Bridging scenario planning and backcasting: A Q‐analysis of divergent stakeholder priorities for future landscapes
Abstract Many landscapes in sub‐Saharan Africa have undergone rapid changes, often with negative social and ecological impacts. Avoiding (or reversing) such negative impacts requires proactive landscape planning. Scenario planning, a participatory approach that generates narratives of plausible land...
| Main Authors: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Wiley
2023-04-01
|
| Series: | People and Nature |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10441 |
| _version_ | 1827974183203635200 |
|---|---|
| author | Tolera Senbeto Jiren David James Abson Jannik Schultner Maraja Riechers Joern Fischer |
| author_facet | Tolera Senbeto Jiren David James Abson Jannik Schultner Maraja Riechers Joern Fischer |
| author_sort | Tolera Senbeto Jiren |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract Many landscapes in sub‐Saharan Africa have undergone rapid changes, often with negative social and ecological impacts. Avoiding (or reversing) such negative impacts requires proactive landscape planning. Scenario planning, a participatory approach that generates narratives of plausible landscape change trajectories in the future, has been widely used to support landscape planning and decisions. However, not least because of challenges arising from group dynamics, few examples exist where backcasting—the collective envisioning of a desirable future landscape and the identification of pathways to reach that future—has been applied in landscape planning. In this study, building on past scenario planning work in southwestern Ethiopia, we begin to fill this empirical and methodological gap. Specifically, we used the Q‐methodology to elucidate stakeholders' divergent landscape aspirations in a case study in southwestern Ethiopia. Our results show that many stakeholders share a similar vision of building a future landscape that supports smallholder‐based development. However, details in the envisaged pathways differ between stakeholders. Three distinct pathways were prioritized by different stakeholders: (1) Agroecological production, (2) Coffee investment and (3) Intensive food crop production. Accounting for these divergent aspirations is important when taking further steps in landscape planning. We show how using the Q‐methodology as a subjective assessment of stakeholders' landscape priorities can facilitate the integration of backcasting within the normative process of landscape planning. Our approach thus helps navigate conflicting stakeholders' preferences and based on that, carefully plan collective action towards a shared landscape vision. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog. |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-09T19:50:20Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-e303f7e805c248a48c3d6269ab0a3498 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2575-8314 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-09T19:50:20Z |
| publishDate | 2023-04-01 |
| publisher | Wiley |
| record_format | Article |
| series | People and Nature |
| spelling | doaj.art-e303f7e805c248a48c3d6269ab0a34982023-04-03T08:43:59ZengWileyPeople and Nature2575-83142023-04-015257259010.1002/pan3.10441Bridging scenario planning and backcasting: A Q‐analysis of divergent stakeholder priorities for future landscapesTolera Senbeto Jiren0David James Abson1Jannik Schultner2Maraja Riechers3Joern Fischer4Faculty of Sustainability Leuphana Universität Lüneburg Lüneburg GermanyFaculty of Sustainability Leuphana Universität Lüneburg Lüneburg GermanyEnvironmental Systems Analysis Group Wageningen University & Research Wageningen The NetherlandsFaculty of Sustainability Leuphana Universität Lüneburg Lüneburg GermanyFaculty of Sustainability Leuphana Universität Lüneburg Lüneburg GermanyAbstract Many landscapes in sub‐Saharan Africa have undergone rapid changes, often with negative social and ecological impacts. Avoiding (or reversing) such negative impacts requires proactive landscape planning. Scenario planning, a participatory approach that generates narratives of plausible landscape change trajectories in the future, has been widely used to support landscape planning and decisions. However, not least because of challenges arising from group dynamics, few examples exist where backcasting—the collective envisioning of a desirable future landscape and the identification of pathways to reach that future—has been applied in landscape planning. In this study, building on past scenario planning work in southwestern Ethiopia, we begin to fill this empirical and methodological gap. Specifically, we used the Q‐methodology to elucidate stakeholders' divergent landscape aspirations in a case study in southwestern Ethiopia. Our results show that many stakeholders share a similar vision of building a future landscape that supports smallholder‐based development. However, details in the envisaged pathways differ between stakeholders. Three distinct pathways were prioritized by different stakeholders: (1) Agroecological production, (2) Coffee investment and (3) Intensive food crop production. Accounting for these divergent aspirations is important when taking further steps in landscape planning. We show how using the Q‐methodology as a subjective assessment of stakeholders' landscape priorities can facilitate the integration of backcasting within the normative process of landscape planning. Our approach thus helps navigate conflicting stakeholders' preferences and based on that, carefully plan collective action towards a shared landscape vision. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10441backcastinglandscapeQ‐methodologyscenariostakeholdervisioning |
| spellingShingle | Tolera Senbeto Jiren David James Abson Jannik Schultner Maraja Riechers Joern Fischer Bridging scenario planning and backcasting: A Q‐analysis of divergent stakeholder priorities for future landscapes People and Nature backcasting landscape Q‐methodology scenario stakeholder visioning |
| title | Bridging scenario planning and backcasting: A Q‐analysis of divergent stakeholder priorities for future landscapes |
| title_full | Bridging scenario planning and backcasting: A Q‐analysis of divergent stakeholder priorities for future landscapes |
| title_fullStr | Bridging scenario planning and backcasting: A Q‐analysis of divergent stakeholder priorities for future landscapes |
| title_full_unstemmed | Bridging scenario planning and backcasting: A Q‐analysis of divergent stakeholder priorities for future landscapes |
| title_short | Bridging scenario planning and backcasting: A Q‐analysis of divergent stakeholder priorities for future landscapes |
| title_sort | bridging scenario planning and backcasting a q analysis of divergent stakeholder priorities for future landscapes |
| topic | backcasting landscape Q‐methodology scenario stakeholder visioning |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10441 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT tolerasenbetojiren bridgingscenarioplanningandbackcastingaqanalysisofdivergentstakeholderprioritiesforfuturelandscapes AT davidjamesabson bridgingscenarioplanningandbackcastingaqanalysisofdivergentstakeholderprioritiesforfuturelandscapes AT jannikschultner bridgingscenarioplanningandbackcastingaqanalysisofdivergentstakeholderprioritiesforfuturelandscapes AT marajariechers bridgingscenarioplanningandbackcastingaqanalysisofdivergentstakeholderprioritiesforfuturelandscapes AT joernfischer bridgingscenarioplanningandbackcastingaqanalysisofdivergentstakeholderprioritiesforfuturelandscapes |