Strangers in the Night? Analysing the Develper - User Nexus in Scenari Practice thrugh Cncepts f Plausibility Ricarda Scheele, M.Sc. Stuttgart Research Center fr Interdisciplinary Risk and Innvatin Studies () University f Stuttgart What happens when energy scenaris leave their happy sphere f generatin? Scenari Travel! What happens when they travel? Nt nly thrugh time and space but thrugh actr wrlds? 1
Scenaris as knwledge wrk in sciety In business and plicy cntexts energy scenaris emerged as prmising tls t explre the future, such as the emergence f technlgies and their scietal implicatins. Tw Observatins: 1. Increase in large-scale scenari wrk (IPCC, Greenpeace Energy [R]evlutin, guiding scenaris [Leitstudien]) prduced and disseminated in frms f reprts, narratives etc. 2. Scenaris leave their generative sphere; it pens up scenaris t sciety, t a wide audience that was nt invlved/ envisined/ intended; userrecipients instead f user-prducers (Pulver & VanDeveer 2009) My argument: Scenaris are (knwledge) bjects in sciety, taking n a mre prminent rle in sciety, shaping sciety and its view n the future while being shaped by it. Shift in analysis twards scenaris as being bjects in sciety itself. DEVELOPMENT Scenari bjectives Kinds f knwledge Methds LIFE PATH OF ENERGY SCENARIOS (Grunwald, 2011) EVALUATION Evaluatin criteria Perceptins, usefulness EFFECT/ USAGE Relevance/ Scpe Scenaris in cntext Specific & cmplex prcesses f explring the future, based n methd specificatin Hw are future statements defined & established? Hw t judge/ assess scenaris? Users are cnfrnted with a large numbers f diverse scenaris 2
LIFE PATH OF ENERGY SCENARIOS DEVELOPMENT EVALUATION EFFECT/ USAGE Meaning is c-prduced by develpers & users Plausibility = Reframing & Re-perceptin Interactin, actr-specific and cmmn references: Scenaris as BOUNDARY OBJECTS mediating interactin between epistemic cmmunities Relating thrugh scenaris as bjects (S O S) Meaning is established n bth sides independently: Develpers plausibility = Users plausibility? Plausibility (frmally) established by methds What rles fr scenaris as bjects? EPISTEMIC OBJECTS (Knrr-Cetina 2001) Users have t make judgment Relating with scenaris as bjects (O S) New Perspectives n the Cncept f Plausibility In light f intrinsic uncertainty, a nn-technical cncept as alternative t precise estimates f prbabilities (Strand 2013) Sense-making, meaning-making, spectrum f plausibility implausibility [T]here is little in the literature n scenari planning that decribes what is meant by plausibility r hw plausibility is established in practice. (Selin & Pereira 2013) Analytical interest in scenaris as bjects allws fr new perspectives: Subject-bject relatinship: Plausibility is derived frm engaging with the bject and its characteristics ( nn-scial practice, Knrr-Cetina 2001) Materiality f bject: Scenari as bject is central t prcesses f learning and knwing, f meaning-prducing Infrms research that fllws the trajectries f plausibility 3
Semi-experimental study n plausibility Sample: n= 55, Master-degree students, University f Stuttgart Sample: Scial sciences vs. engineering students, all with fcus n energy 2 treatment grups: 2 scenari reprts in different rder (n=30/n=25) Material: 2 Scenari Reprts (à 2 individual scenaris) previusly develped using different scenari methds Intuitive Lgics (after van der Heijden, 2006) Crss-Impact Balance Analysis (after Weimer-Jehle, 2006) Differences in cntent scenaris Within-subject Prcedure: T0: Online questinnaire T1: Classrm sessin: Read reprts, plausibility judgments, related cncepts T2: Grup discussins, epistemic evaluatin, fllwing recurring judgments [Data evaluatin accrding t Mdels-f-Data Thery (Chinn & Brewer, 2003)] Different patterns in reasning bservable, e.g.: Type Pr scientific nature f scenaris Discussins f scenaris are dminated by scientific character, the scenari lks mre slid due t the matrix, there is n scientific thery behind it Ptentially strng influence n thers Engineering students particularly critical twards matrix-based methd (CIB) Type `The critical and undecided` Qualitative Data Discussins f scenaris are dminated by uncertainty; Hw can I even say smething abut this scenari?!, it is a t small picture f a ptential reality New furthering questins/ issues psed Scial science students are particularly undecided 4
Quantitative Data [Data evaluatin accrding t plausibility judgement in cnceptual change (Lmbardi et al. 2015)] Individual-related factrs: Backgrund knwledge: Less knwledge abut energy crrelated psitively with judgment in extremes Need fr cgnitive clsure: Individuals with mtivatin t engage in cntrversial tpics, shwed high plausibility judgements Beliefs: Scenaris were ranked higher when featuring persnal beliefs abut success factrs f the German Energiewende Expectatins: Psitive crrelatin between expectatin f success f Energiewende and the cntent f scenaris. Methd and expertise-related factrs: Plausibility judgments depended n trust in methd: Narratives (develped with IL) were less trusted, but generated mre questins in discussin Trustwrthiness f develpers, degree f cmplexity psitively crrelated with plausibility Cnclusins: What des this tell us? Current scenari literature and practice in energy tends t present users as passive recipients, as empty signifiers in the scenari life path Scenaris as epistemic bjects shifts attentin (see Knrr-Cetina): Changing and unflding ntlgy: `Lack f cmpleteness f being, bjects are cnstantly emerging, Empirical data suggests a multiplicity f surce-related and individual-related factrs play a rle New meanings/ cntexts are created by participants because scenaris were stripped ff their riginal develpment cntext Dispersed character: Partial bjects may unfld the ntlgy f the scenari as a whle Fr different peple, different partial bjects are cnducive in relating t the whle (narrative, matrix, netwrk diagram) Signifying meaning: The lack epistemic bjects shw, pint t avenues fr explratin and meaning-making Trust in surce: Scenaris embdy smething cntradicting: Alleged clarity and precisin thrugh mdels & ambiguity thrugh selectivity, arbitrariness f a few scenaris 5
Thank yu fr yur attentin! Ricarda Scheele, M.Sc. Stuttgart Research Center fr Interdisciplinary Risk and Innvatin Studies University f Stuttgart www.zirius.eu ricarda.scheele@zirius.uni-stuttgart.de Bibligraphy Chinn, C. A., Brewer, W. F. (2001) Mdels f Data: A Thery f Hw Peple Evaluate Data, Cgnitin and Instructin, 19(3):323-393. Grunwald, A. (2011) Der Lebensweg vn Energieszenarien Umrisse eines Frschungsprgramms. In: C. Dieckhff, et al. (ed.) Energieszenarien Knstruktin, Bewertung und Wirkung Anbieter und Nachfrager im Dialg. Karlsruhe: KIT Scientific Publishing. p. 11-24. Knrr-Cetina, K. (2001) Objectual Practice, In Schatzki, T. R. et al. (eds.) The Practice Turn in Cntemprary Thery, Lndn: Rutledge, p. 175-188. Lmbardi, Dug, E. Michael Nussbaum, and Gale M. Sinatra (2015) Plausibility Judgments in Cnceptual Change and Epistemic Cgnitin, Educatinal Psychlgist 51 (1):35-56. Pulver, S., VanDeever, S. (2009) Thinking abut Tmrrws : Scenaris, Glbal Envirnmental Plitics, and Scial Science Schlarship, Glbal Envirnmental Plitics 9 (2):1-14. Selin, C. & Pereira, A. (2013) Pursuing plausibility, Internat. J. Fresight and Innvatin Plicy, 9 (2/3/4): 93-109. Strand, R. (2013) Science, Utpia and the human cnditin, Internat. J. Fresight and Innvatin Plicy, 9 (2/3/4): 110-124. Van der Heijden, (2005) Scenaris: The Art f Strategic Cnversatin, 2 nd ed., Chichester: Jhn Wiley & Sns. Weimer-Jehle, W. (2006) Crss-impact balances: A system-theretical apprach t crss-impact analysis, Techn. Frecasting & Scial Change, 73: 334-361. 6