Scenario-based Approach to Local Water-energy-food Nexus Issues with Experts and Stakeholders

  • Kenshi Baba
  • Naoki Masuhara
  • Michinori Kimura
Part of the Global Environmental Studies book series (GENVST)


As the trade-offs within nexus issues of water-energy-food usually come along with scientific disputes, building a consensus among stakeholders with the scientific evidence is required to realize sustainable and resilient societies. In this chapter, we explore the capability of problem-solving for potential disputes that may occur among nexus issues at a local level from case studies in Beppu, Japan by using our scenario-based approach customized to integrate expert knowledge and local knowledge. Our scenario-based approach contains not only the elements of the existing scenario planning but also stakeholder analysis and the Delphi method which enables co-design and co-production of science and society. By integrating these methods, we intend to improve scientific evidence-based policy making processes. As we are now developing the Delphi method, we focused the first half of the process of stakeholder analysis and stakeholder meeting.


Co-design Co-production Local knowledge Expert knowledge Stakeholder analysis Consensus building 


  1. Baba K, Matsuura M (2008) Examining Environemtal disputes solutions using negotiation Simulatoin – a case of wind power siting. Journal of Environmental Systems Study 36:149–158CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baba K, Tanaka M (2015) Challenges of implementing climate change adaptation policy for disaster risk reduction - implications from framing gap among stakeholders and the general public. J Disaster Res 10(3):404–419CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Beppu city (2012) Cultural landscape, Yukemuri (steam) landscape conservation plan.
  4. Beppu city (2014a) Regional New Energy Feasibility Study Report.
  5. Beppu city (2014b) Population in Beppu.
  6. Beppu city (2015a) Summary of Prior Procedures Concerning the Introduction of New Energy in the Beppu City Region.
  7. Center for Research and Development Strategy, Japan Science and Technology Agency (2012) STRATEGIC PROPOSAL: toward the establishment of principles regarding the roles and responsibilities of science and government in policy making. CRD, JSTGoogle Scholar
  8. International Council for Science (2013) Future earth research for global sustainability draft initial design report. ICSGoogle Scholar
  9. Kingdon WJ (1995) Agendas, alternatives, and public policies. Addison-Wesley Educational Publishers Inc, BostonGoogle Scholar
  10. Matsuura M, Baba K (2016) Consensus building for long-term sustainability in the non-north American context: reflecting on a stakeholder process in Japan. Negot Confl Manag Res 9(3):256–268CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Oita prefecture (2010) Precaution statement for utilization of hot spring.
  12. Oita prefecture (2014a) Hot springs data.
  13. Oita prefecture (2014b) Revision of target of renewable energy introduction in Oita new energy vision.
  14. Rumore D, Schenk T, Susskind LE (2016) Role-play simulations for climate change adaptation education and engagement. Nat Clim Chang 6:745–750CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Stone D (1997) Policy paradox: the art of political decision making. W. W. Norton & Company, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  16. Susskind LE, Thomas-Larmar J (1999) Conducting a conflict assessment. In: Susskind LE, McKearnan S, Thomas-Larmar J (eds) Consensus building handbook. SAGE Publications Inc, Thousand Oaks, pp 99–136Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Tokyo City UniversityYokohamaJapan
  2. 2.Research Institute of Humanity and NatureKyotoJapan
  3. 3.Lake Biwa Environmental Research InstituteOtsuJapan

Personalised recommendations