Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Scenarios that illuminate vulnerabilities and robust responses

Climatic Change Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Cite this article

Abstract

Scenarios exist so that decision makers and those who provide them with information can make statements about the future that claim less confidence than do predictions, projections, and forecasts. Despite their prevalence, fundamental questions remain about how scenarios should best be developed and used. This paper proposes a particular conceptualization of scenarios that aims to address many of the challenges faced when using scenarios to inform contentious policy debates. The concept envisions scenarios as illuminating the vulnerabilities of proposed policies, that is, as concise summaries of the future states of the world in which a proposed policy would fail to meet its goals. Such scenarios emerge from a decision support process that begins with a proposed policy, seeks to understand the conditions under which it would fail, and then uses this information to identify and evaluate potential alternative policies that are robust over a wide range of future conditions. Statistical cluster analyses applied to databases of simulation model results can help identify scenarios as part of this process. Drawing on themes from the decision support literature, this paper first reviews difficulties faced when using scenarios to inform climate-related decisions, describes the proposed approach to address these challenges, illustrates the approach with applications for three different types of users, and concludes with some thoughts on implications for the provision of climate information and for future scenario processes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Notes

  1. Rozenberg et al. (2012) does use scenario discovery to consider a wide range of such factors in an analysis aimed at national government level decision makers.

  2. Available from www.weap21.org. Accessed Sept 4, 2012

  3. Our group conducted several versions of the IEUA analysis, each reflecting a different iteration of the process shown in Fig. 1 and considering different strategies and performance measures. This example derives from the first iteration.

References

  • Adger WN (2006) Vulnerability. Glob Environ Chang 16:228–268

    Google Scholar 

  • America’s Climate Choices (ACC) (2010) Informing an effective response to climate change

  • Bankes SC (1993) Exploratory modeling for policy analysis. Oper Res 41(3):435–449

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berkes F (2007) Understanding uncertainty and reducing vulnerability: lessons from resilience thinking. Nat Hazard 41:283–295

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bishop P, Hines A, Collins T (2007) The current state of scenario development: an overview of techniques. Foresight 9(1):5–25

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Borjeson L, Hojer M, Dreborg I, Ekvall T, Finnveden G (2006) Scenario types and techniques: towards a user’s guide. Futures 38:723–739

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bradfield R, Wright G, Burt G, Cairns G, Heijden KVD (2006) The origins and evolution of scenario techniques in long range business planning. Futures 37:795–812

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown C (2010) “The end of reliability.” J Water Resour Plan Manag 143–145

  • Bryant BP, Lempert RJ (2010) Thinking inside the box: a participatory, computer-assisted approach to scenario discovery. Technol Forecast Soc Chang 77:34–49

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carter TR, Jones RN, Lu SBX, Conde C, Mearns LO, O’Neill BC, Rounsevell MDA, Zurek MB (2007) New assessment methods and the characterisation of future conditions. In: Parry ML, Canziani OF, Palutikof JP, Linden PJvd, Hanson CE (eds) Climate change 2007: impacts, adaptation and vulnerability. Contribution of working group II to the fourth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge, UK, Cambridge University Press, 1: 33–171

  • Dessai S, Hulme M (2004) Does climate adaptation policy need probabilities? Clim Pol 4:107–128

    Google Scholar 

  • Dessai S, Hulme M (2007) Assessing the robustness of adaptation decisions to climate change uncertainties: a case study on water resources management in the East of England. Glob Environ Chang 17(1):59–72

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dixon L, Lempert RJ, LaTourrette T, Reville RT (2007) The federal role in terrorism insurance: evaluating alternatives in an uncertain world. RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, p 150

    Google Scholar 

  • Dodd C (2007, November 16) “Terrorism risk insurance program reauthorization.” Congr Rec 153: S14592

  • European Environmental Agency (EEA) (2009) Looking back on looking forward: a review of evaluative scenario literature. Copenhagen

  • Friedman JH, Fisher NI (1999) Bump hunting in high-dimensional data. Stat Comput 9:123–143

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fussel H-M (2007) Vulnerability: a generally applicable conceptual framework for climate change research. Glob Environ Chang 17:155–167

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garb Y, Pulver S, VanDeveer SD (2008) Scenarios in society, society in scenarios: toward a social scientific analysis of storyline-driven environmental modeling. Environ Res Lett 3:1–8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Groves DG, Lempert RJ (2007) A new analytic method for finding policy-relevant scenarios. Glob Environ Chang 17:73–85

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Groves DG, Davis M, Wilkinson R, Lempert R (2008a) “Planning for climate change in the Inland Empire: Southern California.” Water Resour IMPACT July

  • Groves DG, Knopman D, Lempert R, Berry S, Wainfan L (2008b) Presenting uncertainty about climate change to water resource managers–summary of workshops with the inland empire utilities agency. RAND Corporation, Santa Monica

    Google Scholar 

  • Groves DG, Lempert RJ, Knopman D, Berry S (2008c) Preparing for an uncertain future climate in the inland empire–identifying robust water management strategies. RAND Corporation, Santa Monica

    Google Scholar 

  • Grubler AN, Nakicenovic N (2001) Identifying dangers in an uncertain climate. Nature 412:15

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hulme M, Dessai S (2008) Predicting, deciding, learning: can one evaluate the ‘success’ of national climate scenarios? Environ Res Lett 3:1–7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • IEUA (2005) 2005 regional urban water management plan. Inland Empire Utilities Agency, Chino

    Google Scholar 

  • IPCC (2007) Climate change 2007: impacts, adaptation and vulnerability, intergovernmental panel on climate change

  • Jenkins H (August 8, 2007) Terror insurance is here to stay. Wall Str J

  • Kahneman D, Lovallo D (1993) Timid choices and bold forecasts: a cognitive perspective on risk taking. Manag Sci 39(1):17–31

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirshen P, Watson C, Dougla E, Gontz A, Lee J, Tian Y (2008) Coastal flooding in the northeastern United States due to climate change. Mitig Adapt Strateg Glob Chang 13:437–451

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lempert RJ (2007) Can scenarios help policymakers be both bold and careful? In: Fukuyama F (ed) Blindside: how to anticipate forcing events and wild cards in global politics. Brookings Institution Press, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • Lempert RJ, Collins M (2007) Managing the risk of uncertain threshold responses: comparison of robust, optimum, and precautionary approaches. Risk Anal 27(4):1009–1026

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lempert R, Groves DG (2010) Identifying and evaluating robust adaptive policy responses to climate change for water management agencies in the American West. Technol Forecast Soc Chang 77:960–974

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lempert RJ, Popper SW, Bankes S (2002) Confronting surprise. Soc Sci Comput Rev 20(4):420–440

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lempert RJ, Popper SW, Bankes SC (2003) Shaping the next 100 years: new methods for quantitative, long-term policy analysis. RAND Corporation, Santa Monica

    Google Scholar 

  • Lempert R, Nakicenovic N, Sarewitz D, Schlesinger M (2004) Characterizing climate-change uncertainties for decision-makers–an editorial essay. Clim Chang 65(1–2):1–9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lempert RJ, Groves DG, Popper SW, Bankes SC (2006) A general, analytic method for generating robust strategies and narrative scenarios. Manag Sci 52(4):514–528

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • March J, Simon H (1958) Organizations. John Wiley

  • March J, Sproul L, Tamuz M (1991) Learning from samples of one or fewer. Organ Sci 2:1–13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McJeon HC, Clarke L, Kyle P, Wise M, Hackbarth A, Bryant B, Lempert RJ (2011) Technology interactions among low-carbon energy technologies: what can we learn from a large number of scenarios? Energy Econ 33:619–631

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Means E, Laugier M, Daw J, Kaatz L, Waage M (2010) Decision support planning methods: incorporating climate change into water planning, water utility climate alliance: 76

  • Morgan MG, Henrion M (1990) Uncertainty: a guide to dealing with uncertainty in quantitative risk and policy analysis. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Morgan MG, Keith DW (2008) Improving the way we think about projecting future energy use and emissions of carbon dioxide. Clim Chang 90:189–215

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morgan MG, Dowlatabadi H, Henrion M, Keith D, Lempert RJ, McBride S, Small M, Wilbanks T (2009) Best practice approaches for characterizing, communicating, and incorporating scientific uncertainty in decision-making. Synthesis and Assessment Product 5.2 Washington D.C., U.S. Climate Change Science Program, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

  • Nakicenovic N, Alcamo J, Davis G, de Vries B, Fenhann J, Gaffin S, Gregory K, Grubler A, Jung TY, Kram T, La Rovere EL, Michaelis L, Mori S, Morita T, Pepper W, Pitcher HM, Price L, Riahi K, Roehrl A, Rogner H-H, Sankovski A, Schlesinger M, Shukla P, Smith SJ, Swart R, van Rooijen S, Victor N, Dadi Z (2000) Special report on emissions scenarios: a special report of working group III of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press

  • National Research Council (2009) Informing decisions in a changing climate. T. N. A. Press. Washington, DC, Panel on Strategies and Methods for Climate-Related Decision Support, Committee on the Human Dimensions of Climate Change, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education

  • Nelson DR, Adger N, Brown K (2007) Adaptation to environmental change: contributions of a resilience framework. Annu Rev Environ Resour 32:395–419

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olsson P, Gunderson LH, Carpenter SR, Ryan P, Lebel L, Folke C, Holling CS (2006) Shooting the rapids: navigating transitions to adaptive governance of social-ecological systems. Ecol Soc 11(1):18

    Google Scholar 

  • O'Neill BC, Nakicenovic N (2008) Learning from global emissions scenarios. Environ Res Lett 3:1–9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O'Neill BC, Pulver S, VanDeveer SD, Garb Y (2008) Editorial–where next with global environmental scenarios? Environ Res Lett 3:1–4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parson EA (2008) Useful global-change scenarios: current issues and challenges. Environ Res Lett 3:1–5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parson EA, Burkett V, Fischer-Vanden K, Keith D, Mearns LO, Pitcher H, Rosenweig C, Webster M (2007) Global-change scenarios: their development and use, synthesis and assessment product 2.1b. US Climate Change Science Program

  • Pidgeon N, Fischhoff B (2011) The role of social and decision sciences in communicating uncertain climate risks. Nat Clim Chang 1:35–41

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Popper SW, Berrebi C, Griffin J, Light T, Min EY, Crane K (2009) Natural gas and Israel’s energy future: near-term decisions from a strategic perspective. RAND Corporation, Santa Monica

    Google Scholar 

  • Postma TJBM, Liebl F (2005) How to improve scenario analysis as a strategic management tool? Technol Forecast Soc Chang 72:161–173

    Google Scholar 

  • Ranger N, Millner A, Dietz S, Fankhauser S, Lopez A, Ruta G (2010) Adaptation in the UK: a decision making process. Granthan/CCEP Policy Brief

  • Rittel H, Webber M (1973) Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sci 4:155–169

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rounsevell MDA, Metzger MJ (2010) Developing qualitative scenario storylines for environmental change assessment. Adv Rev WIREs Clim Chang 1:606–619

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rozenberg J, Guivarch C, Lempert R, Hallegatte S (2012) Building SSPs: a scenario elicitation methodology to map the space of possible future mitigative and adaptative capacity. FEEM (Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei) Working Paper. 2012.052

  • Sarewitz D, Pielke JRA (2000) Science, prediction: decision-making, and the future of nature. Island Press, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • Savage LJ (1954) The foundation of statistics. Dover Publications

  • Schneider SH (2001) What is ‘dangerous’ climate change? Nature 411:17–19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schoemaker PJH (1993) Multiple scenario development: its conceptual and behavioral foundation. Strateg Manag J 14(3):193–213

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz P (1996) The art of the long view–planning for the future in an uncertain world. Currency-Doubleday, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Shapiro I (2003) Moral foundation of politics. Yale University Press

  • Smith JB, Schneider SH, Oppenheimer M, Yohe GW, Hare W, Mastrandrea MD, Patwardhan A, Burton I, Corfee-Morlot J, Magadza CHD, Fuessel H-M, Pittock AB, Rahman A, Suarez A, Ypersele J-PV (2009) Assessing dangerous climate change through an update of the intergovernmental panel on climate change (IPCC) “reasons for concern”. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 106:4133–4137

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Treverton G (2001) Reshaping national intelligence for an age of information. Cambridge University Press

  • U.S. Commission on National Security in the 21st Century (1999) New world coming: American security in the 21st century, Study Addendum

  • van der Heijden K (1996) Scenarios: the art of strategic conversation. Wiley, Chichester

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Notten P, Sleegers AM, van Asselt MBA (2005) The future shocks: on discontinuity and scenario developments. Futures 35:423–443

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van’t Klooster SA, van Asselt MBA (2006) Practising the scenario-axes technique. Futures 38(1):15–30

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wack P (1985) “The gentle art of reperceiving–scenarios: uncharted waters ahead (part 1 of a two-part article).” Harv Bus Rev (September–October): 73–89

  • Walker BH, Anderies JM, Kinzig AP, Ryan P (2006) Exploring resilience in social-ecological systems: comparative studies and theory development. CSIRO Publishing, Collingwood

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The ideas expressed in this essay emerged from fruitful discussions, collaborations, and debates with numerous wonderful colleagues. I owe particular thanks to Andy Parker for comments on this manuscript and to Chris Weaver for encouragement and funding of several earlier versions. Comments from two anonymous reviewers played a key role in shaping the essay you see here. I thank the National Science Foundation for its support through grant SES‐0345925 and the center for Climate and Energy Decision Making (SES‐0949710) for its support through a cooperative agreement between the National Science Foundation and Carnegie Mellon University.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. RAND, 1776 Main St., Santa Monica, CA, 90407, USA

    Robert Lempert

Authors
  1. Robert Lempert
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Robert Lempert.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lempert, R. Scenarios that illuminate vulnerabilities and robust responses. Climatic Change 117, 627–646 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-012-0574-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-012-0574-6

Keywords

search

Navigation