Traditional PlanningTraditional Planning

It’s largely deterministicIt’s largely deterministic Process relies on a single most likely Process relies on a single most likely

alternative future forecastalternative future forecast• Desire for single right answerDesire for single right answer• Often anchored in present Often anchored in present • Adversarial--legitimate differences in views of Adversarial--legitimate differences in views of

uncertain futureuncertain future Forecasts are critical to planning and Forecasts are critical to planning and

analysisanalysis• Both mostly done in deterministic contextBoth mostly done in deterministic context

Maybe with some sensitivity analysisMaybe with some sensitivity analysis

Forecasting & Comparing CriteriaForecasting & Comparing Criteria

Plan

Effe

cts

Baseline Risk

Existing Risk

Future Risk if No Action

Future Risk with Management Option A

Before & AfterComparison

With & WithoutOption Comparison

Target Gap Analysis

Time

In fact, there aremany without conditions that are possible

Most Likely Future ConditionMost Likely Future Condition

We labor in uncertaintyWe labor in uncertainty A single forecast of the future will be A single forecast of the future will be

wrongwrong Thus, planning is often based on Thus, planning is often based on

what could be not what will bewhat could be not what will be What could be is wide open to What could be is wide open to

debatedebate The process is far more adversarial The process is far more adversarial

than it needs to bethan it needs to be

Scenario PlanningScenario Planning

Began with US militaryBegan with US military Developed in second half of 20Developed in second half of 20thth

century (Europe) century (Europe) Result of failure of traditional Result of failure of traditional

planningplanning• Deterministic view of futureDeterministic view of future• Forecasts were wrongForecasts were wrong

When to Use Scenario When to Use Scenario PlanningPlanning

Scenario Planning Deterministic Planning

Deterministic Planning Standard DecisionMaking

Consequence

Uncertainty Much

Grave

Little

Minor

Scenario Planning StepsScenario Planning Steps

Identify 2 key drivers of future Identify 2 key drivers of future uncertaintyuncertainty

Use them to identify 4 distinct Use them to identify 4 distinct alternative without condition alternative without condition forecastsforecasts

Evaluate plans against each of the Evaluate plans against each of the without project conditionswithout project conditions

Consider an example developed for Consider an example developed for shoreline erosion in Barrow, Alaskashoreline erosion in Barrow, Alaska

Erosion rate& Beach recovery

Consequence forQuality of life

Severe

Severe

Minor

Minor

Goodbye Barrow

Happy Days

Troubled Times

SurvivingMCDA3

MCDA2

MCDA4

MCDA1

Narratives, written for each scenario, will develop the plan effects in relation to each possible future.

NarrativesNarratives

True to problem statement in a story-True to problem statement in a story-like waylike way

Each addresses:Each addresses:• erosion problems and storm regime erosion problems and storm regime • fate of infrastructure fate of infrastructure • effect on social fabriceffect on social fabric

These are multiple without conditionsThese are multiple without conditions

Goodbye BarrowGoodbye Barrow Tells the story of severe erosion rates and beach Tells the story of severe erosion rates and beach

recovery recovery • increasing evidence of global warmingincreasing evidence of global warming• retreating ice coverretreating ice cover• more frequent and more severe stormsmore frequent and more severe storms• retreat of shoreline claims road against ineffective local retreat of shoreline claims road against ineffective local

measuresmeasures• occasional ivu even more hazardous to the communityoccasional ivu even more hazardous to the community• utility interruptions begin to occurutility interruptions begin to occur• people with means move people with means move • quality of life suffersquality of life suffers• …………..and so on...and so on.

Evaluate plansEvaluate plans

For each scenario evaluate planning For each scenario evaluate planning objectives and criteriaobjectives and criteria• Erosion related impactsErosion related impacts• Infrastructure risk Infrastructure risk • Social consequences Social consequences • Benefits and costsBenefits and costs• Environmental impactsEnvironmental impacts

Two Basic Ways to ProceedTwo Basic Ways to Proceed

Evaluate each plan against each of the Evaluate each plan against each of the four scenarios (using traditional four scenarios (using traditional evaluation, MCDA, risk ranking) evaluation, MCDA, risk ranking)

Results of this evaluation compared Results of this evaluation compared across plans for the purpose of selecting a across plans for the purpose of selecting a planplan

Choose plan that does best (robustness) Choose plan that does best (robustness) regardless of the future realized?regardless of the future realized?

Two Basic Ways to ProceedTwo Basic Ways to Proceed

Choose one of the four scenarios as most Choose one of the four scenarios as most likely likely

Proceed as usual through the selection Proceed as usual through the selection processprocess

Evaluate the recommended plan against Evaluate the recommended plan against the other three remaining scenariosthe other three remaining scenarios

Unacceptable results in any of these mean Unacceptable results in any of these mean plan must be reformulated to mitigate plan must be reformulated to mitigate these effects or another plan is selectedthese effects or another plan is selected