FN Archimer Export Format PT J TI Exploring the usefulness of scenario archetypes in science-policy processes: experience across IPBES assessments BT AF Sitas, Nadia Harmáčková, Zuzana V. Anticamara, Jonathan A. Arneth, Almut Badola, Ruchi Biggs, Reinette Blanchard, Ryan Brotons, Lluis Cantele, Matthew Coetzer, Kaera DasGupta, Rajarshi den Belder, Eefje Ghosh, Sonali Guisan, Antoine Gundimeda, Haripriya Hamann, Meike Harrison, Paula A. Hashimoto, Shizuka Hauck, Jennifer Klatt, Brian J. Kok, Kasper Krug, Rainer M. Niamir, Aidin O'Farrell, Patrick J. Okayasu, Sana Palomo, Ignacio Pereira, Laura M. Riordan, Philip Santos-Martín, Fernando Selomane, Odirilwe Shin, Yunne-Jai Valle, Mireia AS 1:1,2,3;2:4,5;3:6;4:7;5:8;6:1,4;7:1,3,9;8:10,11,12;9:13,14;10:15;11:16;12:17;13:18;14:19,20;15:21;16:22;17:23;18:24;19:25,26;20:27;21:28;22:29;23:30;24:3,31;25:32;26:33,34;27:1,35;28:36,37;29:34,38;30:1,4;31:39,40;32:33,41; FF 1:;2:;3:;4:;5:;6:;7:;8:;9:;10:;11:;12:;13:;14:;15:;16:;17:;18:;19:;20:;21:;22:;23:;24:;25:;26:;27:;28:;29:;30:;31:;32:; C1 Centre for Complex Systems in Transition, Stellenbosch University, South Africa Department of Conservation Ecology, Stellenbosch University, South Africa Council for Scientific and Industrial Research, South Africa Stockholm Resilience Centre, Stockholm University, Sweden Bolin Centre for Climate Research, Stockholm University, Sweden UP Diliman Invertebrate Museum - Institute of Biology, National Science Complex, University of the Philippines-Diliman, Quezon City, Philippines KIT, Department of Atmospheric Environmental Research, Garmisch-Partenkirchen, Germany Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun, India Centre for Invasion Biology, Stellenbosch University, South Africa CREAF, Barcelona, Spain InForest Jru (CTFC-CREAF), Solsona, Spain CSIC, Cerdanyola del Vallés, Spain International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Laxenburg, Austria School of BioSciences, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia Global Change Institute, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa Institute for Global Environmental Strategies, Hayama, Kanagawa, Japan Agrosystems, Wageningen University & Research, Wageningen, the Netherlands Ministry of Environment, Forests & Climate Change, India Department of Ecology and Evolution, University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland Institute of Earth Surface Dynamics, University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland Department of Humanities and Social Sciences, Indian Institute of Technology Bombay, Powai, Mumbai, India Humphrey School of Public Affairs, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA Centre for Ecology & Hydrology, Lancaster Environment Centre, Bailrigg, Lancaster, UK Department of Ecosystem Studies, The University of Tokyo, Japan CoKnow Consulting, Jesewitz, Germany Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research - UFZ, Leipzig, Germany Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan, USA Wageningen University & Research, Wageningen, the Netherlands University of Zurich, Department of Evolutionary Biology and Environmental Studies, Zurich, Switzerland Senckenberg Biodiversity and Climate Research Institute, Germany Percy FitzPatrick Institute of African Ornithology, University of Cape Town, Rondebosch, South Africa PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency, The Netherlands Basque Centre for Climate Change (BC3), Leioa, Spain Social-Ecological Systems Laboratory, Department of Ecology, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Spain Centre for Food Policy, City University of London, UK Marwell Wildlife, UK University of Southampton, UK Departamento ESCET, Universidad Rey Juan Carlos de Madrid, Spain MARBEC, Institut de Recherche pour le Développement (IRD), IFREMER, CNRS, Univ Montpellier, France University of Cape Town, Department of Biological Sciences, Marine Research Institute (Ma-Re), South Africa National Center for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis, Santa Barbara, California, USA C2 UNIV STELLENBOSCH, SOUTH AFRICA UNIV STELLENBOSCH, SOUTH AFRICA CSIR (SOUTH AFRICA), SOUTH AFRICA UNIV STOCKHOLM, SWEDEN UNIV STOCKHOLM, SWEDEN UNIV PHILIPPINES, PHILIPPINES KIT, GERMANY WILDLIFE INST INDIA, INDIA UNIV STELLENBOSCH, SOUTH AFRICA CREAF, SPAIN INFOREST JRU (CTFC-CREAF), SPAIN CSIC, SPAIN IIASA, AUSTRIA UNIV MELBOURNE, AUSTRALIA UNIV WITWATERSRAND, SOUTH AFRICA IGES, JAPAN UNIV WAGENINGEN, NETHERLANDS MOEFCC, INDIA UNIV LAUSANNE, SWITZERLAND UNIV LAUSANNE, SWITZERLAND IIT BOMBAY, INDIA UNIV MINNESOTA, USA CTR ECOL & HYDROL, UK UNIV TOKYO, JAPAN COKNOW CONSULTING, GERMANY UFZ, GERMANY UNIV MICHIGAN STATE, USA UNIV WAGENINGEN, NETHERLANDS UNIV ZURICH, SWITZERLAND SENCKENBERG BIK-F, GERMANY UNIV CAPE TOWN, SOUTH AFRICA PBL NETHERLANDS ENVIRONM ASSESSMENT AGCY, NETHERLANDS BASQUE CENTRE FOR CLIMATE CHANGE (BC3), SPAIN UNIV AUTONOMA MADRID, SPAIN UNIV LONDON, UK MARWELL WILDLIFE, UK UNIV SOUTHAMPTON, UK UNIV MADRID, SPAIN IRD, FRANCE UNIV CAPE TOWN, SOUTH AFRICA NCEAS, USA UM MARBEC IN WOS Cotutelle UMR DOAJ copubli-europe copubli-int-hors-europe copubli-sud IF 3.89 TC 26 UR https://archimer.ifremer.fr/doc/00516/62748/67140.pdf LA English DT Article DE ;assessment;biodiversity;decision making;ecosystem services;futures;nature;regional;scenarios AB Scenario analyses have been used in multiple science-policy assessments to better understand complex plausible futures. Scenario archetype approaches are based on the fact that many future scenarios have similar underlying storylines, assumptions, and trends in drivers of change, which allows for grouping of scenarios into typologies, or archetypes, facilitating comparisons between a large range of studies. The use of scenario archetypes in environmental assessments foregrounds important policy questions and can be used to codesign interventions tackling future sustainability issues. Recently, scenario archetypes were used in four regional assessments and one ongoing global assessment within the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform for Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES). The aim of these assessments was to provide decision makers with policy-relevant knowledge about the state of biodiversity, ecosystems, and the contributions they provide to people. This paper reflects on the usefulness of the scenario archetype approach within science-policy processes, drawing on the experience from the IPBES assessments. Using a thematic analysis of (a) survey data collected from experts involved in the archetype analyses across IPBES assessments, (b) notes from IPBES workshops, and (c) regional assessment chapter texts, we synthesize the benefits, challenges, and frontiers of applying the scenario archetype approach in a science-policy process. Scenario archetypes were perceived to allow syntheses of large amounts of information for scientific, practice-, and policy-related purposes, streamline key messages from multiple scenario studies, and facilitate communication of them to end users. In terms of challenges, they were perceived as subjective in their interpretation, oversimplifying information, having a limited applicability across scales, and concealing contextual information and novel narratives. Finally, our results highlight what methodologies, applications, and frontiers in archetype-based research should be explored in the future. These advances can assist the design of future large-scale sustainability-related assessment processes, aiming to better support decisions and interventions for equitable and sustainable futures. PY 2019 PD SEP SO Ecology And Society SN 1708-3087 PU Resilience Alliance, Inc. VL 24 IS 3 UT 000490942000017 DI 10.5751/ES-11039-240335 ID 62748 ER EF