1

Bridging long-term scenario and strategy Bridging long-term scenario and strategy analysis: current practice and future analysis: current practice and future directions in environmental policy directions in environmental policy

The 3rd International Seville Conference on Future-Oriented Technology Analysis (FTA):

Impacts and implications for policy and decision making

Axel VolkeryScenarios and Forward Studies Group

2

The European Environment AgencyThe European Environment Agency

• A specialised European Agency based in Copenhagen

• 32 member countries

• Mission is to provide ”timely, targeted, relevant and reliable information” on the ”state and prospects of Europe’s environment”

www.eea.europa.euwww.eea.europa.eu/themes/scenarios

3

BLOSSOM projectBLOSSOM project

BLOSSOM = Bridging LOng-term Scenario and Strategy analysis – Organisation and Methods

• Take stock of existing practice • Analyse institutional approaches• Review methodological approaches• Foster information exchange and learning

First phase run in 2008 as a scoping activity together with RAND Europe

4

Direct and indirect forms of scenario Direct and indirect forms of scenario based decision-support…based decision-support…

Indirect Direct

Stimulating wider debate about possible futures

Getting stakeholder buy-in or engagement

Triggering cultural change within the organisation

Clarifying an issue’s importance and framing a decision-making agenda

Generating options for future action

Appraising robustness of options for future action

5

...across the ”cycle of policy-making”...across the ”cycle of policy-making”

More indirect forms

More direct forms

6

Estimating the outcomes/impacts of Estimating the outcomes/impacts of scenarios in public policy makingscenarios in public policy making

Source: draft AoA, UNEP/UNESCO, adapted from Eckley 2001

Influences from scenarios/foresight exercises may take considerable time to become evident (see Mitchell et al. 2006 for a similar assessment of the influence of Global Environmental Assessments)

7

Literature reviewLiterature review

• 54 suitable pieces were identified

• The evaluative literature remains nascent - major gaps identified:

• Factors that influence the effectiveness and efficiency of uptake of scenarios / other foresight tools

• Failure of related exercises• SWOT for institutional arrangements • Case studies beyond the world of business

8

Workshop participants surveyWorkshop participants survey

How important are the following objectives when using scenarios or other futures methods?

0 1 2 3 4 5

Stimulating wider debate about possible futures

Clarifying an issue’s importance and framing adecision-making agenda

Generating options for future action

Appraising robustness of options for future action

Triggering cultural change within the organisation

Getting stakeholder engagement or buy-in

Not important at all Very important

Mean+/- Standard deviation

Not important at all Very important

Mean+/- Standard deviation

1 2 3 4 50

9

How successful is scenario thinking in achieving these objectives?

0 1 2 3 4 5

Stimulating wider debate about possible futures

Clarifying an issue’s importance and framing adecision-making agenda

Generating options for future action

Appraising robustness of options for future action

Triggering cultural change within the organisation

Getting stakeholder engagement or buy-in

Not successful at all Very successful

Mean+/- Standard deviation

1 2 3 4 50

Workshop participants surveyWorkshop participants survey

10

What are the key factors that contribute to achieve the objectives of scenarios and other futures methodologies?

Not important at all Very important

0 1 2 3 4 5

The selection of appropriate and attainable goalsfor the exercise

The selection of the right methodology for the setgoals

The rigor/robustness of the application of themethodology

The flexibility of the methodology to the specificcontext

The skills/experience of those carrying out thescenario exercise

The skills/experience of those using the scenariooutputs

The level of involvement of the user/audience withthe scenario exercise

The resources available for the project

The institutional context of the user/audience

Political factors (e.g. the organisation’s willingnessto take a long-term view)

Mean

+/- Standard deviation

Mean

+/- Standard deviation

Workshop participants surveyWorkshop participants survey

11

Bridging scenario and strategy analysisBridging scenario and strategy analysis

Source: adapted from van der Heijden (2004), Barre (2007)

One-off / ad-hoc(more product-oriented)

Ongoing / permanent(more process-oriented)

Thinking(broadening/opening up)

Making sense Anticipation

Acting(closing)

Optimal strategy Adaptive learning

12

BarriersBarriers

Particular challenges

• Heterogenous nature of objectives and interests faced by governmental agencies

• Weak institutionalisation, silo mentality, unclear benefits

• Different time horizons, but also different attention foci of policy-makers and analysts

• Contradictions between process and product functions

• Contradictions between deliberative and representative democracy

13

Key topicsKey topics

• User and stakeholder participation• Making knowledge useful• Linking strategic planning to the policy cycle /

timing• Skills and capacity• Accountability and incentives• Organisational choices

14

Clustering approachesClustering approaches

Ongoing Ad-hoc

Cross-sector

External UK-ForesightHorizon Scanning CentreFISTERA

Numerous long-term strategic analysis studies

Internal UK-ForesightHorizon Scanning CentreFinland Futures Centre

Centre d’analyse stratégique, France Swedish inter-ministerial foresight network

Sector-based

External UK Climate Impacts Programme Tyndall Centre, UK

Internal Departmental Strategy units (e.g. NL Dept of Agriculture)

UK Meteorological Office IPCCRMNO (NL)

Source: EEA forthcoming

15

Some options to considerSome options to consider

Virtual network or physical location?

Interdep. steering groups

or not?

Centralised or decentralised?

Government funded or

contribution based?

Temporary or permanent?

Formalised inputs or space for discussion?

In-built or outsourced expertise?

Expert-led or stakeholder-driven?

Issue-based network or think tank with

own agenda?

16

Outlook on EEA activitiesOutlook on EEA activities

• Technical report available soon• in 2009: review and compare practice in

greater depth across EEA member countries• More systemic comparison of advantages /

disadvantages of approaches• Build toolbox matrix• Better understanding how to evaluate impacts and

effectivness

• Networking - your cooperation is highly welcome...

17

Thank youThank you

Dr. Axel VolkeryEuropean Environment Agency

Kongens Nytorv 6DK – 1050 Copenhagen K

+45 3336 71747axel.volkery@eea.europa.eu