A participatory exploratory modelling approach for long-term planning in energy transitions

Energy Research and Social Science

Volumn 35, Issue , 2018, Pages 205-216

  Moallemi, Enayat A ^a   Malekpour, Shirin ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES   (Australia)

^b MONASH UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

Energy policy; Exploratory modelling; Policy analysis; Sustainability transitions; Uncertainty

Indexed keywords

EID: 85032359913     PISSN: 22146296     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.erss.2017.10.022     Document Type: Article

References (123)

1. Delina, L.L., Janetos, A., Cosmopolitan energy futures: navigating the pluralities and polarities in the energies of tomorrow. Energy Res. Soc. Sci., 35, 2018.
2. Wiseman, J., The great energy transition of the 21st century: the 2050 zero-carbon world oration. Energy Res. Soc. Sci., 35, 2018.
3. Lenferna, G.A., Can we equitably manage the end of the fossil fuel era?. Energy Res. Soc. Sci., 35, 2018.
4. Bagheri Moghaddam, N., Mousavi, S.M., Moallemi, E.A., Nasiri, M., Formulating directional industry strategies for renewable energies in developing countries: the case study of Iran's wind turbine industry. Renew. Energy 39:1 (2012), 299–306.
5. CCC, Building a Low-Carbon Economy – The UK's Contribution to Tackling Climate Change. 2008, Committee on Climate Change, London.
6. Foxon, T.J., Transition pathways for a UK low carbon electricity future. Energy Policy 52:0 (2013), 10–24.
7. Pye, S., Sabio, N., Strachan, N., An integrated systematic analysis of uncertainties in UK energy transition pathways. Energy Policy 87 (2015), 673–684.
8. Trutnevyte, E., Barton, J., O'Grady, Á., Ogunkunle, D., Pudjianto, D., Robertson, E., Linking a storyline with multiple models: a cross-scale study of the UK power system transition. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 89 (2014), 26–42.
9. Moallemi, E.A., Aye, L., Webb, J.M., de Haan, F.J., George, B.A., India's on-grid solar power development: historical transitions present status and future driving forces. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 69 (2017), 239–247.
10. MNRE, Jawaharlal Nehru National Solar Mission (JNNSM). 2010, Ministry of New and Renewable Energy, Government of India, India.
11. GoI, National Action Plan on Climate Change. 2008, Prime Minister's Council on Climate Change.
12. Jolly, S., Raven, R., Field configuring events shaping sustainability transitions? The case of solar PV in India. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 103 (2016), 324–333.
13. Sareen, S., Energy distribution trajectories in two Western Indian states: comparative politics and sectoral dynamics. Energy Res. Soc. Sci., 35, 2018.
14. Rittel, H.W., Webber, M.M., Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sci. 4:2 (1973), 155–169.
15. Taneja, P., Walker, W.E., Ligteringen, H., Van Schuylenburg, M., Van Der Plas, R., Implications of an uncertain future for port planning. Marit. Policy Manag. 37:3 (2010), 221–245.
16. Enserink, B., Kwakkel, J.H., Veenman, S., Coping with uncertainty in climate policy making: (mis)understanding scenario studies. Futures 53 (2013), 1–12.
17. Urich, C., Rauch, W., Modelling the urban water cycle as an integrated part of the city: a review. Water Sci. Technol. 70:11 (2014), 1857–1872.
18. Wilhite, D.A., Breaking the hydro-illogical cycle: changing the paradigm for drought management. Eur. Water 34 (2011), 5–18.
19. Lempert, R.J., Popper, S.W., Bankes, S.C., Shaping the Next One Hundred Years: New Methods for Quantitative, Long-Term Policy Analysis. 2003, Rand Corporation.
20. Kwakkel, J.H., Haasnoot, M., Walker, W.E., Comparing robust decision-making and dynamic adaptive policy pathways for model-based decision support under deep uncertainty. Environ. Model. Softw. 86 (2016), 168–183.
21. Moallemi, E.A., Policy Analysis of Energy Transition Pathways: A Dual Narrative-Modelling Approach Applied to India's Electricity Sector. 2016, School of Engineering, The University of Melbourne.
22. Malekpour, S., Adapting Strategic Infrastructure Planning: Process Interventions for Sustainable Development School of Social Sciences. 2016, Monash University, Australia.
23. Walker, W.E., Haasnoot, M., Kwakkel, J.H., Adapt or perish: a review of planning approaches for adaptation under deep uncertainty. Sustainability 5:3 (2013), 955–979.
24. Malekpour, S., de Haan, F.J., Brown, R.R., A methodology to enable exploratory thinking in strategic planning. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 105 (2016), 192–202.
25. Malekpour, S., Brown, R.R., de Haan, F.J., Wong, T.H.F., Preparing for disruptions: a diagnostic strategic planning intervention for sustainable development. Cities 63 (2017), 58–69.
26. Loulou, R., Remne, U., Kanudia, A., Lehtila, A., Goldstein, G., Documentation for the TIMES Model. 2005, International Energy Agency Energy Technology Systems Analysis Programme (IEA-ETSAP).
27. Loulou, R., Goldstein, G., Noble, K., Documentation for the MARKAL Family of Models. 2004, Energy Technology Systems Analysis Programme (ETSAP), International Energy Agency (IEA), Paris, France.
28. Messner, S., Strubegger, M., User's Guide for MESSAGE III. 1995, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA), Laxenburg, Austria.
29. Li, F.G.N., Trutnevyte, E., Strachan, N., A review of socio-technical energy transition (STET) models. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 100 (2015), 290–305.
30. Kwakkel, J.H., Pruyt, E., Exploratory modeling and analysis, an approach for model-based foresight under deep uncertainty. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 80:3 (2013), 419–431.
31. Hamarat, C., Kwakkel, J.H., Pruyt, E., Adaptive robust design under deep uncertainty. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change, 80, 2013, 408.
32. Hughes, N., Strachan, N., Methodological review of UK and international low carbon scenarios. Energy Policy 38:10 (2010), 6056–6065.
33. Pfenninger, S., Hawkes, A., Keirstead, J., Energy systems modeling for twenty-first century energy challenges. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 33 (2014), 74–86.
34. Li, F.G.N., Strachan, N., Modelling energy transitions for climate targets under landscape and actor inertia. Environ. Innov. Soc. Transit. 24 (2017), 106–129, 10.1016/j.eist.2016.08.002.
35. Holtz, G., Alkemade, F., de Haan, F., Köhler, J., Trutnevyte, E., Luthe, T., Halbe, J., Papachristos, G., Chappin, E., Kwakkel, J., Ruutu, S., Prospects of modelling societal transitions: position paper of an emerging community. Environ. Innov. Soc. Transit. 7 (2015), 41–58.
36. Halbe, J., Reusser, D.E., Holtz, G., Haasnoot, M., Stosius, A., Avenhaus, W., Kwakkel, J.H., Lessons for model use in transition research: a survey and comparison with other research areas. Environ. Innov. Soc. Transit. 15 (2015), 194–210.
37. Holtz, G., Modelling transitions: an appraisal of experiences and suggestions for research. Environ. Innov. Soc. Transit. 1:2 (2011), 167–186.
38. Bankes, S., Exploratory modeling for policy analysis. Oper. Res. 41:3 (1993), 435–449.
39. Loorbach, D., Transition management for sustainable development: a prescriptive, complexity-based governance framework. Gov.-Int. J. Policy Adm. Inst. 23:1 (2010), 161–183.
40. Dewar, J.A., Builder, C.H., Hix, W.M., Levin, M.H., Assumption-Based Planning; A Planning Tool for Very Uncertain Times. 1993, RAND, Santa Monica, USA.
41. Trutnevyte, E., Strachan, N., Dodds, P.E., Pudjianto, D., Strbac, G., Synergies and trade-offs between governance and costs in electricity system transition. Energy Policy 85:0 (2015), 170–181.
42. Li, F.G.N., Pye, S., Strachan, N., Regional winners and losers in future UK energy system transitions. Energy Strategy Rev. 13–14 (2016), 11–31.
43. Robertson, S., A longitudinal quantitative–qualitative systems approach to the study of transitions toward a low carbon society. J. Clean. Prod. 128 (2015), 221–223.
44. Geels, F.W., Berkhout, F., van Vuuren, D.P., Bridging analytical approaches for low-carbon transitions. Nature Clim. Change 6 (2016), 576–583, 10.1038/nclimate2980.
45. Turnheim, B., Berkhout, F., Geels, F., Hof, A., McMeekin, A., Nykvist, B., van Vuuren, D., Evaluating sustainability transitions pathways: bridging analytical approaches to address governance challenges. Glob. Environ. Change 35 (2015), 239–253.
46. Stocker, T., Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis: Working Group I Contribution to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change., 2014, Cambridge University Press.
47. Bagheri Moghaddam, N., Mousavi, S.M., Nasiri, M., Moallemi, E.A., Yousefdehi, H., Wind energy status of Iran: evaluating Iran's technological capability in manufacturing wind turbines. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 15:8 (2011), 4200–4211.
48. Strambo, C., Nilsson, M., Månsson, A., Coherent or inconsistent? Assessing energy security and climate policy interaction within the European Union. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 8 (2015), 1–12.
49. Wei, M., Patadia, S., Kammen, D.M., Putting renewables and energy efficiency to work: how many jobs can the clean energy industry generate in the US?. Energy Policy 38:2 (2010), 919–931.
50. Markard, J., Raven, R., Truffer, B., Sustainability transitions: an emerging field of research and its prospects. Res. Policy 41:6 (2012), 955–967.
51. Suurs, R.A., Motors of Sustainable Innovation: Towards a Theory on the Dynamics of Technological Innovation Systems. 2009, Faculty of Geosciences, Utrecht University, The Netherlands.
52. Rotmans, J., Kemp, R., Asselt, M.v., More evolution than revolution: transition management in public policy. Foresight 3:1 (2001), 15–31.
53. Rip, A., Kemp, R., Technological change. Rayner, S., Malone, E.L., (eds.) Human Choice and Climate Change, 1998, Battelle Press, Columbus, OH, 327–399.
54. Geels, F., Technological transitions as evolutionary reconfiguration processes: a multi-level perspective and a case-study. Res. Policy 31:8–9 (2002), 1257–1274.
55. Hekkert, M.P., Suurs, R.A.A., Negro, S.O., Kuhlmann, S., Smits, R.E.H.M., Functions of innovation systems: a new approach for analysing technological change. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 74:4 (2007), 413–432.
56. Moallemi, E.A., Ahamdi, A., Afrazeh, A., Bagheri Moghaddam, N., Understanding systemic analysis in the governance of sustainability transition in renewable energies: the case of fuel cell technology in Iran. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 33 (2014), 305–315.
57. Bergek, A., Jacobsson, S., Carlsson, B., Lindmark, S., Rickne, A., Analyzing the functional dynamics of technological innovation systems: a scheme of analysis. Res. Policy 37:3 (2008), 407–429.
58. de Haan, F., Rotmans, J., Patterns in transitions: understanding complex chains of change. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 78:1 (2011), 90–102.
59. de Haan, F.J., Towards Transition Theory. 2010, Dutch Research Institute for Transitions (DRIFT), Erasmus University, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
60. Loorbach, D.A., Transition Management New Mode of Governance for Sustainable Development. 2007, Dutch Research Institute for Transitions (DRIFT), Erasmus University.
61. Walker, W.E., Rahman, S.A., Cave, J., Adaptive policies, policy analysis, and policy-making. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 128:2 (2001), 282–289.
62. Haasnoot, M., Kwakkel, J.H., Walker, W.E., Maat, J.T., Dynamic adaptive policy pathways: a method for crafting robust decisions for a deeply uncertain world. Glob. Environ. Change, 23, 2013, 485.
63. Späth, L., Scolobig, A., Stakeholder empowerment through participatory planning practices: the case of electricity transmission lines in France and Norway. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 23 (2017), 189–198.
64. Durning, D., Debating Technologies: A Methodological Contribution to the Design and Evaluation of Participatory Policy Analysis. 1999, Wiley Online Library.
65. Walker, W.E., Mayer, I.S., Hagen, E.R., Shared vision planning as policy analysis: opportunities for shared learning and methodological innovation. Palmer, R.E., (eds.) Proceedings of the World Environmental and Water Resources Congress 2010: Challenges of Change, Reston, VA: American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), Environmental and Water Resources Institute (EWRI), 2010, 2204–2222.
66. Hermans, L.M., Haasnoot, M., ter Maat, J., Kwakkel, J.H., Designing monitoring arrangements for collaborative learning about adaptation pathways. Environ. Sci. Policy 69 (2017), 29–38.
67. Köhler, J., de Haan, F., Holtz, G., Kubeczko, K., Moallemi, E.A., Papachristos, G., Chappin, E.J.L., Challenges in modelling sustainability transitions. The 7th International Sustainability Transitions (IST) Conference, September 6–September 9 2016, Wuppertal, Germany, 2016.
68. Strachan, N., Warren, P., Incorporating behavioural complexity in energy-economic models. UK Energy Research Centre Conference on: Energy and People: Futures, Complexity and Challenges, UCL Energy Institute, University College London, Oxford, UK, 2011, 1–20.
69. Chappin, E.J., Dijkema, G.P., Agent-based modelling of energy infrastructure transitions. Int. J. Crit. Infrastruct. 6:2 (2010), 106–130.
70. Kwakkel, J.H., Yücel, G., An exploratory analysis of the dutch electricity system in transition. J. Knowl. Econ. 5:4 (2014), 670–685.
71. Moallemi, E.A., Aye, L., de Haan, F.J., Webb, J.M., Policy analysis of renewable electricity development in India: from a transition modelling perspective. The 34th International Conference of the System Dynamics Society: Black Swans and Black Lies, July 17–July 21 2016, Delft, The Netherlands, 2016.
72. Moallemi, E.A., de Haan, F., George, B., Webb, J., Aye, L., Dynamic modelling of energy transitions using a coupled modelling-narrative approach. The 21st International Congress on Modelling and Simulation (MODSIM2015), November 29–December 4 2015, Gold Coast, Australia, 2015.
73. Rylatt, M., Gammon, R., Boait, P., Varga, L., Allen, P., Savill, M., Snape, R., Lemon, M., Ardestani, B., Pakka, V., Fletcher, G., Smith, S., Fan, D., Strathern, M., Cascade: an agent based framework for modeling the dynamics of smart electricity systems. Emerg.: Complex. Organ. 15:Suppl. 2 (2013), 1–13.
74. Pye, S., Li, F.G.N., Price, J., Fais, B., Achieving net-zero emissions through the reframing of UK national targets in the post-Paris Agreement era. Nat. Energy, 2, 2017, 17024.
75. de Haan, F.J., Rogers, B.C., Brown, R.R., Deletic, A., Many roads to Rome: the emergence of pathways from patterns of change through exploratory modelling of sustainability transitions. Environ. Model. Softw. 85 (2016), 279–292.
76. Rosenblatt, M., Remarks on some nonparametric estimates of a density function. Ann. Math. Stat. 27:3 (1956), 832–837.
77. Bryant, B.P., Lempert, R.J., Thinking inside the box: a participatory, computer-assisted approach to scenario discovery. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 77:1 (2010), 34–49.
78. Groves, D.G., Lempert, R.J., A new analytic method for finding policy-relevant scenarios. Glob. Environ. Change 17:1 (2007), 73–85.
79. Auping, W.L., Pruyt, E., de Jong, S., Kwakkel, J.H., The geopolitical impact of the shale revolution: exploring consequences on energy prices and rentier states. Energy Policy 98 (2016), 390–399.
80. Rozenberg, J., Guivarch, C., Lempert, R., Hallegatte, S., Building SSPs for climate policy analysis: a scenario elicitation methodology to map the space of possible future challenges to mitigation and adaptation. Clim. Change 122:3 (2014), 509–522.
81. O'Neill, B.C., Kriegler, E., Riahi, K., Ebi, K.L., Hallegatte, S., Carter, T.R., Mathur, R., van Vuuren, D.P., A new scenario framework for climate change research: the concept of shared socioeconomic pathways. Clim. Change 122:3 (2014), 387–400.
82. Lempert, R.J., Kalra, N., Peyraud, S., Mao, Z., Tan, S.B., Cira, D., Lotsch, A., Ensuring robust flood risk management in Ho Chi Minh City. Policy Research Working Paper 6465, 2013, World Bank.
83. Reed, M.S., Graves, A., Dandy, N., Posthumus, H., Hubacek, K., Morris, J., Prell, C., Quinn, C.H., Stringer, L.C., Who's in and why? A typology of stakeholder analysis methods for natural resource management. J. Environ. Manag. 90:5 (2009), 1933–1949.
84. Rotmans, J., Societal Innovation: Between Dream and Reality Lies Complexity. 2005, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), Rotterdam.
85. UN, Global Change and Sustainable Development: Critical Trends. 1997, Commission for Sustainable Development, Economic and Social Council, United Nations p. 91.
86. Dignum, M., Correlje, A., Groenleer, M., Scholten, D., Governing through visions: evaluating the performativity for the European Gas Target Models. Energy Res. Soc. Sci., 35, 2018.
87. de Haan, F.J., Ferguson, B.C., Adamowicz, R.C., Johnstone, P., Brown, R.R., Wong, T.H.F., The needs of society: a new understanding of transitions, sustainability and liveability. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 85 (2014), 121–132.
88. Moallemi, E.A., de Haan, F.J., Webb, J.M., George, B.A., Aye, L., Transition dynamics in state-influenced niche empowerments: experiences from India's electricity sector. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 116 (2017), 129–141.
89. Delina, L.L., Producing the future of energy in developing countries: sociotechnical imaginaries in Thailand. Energy Res. Soc. Sci., 35, 2018.
90. Victor, D.G., Heller, T.C., Hope, E., The Political Economy of Power Sector Reform: The Experiences of Five Major Developing Countries. 2007, Cambridge University Press.
91. Frantzeskaki, N., Dynamics of Societal Transitions: Driving Forces and Feedback Loops. 2011, Faculty of Technology, Policy and Management, Delft University of Technology.
92. Geels, F.W., Kern, F., Fuchs, G., Hinderer, N., Kungl, G., Mylan, J., Neukirch, M., Wassermann, S., The enactment of socio-technical transition pathways: a reformulated typology and a comparative multi-level analysis of the German and UK low-carbon electricity transitions (1990–2014). Res. Policy 45:4 (2016), 896–913.
93. Kern, F., Verhees, B., Raven, R., Smith, A., Empowering sustainable niches: comparing UK and Dutch offshore wind developments. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 100 (2015), 344–355.
94. Hekkert, M.P., Negro, S.O., Functions of innovation systems as a framework to understand sustainable technological change: empirical evidence for earlier claims. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 76:4 (2009), 584–594.
95. Geels, F.W., Schot, J., Typology of sociotechnical transition pathways. Res. Policy 36:3 (2007), 399–417.
96. Foxon, T.J., A coevolutionary framework for analysing a transition to a sustainable low carbon economy. Ecol. Econ. 70:12 (2011), 2258–2267.
97. Nasiri, M., Ramazani Khorshid-Doust, R., Bagheri Moghaddam, N., Effects of under-development and oil-dependency of countries on the formation of renewable energy technologies: a comparative study of hydrogen and fuel cell technology development in Iran and the Netherlands. Energy Policy 63 (2013), 588–598.
98. Moallemi, E.A., Ahmadi, A., Afrazeh, A., Bagheri Moghaddam, N., Assessing the performance of transition towards renewable energy: case study of Iran's fuel cell technology. J. Corp. Citizsh. 2015:58 (2015), 137–158 22.
99. Chappin, E.J.L., Afman, M.R., An agent-based model of transitions in consumer lighting: policy impacts from the E.U. phase-out of incandescents. Environ. Innov. Soc. Transit. 7 (2013), 16–36.
100. Yücel, G., van Daalen, C., A simulation-based analysis of transition pathways for the Dutch electricity system. Energy Policy 42:0 (2012), 557–568.
101. Moallemi, E.A., Aye, L., de Haan, F.J., Webb, J.M., A dual narrative-modelling approach for evaluating socio-technical transitions in electricity sectors. J. Clean. Prod. 162 (2017), 1210–1224.
102. Yücel, G., Analyzing Transition Dynamics: The Actor-Option Framework for Modelling Socio-Technical Systems. 2010, Faculty of Technology, Policy and Management, Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands.
103. Maier, H.R., Guillaume, J.H.A., van Delden, H., Riddell, G.A., Haasnoot, M., Kwakkel, J.H., An uncertain future, deep uncertainty, scenarios, robustness and adaptation: how do they fit together?. Environ. Model. Softw. 81 (2016), 154–164.
104. Basu, R., Implementing Quality: A Practical Guide to Tools and Techniques: Enabling the Power of Operational Excellence. 2004, Thomson Learning, London.
105. Lawrence, J., Haasnoot, M., What it took to catalyse uptake of dynamic adaptive pathways planning to address climate change uncertainty. Environ. Sci. Policy 68 (2017), 47–57.
106. Gerst, M.D., Wang, P., Borsuk, M.E., Discovering plausible energy and economic futures under global change using multidimensional scenario discovery. Environ. Model. Softw. 44 (2013), 76–86.
107. Guivarch, C., Rozenberg, J., Schweizer, V., The diversity of socio-economic pathways and CO2 emissions scenarios: insights from the investigation of a scenarios database. Environ. Model. Softw. 80 (2016), 336–353.
108. Störmer, E., Truffer, B., Dominguez, D., Gujer, W., Herlyn, A., Hiessl, H., Kastenholz, H., Klinke, A., Markard, J., Maurer, M., Ruef, A., The exploratory analysis of trade-offs in strategic planning: lessons from Regional Infrastructure Foresight. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 76:9 (2009), 1150–1162.
109. Moallemi, E.A., de Haan, F., Kwakkel, J., Aye, L., Narrative-informed exploratory analysis of energy transition pathways: a case study of India's electricity sector. Energy Policy 110 (2017), 271–287.
110. Halim, R.A., Kwakkel, J.H., Tavasszy, L.A., A scenario discovery study of the impact of uncertainties in the global container transport system on European ports. Futures 81 (2016), 148–160, 10.1016/j.futures.2015.09.004.
111. Kwakkel, J.H., Cunningham, S.C., Improving scenario discovery by bagging random boxes. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 111 (2016), 124–134.
112. Breiman, L., Friedman, J., Stone, C.J., Olshen, R.A., Classification and Regression Trees. 1984, CRC Press.
113. Friedman, J.H., Fisher, N.I., Bump hunting in high-dimensional data. Stat. Comput. 9:2 (1999), 123–143.
114. Kwakkel, J., Exploratory Modelling and Analysis (EMA) Workbench. 2016, TU Delft.
115. MNRE, Physical Progress (Achievements): Cumulative Deployment of Various Renewable Energy Systems. 2016 http://www.mnre.gov.in/mission-and-vision-2/achievements/. (Accessed March 2016).
116. Eker, S., van Daalen, E., A model-based analysis of biomethane production in the Netherlands and the effectiveness of the subsidization policy under uncertainty. Energy Policy 82 (2015), 178–196.
117. Malekpour, S., de Haan, F., Brown, R., Marrying exploratory modelling to strategic planning: towards participatory model use. 20th International Congress on Modelling and Simulation (MODSIM2013), Adelaide, Australia, 1–6 December, 2013.
118. Derbyshire, J., Wright, G., Preparing for the future: development of an ‘antifragile’ methodology that complements scenario planning by omitting causation. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 82 (2014), 215–225.
119. Kwakkel, J.H., Walker, W.E., Marchau, V.A.W.J., Adaptive airport strategic planning. Eur. J. Transp. Infrastruct. Res. 10 (2010), 249–273.
120. Haasnoot, M., Kwakkel, J.H., Walker, W.E., ter Maat, J., Dynamic adaptive policy pathways: a method for crafting robust decisions for a deeply uncertain world. Glob. Environ. Change 23:2 (2013), 485–498.
121. Hamarat, C., Kwakkel, J.H., Pruyt, E., Adaptive robust design under deep uncertainty. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 80:3 (2013), 408–418.
122. Cardwell, H., Kurt, S., The Shared Vision Planning Primer: How to Incorporate Computer-Aided Dispute Resolution, 2008-R-02. 2008, Institute for Water Resources, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Washington, D.C., US.
123. McDowall, W., Geels, F.W., Ten challenges for computer models in transitions research: commentary on Holtz, et al. Environ. Innov. Soc. Transit. 22 (2017), 41–49.