Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revision Previous revision
Next revision		 Previous revision
Next revisionBoth sides next revision
future_fabulators:scenario_methods [2014-02-18 03:47] – majafuture_fabulators:scenario_methods [2014-02-18 05:53] – maja
Line 138: Line 138:
   * __Cone of plausibility__ method: offers a more deterministic model of the way in which drivers lead to outcomes, by explicitly listing assumptions and how these might change. Of the three techniques, this approach is most suitable for shorter-term time horizons (e.g. a few months to 2-3 years), but can be used to explore longer-term time horizons. It also suits contexts with a limited number of important drivers.[[http://www.eisf.eu/resources/download.asp?d=5764|The Horizon Scanning Centre (pdf)]]   * __Cone of plausibility__ method: offers a more deterministic model of the way in which drivers lead to outcomes, by explicitly listing assumptions and how these might change. Of the three techniques, this approach is most suitable for shorter-term time horizons (e.g. a few months to 2-3 years), but can be used to explore longer-term time horizons. It also suits contexts with a limited number of important drivers.[[http://www.eisf.eu/resources/download.asp?d=5764|The Horizon Scanning Centre (pdf)]]
      
-  * [[http://www.swemorph.com/ma.html|Morphological Analysis]] could be a great way to work with a large number of clustered drivers, that can be combined in different ways to select a smaller set of important and/or quickly create basic scenario skeletons. The foodprints ruler from FoAM Nordica works on a similar principle.+  * [[Morphological Analysis]] could be a great way to work with a large number of clustered drivers, that can be combined in different ways to select a smaller set of important and/or quickly create basic scenario skeletons. The foodprints ruler from FoAM Nordica works on a similar principle. "
  
-  * [[http://www.systemdynamics.org/conferences/2000/PDFs/ducz124p.pdf|Field Anomaly Relaxation]]+  * More on [[Field Anomaly Relaxation]]
  
 +(After reading several papers about this, I wonder what is the difference between MA and FAR?-maja)
  
 //How to better structure building scenario skeletons with guiding questions (which questions could be generalised)?// //How to better structure building scenario skeletons with guiding questions (which questions could be generalised)?//
Line 193: Line 194:
   * How can we follow-up what happens to the groups after we finish the workshops (especially to understand what happens to commitments to actions and preferred possible futures)?   * How can we follow-up what happens to the groups after we finish the workshops (especially to understand what happens to commitments to actions and preferred possible futures)?
   * How much do we need to be involved in the follow-up?   * How much do we need to be involved in the follow-up?
 +
 +
 +==== Futures research methods ====
 +
 +<html><a href=https://www.emeraldinsight.com/content_images/fig/2730080303002.png"><img src="https://www.emeraldinsight.com/content_images/fig/2730080303002.png"></a></html>
 +
 +From: [[https://www.emeraldinsight.com/journals.htm?articleid=1558553&show=html|Identifying systems' new initial conditions as influence points for the future]]
 +
  
  • future_fabulators/scenario_methods.txt
  • Last modified: 2023-05-08 11:38
  • by nik