A group of Dutch teachers, as part of their Master’s programme, developed a game that allows teachers to break free from their day-to-day affairs and reflect on futures by designing scenarios about the future of their school. In this game-based approach the journey of scenario exploration is composed of seven steps: (1) choice of a theme and timeframe, (2) selection of key dilemmas on which two scenario axes will be based, (3) understanding the content and context of a “matrix” provided for the game, (4) setting up scenario groups, (5) developing four scenarios, (6) sharing scenarios, and (7) reflection on the scenarios.
LINK
Many policy documents addressing the future of teacher education do not take into account the fundamental unpredictability of the future, nor the opposing forces that will try to influence that future. Through the analysis of 48 scenario documents on the future of education or teacher education, we identified a set of unpredictable key factors that have to be taken into account when addressing the future of teacher education. We also identified four main futures that may lie ahead for teacher education. We analyzed these four scenarios using the concepts of activity systems, boundary objects, and boundary crossing. This revealed that the extent to which activity systems are open to boundary crossing and are willing to remove institutional boundaries, will largely define the future that lies ahead for teacher education. Future scenarios in themselves can play a role as boundary objects that facilitate the dialogue and boundary crossing between these activity systems
By use of a literature review and an environmental scan four plausible future scenarios will be created, based on the research question: How could the future of backpack tourism look like in 2030, and how could tourism businesses anticipate on the changing demand. The scenarios, which allow one to ‘think out of the box’, will eventually be translated into recommendations towards the tourism sector and therefore can create a future proof company strategy.
DISTENDER will provide integrated strategies by building a methodological framework that guide the integration of climate change(CC) adaptation and mitigation strategies through participatory approaches in ways that respond to the impacts and risks of climatechange (CC), supported by quantitative and qualitative analysis that facilitates the understanding of interactions, synergies and tradeoffs.Holistic approaches to mitigation and adaptation must be tailored to the context-specific situation and this requires a flexibleand participatory planning process to ensure legitimate and salient action, carried out by all important stakeholders. DISTENDER willdevelop a set of multi-driver qualitative and quantitative socio-economic-climate scenarios through a facilitated participatory processthat integrates bottom-up knowledge and locally-relevant drivers with top-down information from the global European SharedSocioeconomic Pathways (SSPs) and downscaled Representative Concentration Pathways (RCPs) from IPCC. A cross-sectorial andmulti-scale impact assessment modelling toolkit will be developed to analyse the complex interactions over multiple sectors,including an economic evaluation framework. The economic impact of the different efforts will be analyse, including damage claimsettlement and how do sectoral activity patterns change under various scenarios considering indirect and cascading effects. It is aninnovative project combining three key concepts: cross-scale, integration/harmonization and robustness checking. DISTENDER willfollow a pragmatic approach applying methodologies and toolkits across a range of European case studies (six core case studies andfive followers) that reflect a cross-section of the challenges posed by CC adaptation and mitigation. The knowledge generated byDISTENDER will be offered by a Decision Support System (DSS) which will include guidelines, manuals, easy-to-use tools andexperiences from the application of the cases studies.
Client: Blue Plan regional activity centre (UNEP/MAP), subcontracted through TEC Conseille, Marseille As part of a regional workshop organized by the Blue Plan in July 2008, one of the conclusions of the Group "Tourism and Climate Change” was the need for saving energy in tourism transportation and particularly of air transport, as air transport is responsible for the largest share of greenhouse gas emissions caused by tourism. In the period 1998-2005, the share of international arrivals by air in the Mediterranean area rose from 23% to 40%, respectively, or in numbers, from 47 to 122 million tourists. Some countries, particularly islands, almost entirely depend on air transport for their international tourism. For example in 2005 air transport is used by 87%, 78%, 73%, 64% and 51% of international tourists arriving in, respectively, Israel, Egypt, Spain, Tunisia and Morocco. According to Plan Bleu forecasts on international arrivals, assuming that the share of air transport remains the same, the number of tourists travelling by plane will reach over 158 million by 2025. Given the role of aviation in the emissions of greenhouse gases (GHG), such a development is clearly not sustainable in the light of the necessary reduction of emissions to avoid dangerous climate change. The overall aim of the study is to inform policy makers and entrepreneurs in both destination and in origin countries, on possible options to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases from air travel, while at the same time not impairing the economic development of tourism. To do this, CSTT has developed a tourism scenario model for all countries with Mediterranean coasts describing inbound and outbound international tourism and domestic tourism by all available transport modes and giving both contributions to GDP and total GHG emissions. This model responses to global mitigation policies (increasing the cost of carbon emissions) as well as national policies (taxes, subsidies and changes in transport quality per transport mode). Using the model both global and national policies can be assessed as well as the risks of global mitigation policies for specific countries.
