichesterGoogle Scholar
  44. van Drunen MA, van’t Klooster SA, Berkhout F (2011) Bounding the future: The use of scenarios in assessing climate change impacts. Futures 43:488–496CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. van Vuuren DP, Lucas PL, Hilderink H (2007) Downscaling drivers of global environmental change: Enabling use of global SRES scenarios at the national and grid levels. Glob Environ Chang 17:114–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. van Vuuren DP, Smith SJ, Riahi K (2010) Downscaling socioeconomic and emissions scenarios for global environmental change research: a review. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Clim Chang 1:393–404CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. van Vuuren DP, Edmonds J, Kainuma M et al (2011) The representative concentration pathways: an overview. Clim Chang 109:5–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. van Vuuren DP, Riahi K, Moss R et al (2012) A proposal for a new scenario framework to support research and assessment in different climate research communities. Glob Environ Chang 22:21–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Wilby RL, Troni J, Biot Y et al (2009) A review of climate risk information for adaptation and development planning. Int J Climatol 29:1193–1215CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Zwicky F (1969) Discovery, Invention. Research—Through the Morphological Approach. The Macmillian Company, TorontoGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Henrik Carlsen
    • 1
  • Karl Henrik Dreborg
    • 1
  • Per Wikman-Svahn
    • 1
  1. 1.Swedish Defence Research Agency (FOI)StockholmSweden

Personalised recommendations