The use of scenarios in climate policy planning: an assessment of actors’ experiences and lessons learned in Finland

Abstract

ABSTRACT Scenarios are often used to depict the possible outcomes of alternative future developments as part of the evaluation of climate and energy policy measures. In Finland, scenarios have become a standard practice in climate-related policy planning. However, scenario planning often results in a single cohesive narrative, which lacks transparency in why certain developments and solutions are included and others left out. This article focuses on how scenarios created during the planning of Finland’s Medium-term Plan for Climate Change Policy (KAISU) were built, and how the actors involved assessed the characteristics and quality of these scenarios. We interviewed a total of 18 participants from research, administration, and policymaking domains involved in the creation of the plan and the scenarios it contains. Semi-structured interviews provided an insight into the creation and use of scenarios as part of policy formulation, as well as points of further improvement for the process. The KAISU plan was constructed as a cross-sectoral collaborative effort between policymakers, public officials, and researchers. Despite the variety of actors involved in the process, the resulting scenarios were perceived as well-executed by the participants. However, national scenario foresight could be improved in three dimensions: 1) the process where actors collaborate to build scenarios, 2) the scenario methodology, where solutions and developments are included or excluded, and 3) use of the scenarios after their construction. Key policy insights The scenario approach used in Finland corresponds with needs at the political level. However, the approach could be improved without compromising this goal. The underlying scenario assumptions and the compatibility of the models used lack transparency. Many actors involved in the scenario process have a limited understanding of the models used and measures proposed outside their respective sector. Construction of more than one policy scenario would allow a larger variety of possible future trajectories to be evaluated in national policymaking. In this case, the aim and role of the scenario process would have to be adjusted and clarified accordingly. Communication regarding the role and applicability of foresight methods should be improved for citizens and politicians alike.