1932

Abstract

In an increasingly globalized and interconnected world, where social and environmental change occur ever more rapidly, careful futures-oriented thinking becomes crucial for effective decision making. Foresight activities, including scenario development, quantitative modeling, and scenario-guided design of policies and programs, play a key role in exploring options to address socioeconomic and environmental challenges across many sectors and decision-making levels. We take stock of recent methodological developments in scenario and foresight exercises, seek to provide greater clarity on the many diverse approaches employed, and examine their use by decision makers in different fields and at different geographic, administrative, and temporal scales. Experience shows the importance of clearly formulated questions, structured dialog, carefully designed scenarios, sophisticated biophysical and socioeconomic analysis, and iteration as needed to more effectively link the growing scenarios and foresight community with today's decision makers and to better address the social, economic, and environmental challenges of tomorrow.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-environ-102017-030109
2018-10-17
2024-04-16
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/energy/43/1/annurev-environ-102017-030109.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-environ-102017-030109&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

Literature Cited

  1. 1.  Steffen W, Crutzen PJ, McNeill JR 2007. The Anthropocene: Are humans now overwhelming the great forces of nature?. AMBIO 36:614–21
    [Google Scholar]
  2. 2.  Mervis J 2017. Not so fast. Science 358:1371–74
    [Google Scholar]
  3. 3.  Missirian A, Schlenker W 2017. Asylum applications respond to temperature fluctuations. Science 358:1610–14
    [Google Scholar]
  4. 4.  van Dijk M, Meijerink GW 2014. A review of global food security scenario and assessment studies: results, gaps and research priorities. Glob. Food Secur. 3:227–38
    [Google Scholar]
  5. 5.  Le Mouël C, Forslund A 2017. How can we feed the world in 2050? A review of the responses from global scenario studies. Eur. Rev. Agric. Econ. 44:541–91
    [Google Scholar]
  6. 6.  Zurek MB, Henrichs T 2007. Linking scenarios across geographical scales in international environmental assessments. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 74:1282–95
    [Google Scholar]
  7. 7.  Voros J 2003. A generic foresight process framework. Foresight 5:10–21
    [Google Scholar]
  8. 8. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2007. Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Geneva: IPCC
  9. 9.  Börjeson L, Höjer M, Dreborg K-H, Ekvall T, Finnveden G 2006. Scenario types and techniques: towards a user's guide. Futures 38:723–39
    [Google Scholar]
  10. 10.  Davidson P 1996. Reality and economic theory. J. Post Keynes. Econ. 18:479–508
    [Google Scholar]
  11. 11.  Amer M, Daim TU, Jetter A 2013. A review of scenario planning. Futures 46:23–40
    [Google Scholar]
  12. 12.  Ramírez R, Selin C 2014. Plausibility and probability in scenario planning. Foresight 16:54–74
    [Google Scholar]
  13. 13.  Westhoek HJ, van den Berg M, Bakkes JA 2006. Scenario development to explore the future of Europe's rural areas. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 114:7–20
    [Google Scholar]
  14. 14.  van Notten PWF, Rotmans J, van Asselt MBA, Rothman DS 2003. An updated scenario typology. Futures 35:423–43
    [Google Scholar]
  15. 15.  Wack P 1985. Scenarios: uncharted waters ahead. Harvard Business Review Sept. 73–89
  16. 16.  Perla PP 1990. The Art of Wargaming: A Guide for Professionals and Hobbyists Annapolis, MD: Nav. Inst. Press
  17. 17.  Hanley JT 2017. Changing DoD's analysis paradigm. Naval War Coll. Rev. 70:164–103
    [Google Scholar]
  18. 18.  Wisecup JV 2010. President's forum. Naval War Coll. Rev. 63:419–23
    [Google Scholar]
  19. 19.  Rubel RC 2006. The epistemology of war gaming. Naval War Coll. Rev. 59:2108–28
    [Google Scholar]
  20. 20.  Watman K 2003. War gaming and its role in examining the future. Brown J. World Aff. 10:51–61
    [Google Scholar]
  21. 21.  Hanley JT Jr. 1991. On Wargaming: A Critique of Strategic Operational Gaming PhD Thesis, Yale Univ.
  22. 22.  Bennett B 2012. Anatomy of a war game: training for nuclear war on the Korean Peninsula. World Policy J 29:21–23
    [Google Scholar]
  23. 23.  Dunnigan JF 2003. War games, preemption, and other curious behavior. Brown J. World Aff. 10:77–86
    [Google Scholar]
  24. 24.  Perla PP, McGrady E 2011. Why wargaming works. Naval War Coll. Rev. 64:4111–30
    [Google Scholar]
  25. 25.  Wilkes BJ 2001. Silver flag: a concept for operational warfare. Air Space Power J 15:47–56
    [Google Scholar]
  26. 26.  Bradfield R, Wright G, Burt G, Cairns G, Van Der Heijden K 2005. The origins and evolution of scenario techniques in long range business planning. Futures 37:795–812
    [Google Scholar]
  27. 27.  Wack P 1985. Scenarios: shooting the rapids. How medium-term analysis illuminated the power of scenarios for shell management. Harvard Business Review Novemb. 139–50
  28. 28.  Godet M, Durance P, Gerber A 2008. Strategic foresight: use and misuse of scenario building Work. Pap. Lab. Innov. Prospect. Stratég. Org. Paris:
  29. 29.  Martelli A 2001. Scenario building and scenario planning: state of the art and prospects of evolution. Futures Res. Q. 17:57–74
    [Google Scholar]
  30. 30. Bain & Company. 2015. Scenario and contingency planning. Insights Novemb. 7
  31. 31.  Rohrbeck R, Schwarz JO 2013. The value contribution of strategic foresight: insights from an empirical study of large European companies. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 80:1593–606
    [Google Scholar]
  32. 32.  Phelps R, Chan C, Kapsalis SC 2001. Does scenario planning affect performance? Two exploratory studies. J. Bus. Res. 51:223–32
    [Google Scholar]
  33. 33.  Visser MP, Chermack TJ 2009. Perceptions of the relationship between scenario planning and firm performance: A qualitative study. Futures 41:581–92
    [Google Scholar]
  34. 34.  Balarezo J, Nielsen BB 2017. Scenario planning as organizational intervention: an integrative framework and future research directions. Rev. Int. Bus. Strategy 27:2–52
    [Google Scholar]
  35. 35.  Höjer M, Ahlroth S, Dreborg K-H, Ekvall T, Finnveden G et al. 2008. Scenarios in selected tools for environmental systems analysis. J. Cleaner Prod. 16:1958–70
    [Google Scholar]
  36. 36.  Liu Y, Mahmoud M, Hartmann H, Stewart S, Wagener T et al. 2008. Chapter Nine: Formal scenario development for environmental impact assessment studies. Dev. Int. Environ. Assess. 3:145–62
    [Google Scholar]
  37. 37. Institute of Environmental Management & Assessment (IMEA). 2011. Special Report—The State of Environmental Impact Assessment Practice in the UK Lincoln, UK: IMEA
  38. 38.  Maynard T 2015. Food System Shock: The Insurance Impacts of Acute Disruption to Global Food Supply London: Lloyd's
  39. 39.  Popper R 2009. Mapping foresight: revealing how Europe and other world regions navigate into the future Eur. Foresight Monit. Netw. Rep. EUR 24041 EN, Publ. Off. EU Luxembourg:
  40. 40.  Bishop P, Hines A, Collins T 2007. The current state of scenario development: an overview of techniques. Foresight 9:5–25
    [Google Scholar]
  41. 41.  Varum CA, Melo C 2010. Directions in scenario planning literature—a review of the past decades. Futures 42:355–69
    [Google Scholar]
  42. 42.  Wilson I 2000. From scenario thinking to strategic action. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 65:23–29
    [Google Scholar]
  43. 43.  Hennicke P 2004. Scenarios for a robust policy mix: the final report of the German study commission on sustainable energy supply. Energy Policy 32:1673–78
    [Google Scholar]
  44. 44.  Jäger J, Rounsevell MDA, Harrison PA, Omann I, Dunford R et al. 2015. Assessing policy robustness of climate change adaptation measures across sectors and scenarios. Clim. Change 128:395–407
    [Google Scholar]
  45. 45.  Vervoort JM, Thornton PK, Kristjanson P, Förch W, Ericksen PJ et al. 2014. Challenges to scenario-guided adaptive action on food security under climate change. Glob. Environ. Change 28:383–94
    [Google Scholar]
  46. 46.  Kaplan S, Garrick BJ 1981. On the quantitative definition of risk. Risk Anal 1:11–27
    [Google Scholar]
  47. 47.  Pfister S, Bayer P, Koehler A, Hellweg S 2011. Projected water consumption in future global agriculture: scenarios and related impacts. Sci. Total Environ. 409:4206–16
    [Google Scholar]
  48. 48.  Swetnam RD, Fisher B, Mbilinyi BP, Munishi PKT, Willcock S et al. 2011. Mapping socio-economic scenarios of land cover change: a GIS method to enable ecosystem service modelling. J. Environ. Manag. 92:563–74
    [Google Scholar]
  49. 49.  Chen L, Messing I, Zhang S, Fu B, Ledin S 2003. Land use evaluation and scenario analysis towards sustainable planning on the Loess Plateau in China—case study in a small catchment. CATENA 54:303–16
    [Google Scholar]
  50. 50.  Bartolini F, Bazzani GM, Gallerani V, Raggi M, Viaggi D 2007. The impact of water and agriculture policy scenarios on irrigated farming systems in Italy: an analysis based on farm level multi-attribute linear programming models. Agric. Syst. 93:90–114
    [Google Scholar]
  51. 51.  Flachsbarth I, Willaarts B, Xie H, Pitois G, Ringler C, Garrido A 2015. The role of Latin America's land and water resources for global food security: environmental trade-offs of future food production pathways. PLOS ONE 10:1e0116733
    [Google Scholar]
  52. 52.  Zanoli R, Gambelli D, Vairo D 2012. Scenarios of the organic food market in Europe. Food Policy 37:41–57
    [Google Scholar]
  53. 53.  Adams RM, McCarl BA, Mearns LO 2003. The effects of spatial scale of climate scenarios on economic assessments: an example from U.S. agriculture. Clim. Change 60:131–48
    [Google Scholar]
  54. 54.  Bock A-K, Lheureux K, Libeau-Dulos M, Nilsagård H, Rodriguez-Cerezo E 2002. Scenarios for co-existence of genetically modified, conventional and organic crops in European agriculture Joint Res. Cent. Rep. EUR 20394EN, Eur. Comm., Joint Res. Cent. Seville, Spain:
  55. 55.  Reilly M, Willenbockel D 2010. Managing uncertainty: a review of food system scenario analysis and modelling. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B 365:3049–63
    [Google Scholar]
  56. 56.  Moss RH, Edmonds JA, Hibbard KA, Manning MR, Rose SK et al. 2010. The next generation of scenarios for climate change research and assessment. Nature 463:747
    [Google Scholar]
  57. 57.  Nakicenovic N, Alcamo J, Grubler A, Riahi K, Roehrl R et al. 2000. Special Report on Emissions Scenarios (SRES), A Special Report of Working Group III of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
  58. 58. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2014. Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change. Working Group III Contribution to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
  59. 59.  Parry ML, Rosenzweig C, Iglesias A, Livermore M, Fischer G 2004. Effects of climate change on global food production under SRES emissions and socio-economic scenarios. Glob. Environ. Change 14:53–67
    [Google Scholar]
  60. 60.  Vermeulen S, Campbell BM, Ingram JS 2012. Climate change and food systems. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resourc. 37:195–222
    [Google Scholar]
  61. 61.  von Lampe M, Willenbockel D, Ahammad H, Blanc E, Cai Y et al. 2014. Why do global long-term scenarios for agriculture differ? An overview of the AgMIP Global Economic Model Intercomparison. Agric. Econ. 45:3–20
    [Google Scholar]
  62. 62.  Nelson GC, van der Mensbrugghe D, Ahammad H, Blanc E, Calvin K et al. 2014. Agriculture and climate change in global scenarios: Why don't the models agree. Agric. Econ. 45:85–101
    [Google Scholar]
  63. 63.  Schlüter M, McAllister RRJ, Arlinghaus R, Bunnefeld N, Eisenack K et al. 2012. New horizons for managing the environment: a review of coupled social-ecological systems modeling. Nat. Resource Model. 25:219–72
    [Google Scholar]
  64. 64.  Ash N, Blanco H, Brown C, Garcia K, Tomich T, Vira B 2010. Ecosystems and Human Well-Being: A Manual for Assessment Practitioners Washington, DC: Island Press
  65. 65.  Mason-D'Croz D, Vervoort J, Palazzo A, Islam S, Lord S et al. 2016. Multi-factor, multi-state, multi-model scenarios: exploring food and climate futures for Southeast Asia. Environ. Model. Softw. 83:255–70
    [Google Scholar]
  66. 66.  Palazzo A, Vervoort JM, Mason-D'Croz D, Rutting L, Havlík P et al. 2017. Linking regional stakeholder scenarios and shared socioeconomic pathways: quantified West African food and climate futures in a global context. Glob. Environ. Change 45:227–42
    [Google Scholar]
  67. 67.  Vervoort JM, Rutting L, Kok K, Hermans FLP, Veldkamp T et al. 2012. Exploring dimensions, scales, and cross-scale dynamics from the perspectives of change agents in social-ecological systems. Ecol. Soc. 17:24
    [Google Scholar]
  68. 68.  Gibson CC, Ostrom E, Ahn TK 2000. The concept of scale and the human dimensions of global change: a survey. Ecol. Econ. 32:217–39
    [Google Scholar]
  69. 69.  Cash D, Adger WN, Berkes F, Garden P, Lebel L et al. 2006. Scale and cross-scale dynamics: governance and information in a multilevel world. Ecol. Soc. 11:8
    [Google Scholar]
  70. 70.  Biggs R, Raudsepp-Hearne C, Atkinson-Palombo C, Bohensky E, Boyd E et al. 2007. Linking futures across scales: a dialog on multiscale scenarios. Ecol. Soc. 12:17
    [Google Scholar]
  71. 71.  Kok K, Biggs R, Zurek M 2007. Methods for developing multiscale participatory scenarios: insights from Southern Africa and Europe. Ecol. Soc. 13:8
    [Google Scholar]
  72. 72.  Bennett EM, Solan M, Biggs R, McPhearson T, Norström AV et al. 2016. Bright spots: seeds of a good Anthropocene. Front. Ecol. Environ. 14:441–48
    [Google Scholar]
  73. 73.  Kaplan S, Haimes YY, Garrick BJ 2001. Fitting hierarchical holographic modeling into the theory of scenario structuring and a resulting refinement to the quantitative definition of risk. Risk Anal 21:807–19
    [Google Scholar]
  74. 74.  Aven T 2011. On some recent definitions and analysis frameworks for risk, vulnerability, and resilience. Risk Anal. 31:515–22
    [Google Scholar]
  75. 75.  Lempert RJ, Groves DJ, Popper SW, Bankes SC 2006. A general, analytic method for generating robust strategies and narrative scenarios. Manag. Sci. 52:514–28
    [Google Scholar]
  76. 76.  Bacon E 2012. Writing Russia's future: paradigms, drivers, and scenarios. Eur. Asia Stud. 64:1165–89
    [Google Scholar]
  77. 77.  Carlsen H, Eriksson EA, Dreborg KH, Johansson B, Bodin Ö 2016. Systematic exploration of scenario spaces. Foresight 18:59–75
    [Google Scholar]
  78. 78.  Lord S, Helfgott A, Vervoort JM 2016. Choosing diverse sets of plausible scenarios in multidimensional exploratory futures techniques. Futures 77:11–27
    [Google Scholar]
  79. 79.  Bryant BP, Lempert RJ 2010. Thinking inside the box: a participatory, computer-assisted approach to scenario discovery. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 77:34–49
    [Google Scholar]
  80. 80.  Carlsen H, Lempert R, Wikman-Svahn P, Schweizer V 2016. Choosing small sets of policy-relevant scenarios by combining vulnerability and diversity approaches. Environ. Model. Softw. 84:155–64
    [Google Scholar]
  81. 81.  Wiebe K, Lotze-Campen H, Sands R, Tabeau A, van der Mensbrugghe D et al. 2015. Climate change impacts on agriculture in 2050 under a range of plausible socioeconomic and emissions scenarios. Environ. Res. Lett. 10:085010
    [Google Scholar]
  82. 82.  Lord S, Nunes-Vaz R 2013. Designing and evaluating layered security. Int. J. Risk Assess. Manag. 17:19–45
    [Google Scholar]
  83. 83.  Heger T, Boman M 2015. Networked foresight—the case of EIT ICT Labs. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 101:147–64
    [Google Scholar]
  84. 84.  Rohrbeck R, Thom N, Arnold H 2015. IT tools for foresight: the integrated insight and response system of Deutsche Telekom Innovation Laboratories. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 97:115–26
    [Google Scholar]
  85. 85.  O'Neill BC, Kriegler E, Ebi KL, Kemp-Benedict E, Riahi K et al. 2015. The roads ahead: narratives for shared socioeconomic pathways describing world futures in the 21st century. Glob. Environ. Change 42:169–80
    [Google Scholar]
  86. 86.  O'Neill BC, Kriegler E, Riahi K, Ebi KL, Hallegatte S et al. 2014. A new scenario framework for climate change research: the concept of shared socioeconomic pathways. Climatic Change 122:387–400
    [Google Scholar]
  87. 87.  Riahi K, Van Vuuren DP, Kriegler E, Edmonds J, O'Neill BC et al. 2017. The shared socioeconomic pathways and their energy, land use, and greenhouse gas emissions implications: an overview. Glob. Environ. Change 42:153–68
    [Google Scholar]
  88. 88.  Skoglund J, Chen W 2015. Financial Risk Management: Applications in Market, Credit, Asset and Liability Management and Firmwide Risk. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley
  89. 89. European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority (EIOPA). 2011. EIOPA report on the Fifth Quantitative Impact Study (QIS5) for Solvency II Rep. EIOPA-TFQIS5-11/001 Eur. Ins. Occup. Pensions Author. Frankfurt:
  90. 90.  Alcamo J 2001. Scenarios as tools for international environmental assessments Environ. Issue Rep. 24 Eur. Environ. Agency Copenhagen:
  91. 91.  Alcamo J 2008. The SAS approach: combining qualitative and quantitative knowledge in environmental scenarios. Environmental Futures: The Practice of Environmental Scenario Analysis J Alcamo 123–50 Amsterdam: Elsevier
    [Google Scholar]
  92. 92.  Kemp-Benedict E 2012. Telling better stories: strengthening the story in story and simulation. Environ. Res. Lett. 7:041004
    [Google Scholar]
  93. 93.  Rounsevell MDA, Metzger MJ 2010. Developing qualitative scenario storylines for environmental change assessment. WIREs Clim. Change 1:606–19
    [Google Scholar]
  94. 94.  Wilkinson A, Kupers R 2013. Living in the futures. Harvard Business Review May. https://hbr.org/2013/05/living-in-the-futures
  95. 95. International Energy Agency (IEA). 2016. World Energy Outlook 2016 Paris: Org. Econ. Co-op. Dev. (OECD)/IEA
  96. 96.  Haegeman K, Marinelli E, Scapolo F, Ricci A, Sokolov A 2013. Quantitative and qualitative approaches in Future-oriented Technology Analysis (FTA): From combination to integration?. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 80:386–97
    [Google Scholar]
  97. 97.  Söderholm P, Hildingsson R, Johansson B, Khan J, Wilhelmsson F 2011. Governing the transition to low-carbon futures: a critical survey of energy scenarios for 2050. Futures 43:1105–16
    [Google Scholar]
  98. 98.  Mallampalli VR, Mavrommati G, Thompson J, Duveneck M, Meyer S et al. 2016. Methods for translating narrative scenarios into quantitative assessments of land use change. Environ. Model. Softw. 82:7–20
    [Google Scholar]
  99. 99.  Voinov A, Kolagani N, McCall MK, Glynn PD, Kragt ME et al. 2016. Modelling with stakeholders—next generation. Environ. Model. Softw. 77:196–220
    [Google Scholar]
  100. 100.  Hejazi M, Edmonds J, Clarke L, Kyle P, Davies E et al. 2014. Long-term global water projections using six socioeconomic scenarios in an integrated assessment modeling framework. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 81:205–26
    [Google Scholar]
  101. 101.  Gallopin GC, Hammond A, Raskin P, Swart R 1997. Branch Points: Global Scenarios and Human Choice Stockh., Sweden: Stockh. Environ. Inst.
  102. 102.  Alcamo J, van Vuuren D, Rosegrant M, Alder J, Bennett E et al. 2005. Methodology for developing the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment scenarios. See Ref. 118 145–72
  103. 103.  Booth EG, Qiu J, Carpenter SR, Schatz J, Chen X et al. 2016. From qualitative to quantitative environmental scenarios: translating storylines into biophysical modeling inputs at the watershed scale. Environ. Model. Softw. 85:80–97
    [Google Scholar]
  104. 104.  Vervoort J, Helfgott A, Brzezina N, Moragues-Faus A, Lord S et al. 2016. Explorative EU Scenarios FP7 TRANSMANGO Leuven, Belgium:
  105. 105.  Oksendal B, Sulem A 2015. Applications of stochastic analysis. The Princeton Companion to Applied Mathematics NJ Higham, MR Dennis, P Glendinning, PA Martin, S Santosa, J Tanner 319–27 Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  106. 106.  Bala BK, Arshad FM, Noh KM 2017. Scenario planning and modelling. System Dynamics: Modelling and Simulation BK Bala, FM Arshad, KM Noh 149–62 Singapore: Springer
    [Google Scholar]
  107. 107.  Nakajima Y, Yasui T, Ohkami Y, Kotake N 2012. Modeling a policy for managing polio vaccine in Japan: scenario planning based on system dynamics. Proc. 30th Intl. Conf. System Dynamics Society St. Gallen, Switzerland: July 22–26
  108. 108.  van Vliet M, Kok K, Veldkamp T 2010. Linking stakeholders and modellers in scenario studies: the use of Fuzzy Cognitive Maps as a communication and learning tool. Futures 42:1–14
    [Google Scholar]
  109. 109.  Kok K 2009. The potential of Fuzzy Cognitive Maps for semi-quantitative scenario development, with an example from Brazil. Glob. Environ. Change 19:122–33
    [Google Scholar]
  110. 110.  Vennix JA 1999. Group model-building: tackling messy problems. Syst. Dyn. Rev. 15:379–401
    [Google Scholar]
  111. 111.  Hovmand PS 2014. Community Based System Dynamics Berlin: Springer
  112. 112.  Nakajima Y, Yasui T, Ohkami Y, Kotake N 2012. Modeling a policy for managing polio vaccine in Japan: scenario planning based on system dynamics Presented at Int. Conf. Syst. Dyn. Soc., 30th. St. Gallen, Switz.:
  113. 113.  Acosta L, Klein RJT, Reidsma P, Metzger MJ, Rounsevell MDA et al. 2013. A spatially explicit scenario-driven model of adaptive capacity to global change in Europe. Glob. Environ. Change 23:1211–24
    [Google Scholar]
  114. 114.  Barton DN, Saloranta T, Moe SJ, Eggestad HO, Kuikka S 2008. Bayesian belief networks as a meta-modelling tool in integrated river basin management—pros and cons in evaluating nutrient abatement decisions under uncertainty in a Norwegian river basin. Ecol. Econ. 66:91–104
    [Google Scholar]
  115. 115.  Borsuk ME, Stow CA, Reckhow KH 2004. A Bayesian network of eutrophication models for synthesis, prediction, and uncertainty analysis. Ecol. Model. 173:219–39
    [Google Scholar]
  116. 116.  Pollino CA, Henderson C 2010. Bayesian Networks: A Guide for their Application in Natural Resources Management and Policy Canberra, Austr.: Landscape Logic
  117. 117.  Alcamo J, Henrichs T 2008. Towards guidelines for environmental scenario analysis. Environmental Futures: The Practice of Environmental Scenario Analysis J Alcamo 13–35 Amsterdam: Elsevier
    [Google Scholar]
  118. 118.  Carpenter SR, Pingali PL, Bennett EM, Zurek MB 2005. Ecosystems and Human Well-Being: Scenarios. Millen. Ecosys. Assess. Vol. 2. Washington, DC: Island Press
    [Google Scholar]
  119. 119. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. 2005. Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Synthesis Washington, DC: Island Press
  120. 120.  Ringland G 1998. Scenario Planning: Managing for the Future Hoboken, NJ: Wiley
  121. 121.  Ramirez R, Mukherjee M, Vezzoli S, Kramer AM 2015. Scenarios as a scholarly methodology to produce “interesting research. .” Futures 71:70–87
    [Google Scholar]
  122. 122.  Schoemaker PJ 1995. Scenario planning: a tool for strategic thinking. Sloan Manag. Rev. 36:25–40
    [Google Scholar]
  123. 123.  Peterson GD, Cumming GS, Carpenter SR 2003. Scenario planning: a tool for conservation in an uncertain world. Conserv. Biol. 17:358–66
    [Google Scholar]
  124. 124.  Bourgeois R, Ekboir J, Sette C, Egal C, Wongtchowsky M, Baltissen G 2012. The State of Foresight in Food and Agriculture and the Roads Toward Improvement Rome: Glob. Forum Agric. Res. Innov.
  125. 125.  Pulver S, VanDeveer SD 2009. “Thinking about tomorrows”: scenarios, global environmental politics, and social science scholarship. Glob. Environ. Polit. 9:1–13
    [Google Scholar]
  126. 126.  Jordan A, Turnpenny J 2015. The Tools of Policy Formulation: Actors, Capacities, Venues and Effects. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publ.
  127. 127.  Chaudhury M, Vervoort J, Kristjanson P, Ericksen P, Ainslie A 2013. Participatory scenarios as a tool to link science and policy on food security under climate change in East Africa. Reg. Environ. Change 13:389–98
    [Google Scholar]
  128. 128. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 1990. Emissions Scenarios Prepared by the Response Strategies Working Group of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change: Report of the Expert Group on Emissions Scenarios. Washington: Island Press
    [Google Scholar]
  129. 129.  Rotty RM, Weinberg AM 1977. How long is coal's future?. Clim. Change 1:45–57
    [Google Scholar]
  130. 130. Shell International. 2001. Energy Needs, Choices and Possibilities: Scenarios to 2050 London: Glob. Bus. Environ., Shell Int.
  131. 131. Shell International. 2018. Shell Scenarios. Sky: Meeting the Goals of the Paris Agreement. London: Glob. Bus. Environ., Shell. Int.
  132. 132.  Bakkes JA, Potting J 2004. The GEO-3 scenarios 2002–2032: quantification and analysis of environmental impacts Rep. UNEP/DEWA/RS.03–4 Rep. RIVM 402001022, United Nations Environ. Progr., Nat. Inst. Public Health Environ. Netherlands:
  133. 133. United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). 2007. Global Environment Outlook 4: GEO-4. Environment for Development Nairobi: UNEP
    [Google Scholar]
  134. 134. United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). 2012. Global Environment Outlook: GEO-5. Environment for the Future We Want. Nairobi: UNEP
  135. 135.  Maggio A, Criekinge TV, Malingreau JP 2015. Global Food Security 2030: Assessing Trends with a View to Guiding Future EU Policies Luxembourg: Publ. Off. EU
  136. 136.  Mylona K, Maragkoudakis P-A, Bock A-K, Wollgast J, Lauro-Caldeira S, Ulberth F 2016. Delivering on EU Food Safety and Nutrition in 2050—Future Challenges and Policy Preparedness Luxembourg: Publ. Off. EU
  137. 137.  Rosenzweig C, Jones JW, Hatfield JL, Ruane AC, Boote KJ et al. 2013. The Agricultural Model Intercomparison and Improvement Project (AgMIP): protocols and pilot studies. Agric. For. Meteorol. 170:166–82
    [Google Scholar]
  138. 138.  Nelson GC, Shively GE 2014. Modeling climate change and agriculture: an introduction to the special issue. Agric. Econ. 45:1–2
    [Google Scholar]
  139. 139.  Rosenzweig C, Ruane A, Antle J, Elliott J, Ashfaq M et al. 2018. Coordinating AgMIP data and models across global and regional scales for 1.5°C and 2.0°C assessments. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. A. 376:20160455
    [Google Scholar]
  140. 140.  Vermeulen SJ, Challinor AJ, Thornton PK, Campbell BM, Eriyagama N et al. 2013. Addressing uncertainty in adaptation planning for agriculture. PNAS 110:8357–62
    [Google Scholar]
  141. 141.  Rosegrant MW, Koo J, Cenacchi N, Ringler C, Robertson RD et al. 2014. Food Security in a World of Natural Resource Scarcity: The Role of Agricultural Technologies Washington, DC: Int. Food Policy Res. Inst.
  142. 142.  Robinson S, Mason-D'Croz D, Sulser T, Islam S, Robertson R et al. 2015. The International Model for Policy Analysis of Agricultural Commodities and Trade (IMPACT): Model Description for Version 3 Washington, DC: Int. Food Policy Res. Inst.
  143. 143.  Islam S, Cenacchi N, Sulser TB, Gbegbelegbe S, Hareau G et al. 2016. Structural approaches to modeling the impact of climate change and adaptation technologies on crop yields and food security. Glob. Food Secur. 10:63–70
    [Google Scholar]
  144. 144.  Valin H, Havlík P, Mosnier A, Herrero M, Schmid E, Obersteiner M 2013. Agricultural productivity and greenhouse gas emissions: trade-offs or synergies between mitigation and food security?. Environ. Res. Lett. 8:035019
    [Google Scholar]
  145. 145.  van Soesbergen A, Arnell AP, Sassen M, Stuch B, Schaldach R et al. 2017. Exploring future agricultural development and biodiversity in Uganda, Rwanda and Burundi: a spatially explicit scenario-based assessment. Regional Environ. Change 17:1409–20
    [Google Scholar]
  146. 146.  Mason-D'Croz D, Vervoort J, Palazzo A, Islam S, Lord S et al. 2016. Multi-factor, multi-state, multi-model scenarios: exploring food and climate futures for Southeast Asia. Environ. Model. Softw. 83:255–70
    [Google Scholar]
  147. 147.  Schubert C, Vervoort J 2015. Future scenarios work informs climate and agriculture policies in seven countries. CGIAR Sept. 7. https://ccafs.cgiar.org/blog/future-scenarios-work-informs-climate-and-agriculture-policies-seven-countries#.WrzhmojwYVB
  148. 148.  Rockström J, Steffen W, Noone K, Persson Å, Chapin FS III et al. 2009. A safe operating space for humanity. Nature 461:472–75
    [Google Scholar]
  149. 149.  Steffen W, Richardson K, Rockström J, Cornell SE, Fetzer I et al. 2015. Planetary boundaries: guiding human development on a changing planet. Science 347:1259855
    [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-environ-102017-030109
Loading
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-environ-102017-030109
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Review Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error