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 [2014-02-26 06:00] majafuture_fabulators:scenario_methods [2014-03-01 05:56] maja
Line 116: Line 116:
  
  
-Anna Maria Orru and David Relan wrote [[:/resilients/scenario_symphony|The Scenario Symphony]] for the Resilients project, containing a whole range of scenario creation methods and techniques, including the dynamic [[:/resilients/from_pan_to_panarchy|panarchy]] and [[:/resilients/temporal model]].+Anna Maria Orru and David Relan wrote [[:/resilients/scenario_symphony|The Scenario Symphony]] for the Resilients project, containing a whole range of scenario creation methods and techniques, including the dynamic [[:/resilients/from_pan_to_panarchy|panarchy]] and [[:/resilients/temporal model]]. It's interesting to compare it to the "Four Generic Futures" method above.
  
 <html><a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/foam/8480321093/" title="figure5 by _foam, on Flickr"><img src="https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8505/8480321093_4d0379e220_c.jpg" width="800" height="354" alt="figure5"></a></html> <html><a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/foam/8480321093/" title="figure5 by _foam, on Flickr"><img src="https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8505/8480321093_4d0379e220_c.jpg" width="800" height="354" alt="figure5"></a></html>
Line 242: Line 242:
 ==== Scenarios ==== ==== Scenarios ====
  
-//When to use one, two, three or more axes//+//How to construct alternative future scenarios//
  
   * __Two axes method__: Scenarios generated using the ‘two axes’ process are illustrative rather than predictive; they tend to be high-level (although additional layers of detail can subsequently be added). They are particularly suited to testing medium to long-term policy direction, by ensuring that it is robust in a range of environments. Scenarios developed using this method tend to look out 10-20 years.[[http://www.eisf.eu/resources/download.asp?d=5764|The Horizon Scanning Centre (pdf)]]   * __Two axes method__: Scenarios generated using the ‘two axes’ process are illustrative rather than predictive; they tend to be high-level (although additional layers of detail can subsequently be added). They are particularly suited to testing medium to long-term policy direction, by ensuring that it is robust in a range of environments. Scenarios developed using this method tend to look out 10-20 years.[[http://www.eisf.eu/resources/download.asp?d=5764|The Horizon Scanning Centre (pdf)]]
   * __Branch analysis method__: The ‘branch analysis’ method is suited to developing scenarios around specific turning-points that are known in advance (e.g. elections, a referendum or peace process). This approach works best for a shorter time horizon: generally up to five years.[[http://www.eisf.eu/resources/download.asp?d=5764|The Horizon Scanning Centre (pdf)]]   * __Branch analysis method__: The ‘branch analysis’ method is suited to developing scenarios around specific turning-points that are known in advance (e.g. elections, a referendum or peace process). This approach works best for a shorter time horizon: generally up to five years.[[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)]]   * __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)]]
 +  * [[four generic futures]] by the Manoa School
   * CLA: probing deeper cultural foundations of core issues   * CLA: probing deeper cultural foundations of core issues
   * Manoa approach: "the scenarios it produces are generally much longer-term, and far more divergent / transformative in their structure -- for sophisticated clients only, or to enhance creativity and innovation in R&D and product design staff. The resulting scenarios also work well as provocations in incasting exercises" From http://www.infinitefutures.com/tools/sb.shtml   * Manoa approach: "the scenarios it produces are generally much longer-term, and far more divergent / transformative in their structure -- for sophisticated clients only, or to enhance creativity and innovation in R&D and product design staff. The resulting scenarios also work well as provocations in incasting exercises" From http://www.infinitefutures.com/tools/sb.shtml
Line 254: Line 255:
  
 //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)?//
 +
 +One suggestion (not sure about all of the focus on problems):
 +
 +<blockquote> 
 +A. General discussion of your future
 +  * What will most people be doing in such a world?
 +  * What economic problems that worry people now will be gone, or relatively minor?
 +  * What environmental problems that worry people now will be gone, or relatively minor?
 +  * What other problems that worry people now will be gone, or relatively minor? What new (economic, environmental, social, health, energy or other) problems will people have to worry about that are absent or unimportant now?
 +
 +B. How probable (likely to actually occur) is the future described in your scenario?
 +
 +C. How preferable is the future described in your scenario? That is, how close is it to your own preferred future?
 +
 +D. To the extent the future described in your scenario is judged preferable by your group, what five things need to be done now to move towards those desirable aspects of that future?
 +
 +E. To the extent the future described in your scenario is judged undesirable by your group, what five things need to be done now to see that those undesirable aspects not occur?
 +</blockquote>
 +
 +From [[http://www.jfs.tku.edu.tw/14-2/A01.pdf|Alternative Futures at The Manoa School]] by Jim Dator
 +
 +
  
 have a look at the CLA or the [[http://www.slideshare.net/wendyinfutures/summary-of-verge-ethnographic-futures-framework-devised-by-richard-lum-and-michele-bowman|Ethnographic Futures Framework]] (Bowman & Schultz, 2005),  have a look at the CLA or the [[http://www.slideshare.net/wendyinfutures/summary-of-verge-ethnographic-futures-framework-devised-by-richard-lum-and-michele-bowman|Ethnographic Futures Framework]] (Bowman & Schultz, 2005), 
  • future_fabulators/scenario_methods.txt
  • Last modified: 2023-05-08 11:38
  • by nik