Reimagining Climate Futures Using Critical Futures Studies to Explore Scenarios for Ljungby Municipality in Sweden
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Stockholm Resilience Centre Sustainability Science for Biosphere Stewardship Master’s Thesis, 60 ECTS Social-ecological Resilience for Sustainable Development Master’s programme 2019/2021, 120 ECTS Reimagining climate futures Using critical futures studies to explore scenarios for Ljungby municipality in Sweden Linna Fredström Table of Contents Table of Contents 1 Figures, tables and boxes 3 Abstract 4 1. Intro 5 1.1 Setting the scene 5 1.2 Research questions and contribution of study 7 1.3 Structure 7 2. Theory 8 2.1 Transformations toward sustainability – a need for critical perspectives 8 2.2 Futures methods in transformation research 9 2.3 Critical social theory and poststructuralism 10 2.4 Poststructuralism as a futures method - causal layered analysis 11 3. Case study - Ljungby municipality 14 4. Method 15 4.1 Research approach 15 4.2 Data collection: infusing collaborative workshop approach with criticality 15 4.3 Data analysis: Causal layered analysis – challenging barriers to transformation 17 4.3.1 Coding workshop notes into themes 18 4.3.2 Uncovering layer of understanding in each theme 18 4.3.3 Challenging the worldview 18 4.3.4 Re-envisioning the myth – reimagining the issue 18 4.4 Dissemination of results – connecting back to the local context through stories 19 4.5 Limitations of method 20 5. Results 22 5.1 Overview of causal layered analysis 23 5.2 Scenarios – introducing the final stories 24 5.2.1 Scenario A – A new story 25 5.2.2 Scenario B – The only way 26 5.2.3 Scenario C – Something unimaginable 27 5.3. Responses and reflections from participants 28 6. Discussion 29 1 6.1 What climate change narratives do Ljungby residents use when creating future scenarios for their hometown? 29 6.1.1 Myths as barriers to imagination 29 6.1.2 Imagination - framing, contesting and bringing the future into being 30 6.2 What happens when dominant narratives are reimagined? 32 6.3 How can methods from critical futures studies enable more transformative scenario processes? 34 7. Conclusion 36 8. Bibliography 37 Appendix 1– Workshop design 47 Participant selection 47 Workshop overview 47 Workshop design – step by step 48 Before workshops – preparing the participants 48 Workshop schedule 48 After workshops - reflecting on the workshop 50 After reading the final scenarios - reflecting on the overall process 50 Appendix 2 – Survey questions after workshop 51 Appendix 3 – Survey questions after reading the scenarios 54 Scenario 1 – A new story 54 Scenario 2 – The only way 54 Scenario 3 – Something unthinkable 55 Appendix 4 – Causal layered analysis results 56 Homo economicus 56 Deep ecology 59 Political subjects and objects 61 Children are the future 63 Individualism and a tragedy of the commons 65 Urban rural divide 67 Western-centric sustainability 69 Digitalisation and social relations 71 Appendix 5 Ethical review – final review 73 2 Figures, tables and boxes Figure 1 – Causal layered analysis, adapted from Inayatullah 2009 .................................................... 12 Figure 2 - Map of Sweden, Ljungby municipality marked. .................................................................. 14 Figure 3 - Overview of research design ................................................................................................ 15 Figure 4 - The Manoa method shows the non-linear, unexpected ways the future evolves. ................. 16 Figure 5 - CLA frames the future as vertical and layered. .................................................................... 16 Figure 6 - Overview of workshop process ............................................................................................ 16 Figure 7 - Causal layered analysis, step by step instructions (adapted from De Simone, 2015) ........... 17 Figure 8 – Scenario A, nature and storytelling enable sharing .............................................................. 25 Figure 9 – Scenario B explores a technocentric “sustainability” .......................................................... 26 Figure 10 - Scenario C shows a “worst case scenario”. ........................................................................ 27 Figure 11 - The two different orders the workshop activities were done in .......................................... 49 Table 1 - Information about participants in each workshop .................................................................. 15 Table 2 - Example of CLA: questions to guide the analysis (adapted from De Simone) and examples of answers from my own analysis. ........................................................................................................ 19 Table 3 - Themes identified in workshops analysed using CLA ........................................................... 23 Table 4 - CLA results that informed scenario A .................................................................................. 25 Table 5 - CLA results that informed scenario B .................................................................................... 26 Table 6 - CLA results that informed scenario C .................................................................................... 27 Table 7 - Descriptions of documents sent to participants in preparation for the workshop .................. 48 Table 8 - CLA layers "Homo economicus" ........................................................................................... 58 Table 9 - CLA layers "Deep ecology" ................................................................................................... 60 Table 10 - CLA layers "Political subjects and objects” ........................................................................ 62 Table 11 - CLA layers "Children are the future" ................................................................................... 64 Table 12 - CLA layers "Tragedy of the commons" ............................................................................... 66 Table 13 - CLA layers "Urban rural divide" ......................................................................................... 68 Table 14 - CLA layers "Western-centric sustainability" ....................................................................... 70 Table 15 - CLA layers for “Digitalisation and social relations” ........................................................... 72 Box 1. Futures methods used in workshop………………………………………………………………………………………17 Box 2. Excerpt from scenario A………………………………………………………………………………………………………25 Box 3. Excerpt from scenario B………………………………………………………………………………………………………26 Box 4. Excerpt from scenario C………………………………………………………………………………………………………27 3 Abstract A growing body of research is calling for radical transformation of society to avoid catastrophic levels of climate change and create a more sustainable and just future. To make this possible, climate researcher will need new approaches and methods that help envision and enable transformations. In this thesis I explore how transformative scenario studies can incorporate critical social theory to enable more reflexive and actionable results. I develop climate change scenarios for a Swedish municipality and adopt a novel combination of the Manoa method and causal layered analysis. This methodological contribution, combining the creativity of the Manoa method and critical perspective of causal layered analysis, is coupled with a transdisciplinary approach. Through collaboration with local actors, including political, private, and civil society representatives, the study maximizes the relevance of the results to the local community. Building on the area’s cultural heritage of oral storytelling, the final scenarios are developed in collaboration with local storytellers and presented back to the community as a set of short stories. The study makes two noteworthy contributions. First, by allowing local context and culture to guide the creation and dissemination of results the study shows the power of a transdisciplinary approach. Second, by applying a critical theory lens, the study unveils how underlying assumptions limit our capacity to imagine different futures and that challenging these assumptions can increase the transformative potential of scenario research. 4 1. Intro 1.1 Setting the scene “The most critical question for climate research is no longer about the problem, but about how to facilitate the transformative changes necessary to avoid catastrophic climate-induced change” (Fazey, et al. 2018:55) In 2015 world leaders agreed to lower greenhouse gas emissions to keep climate change well below 2 degrees. As incremental climate change mitigation policies so far have failed to deliver the results needed to reach the Paris agreement (UNFCCC 2021) a growing number of researchers are calling for radical transformation of society to limit further emissions and adapt to new conditions on Earth (Adger et al. 2009; Fazey, et al. 2018; Westley et al. 2011; Kates, Travis, and Wilbanks 2012; Patterson et al. 2017). To make this transformation possible, climate research must become more actionable and researchers must shoulder a new role: intervening in, rather than merely observing the world (Cornell et al. 2013; Scoones et al. 2020; Fazey et al. 2020). This new role requires new skills and it has been suggested that climate researchers must learn from social sciences, particularly critical social theory, to better account for the pitfalls and possibilities of scientific societal intervention (Delanty 2020; West et al. 2020; Shove 2010; Stirling 2015; Lövbrand et al. 2015). In this thesis I delve into the changing