11 Interfakultäre Einrichtungen
Permanent URI for this collectionhttps://elib.uni-stuttgart.de/handle/11682/12
Browse
3 results
Search Results
Item Open Access Socio-technical energy scenarios : state-of-the-art and CIB-based approaches(2020) Weimer-Jehle, Wolfgang; Vögele, Stefan; Hauser, Wolfgang; Kosow, Hannah; Poganietz, Witold-Roger; Prehofer, SigridEnergy conversion is a major source of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and energy transition scenarios are a key tool for gaining a greater understanding of the possible pathways toward climate protection. There is consensus in energy research that political and societal framework conditions will play a pivotal role in shaping energy transitions. In energy scenario construction, this perspective is increasingly acknowledged through the approach of informing model-based energy analysis with storylines about societal futures, an exercise we call “socio-technical energy scenario construction” in this article. However, there is a dispute about how to construct the storylines in a traceable, consistent, comprehensive, and reproducible way. This study aims to support energy researchers considering the use of the concept of socio-technical scenarios in two ways: first, we provide a state-of-the-art analysis of socio-technical energy scenario construction by comparing 16 studies with respect to five categories. Second, we address the dispute regarding storyline construction in energy research and examine 13 reports using the Cross-Impact Balances method. We collated researcher statements on the strengths and challenges of this method and identified seven categories of promises and challenges each.Item Open Access Uncharted water conflicts ahead : mapping the scenario space for Germany in the year 2050(2024) Kosow, Hannah; Brauner, Simon; Brumme, Anja; Hauser, Wolfgang; Hölzlberger, Fabian; Moschner, Janina; Rübbelke, Dirk; Vögele, Stefan; Weimer-Jehle, WolfgangIntroduction: In recent years, conflicts surrounding the use, distribution, and governance of surface water and groundwater in Germany have gained prominence in the media, on the political agenda, and in research. Increasing effects of climate change, such as heatwaves and drought but also extreme rain events and flooding, are considered to become more prominent and pressing in the future by different societal actors. However, it remains highly uncertain if and what type of conflicts related to water quantity Germany might actually face in the future (and how they will be framed). This paper addresses one dimension of this uncertainty - namely the future context uncertainty of possible resource and water governance conflicts. Our research contributes to an improved understanding of the uncertainty concerning future climatic, natural, land use related, political, economic, and other societal contexts that could impact water conflicts. Method: We ask: What are possible coherent context scenarios for Germany in the year 2050, and how are they expected to influence future water conflicts? In an expert-based process, we apply a qualitative and systematic method of systems analysis, cross-impact balances (CIB). With CIB, we build internally consistent scenarios of possible futures and map the future scenario space. Results and discussion: Diversity mapping with a new CIB web application of the ScenarioWizard reveals that the scenario space is rather large and diverse. The identified scenario space of n = 355 internally consistent scenarios spans four most diverse scenarios “Polycrisis,” “Economy and agriculture in crisis,” “Growth through adaptation to climate change,” and “Sustainable transformation.” Depending on the development of future contexts, the risk for future water resource and governance conflicts may unfold in various ways. We conclude that our scenario analysis provides a useful base for research and practice to address the context uncertainty of water conflicts in Germany. Our results can be used for risk assessment, to define societal framework assumptions for societal-hydrological modeling, and to develop robust and adaptive strategies and policies.Item Open Access Sustainability assessments of energy scenarios : citizens’ preferences for and assessments of sustainability indicators(2022) Schmidt-Scheele, Ricarda; Hauser, Wolfgang; Scheel, Oliver; Minn, Fabienne; Becker, Lisa; Buchgeister, Jens; Hottenroth, Heidi; Junne, Tobias; Lehr, Ulrike; Naegler, Tobias; Simon, Sonja; Sutardhio, Claudia; Tietze, Ingela; Ulrich, Philip; Viere, Tobias; Weidlich, AnkeBackground: Given the multitude of scenarios on the future of our energy systems, multi-criteria assessments are increasingly called for to analyze and assess desired and undesired effects of possible pathways with regard to their environmental, economic and social sustainability. Existing studies apply elaborate lists of sustainability indicators, yet these indicators are defined and selected by experts and the relative importance of each indicator for the overall sustainability assessments is either determined by experts or is computed using mathematical functions. Target group-specific empirical data regarding citizens’ preferences for sustainability indicators as well as their reasoning behind their choices are not included in existing assessments.
Approach and results: We argue that citizens’ preferences and values need to be more systematically analyzed. Next to valid and reliable data regarding diverse sets of indicators, reflections and deliberations are needed regarding what different societal actors, including citizens, consider as justified and legitimate interventions in nature and society, and what considerations they include in their own assessments. For this purpose, we present results from a discrete choice experiment. The method originated in marketing and is currently becoming a popular means to systematically analyze individuals’ preference structures for energy technology assessments. As we show in our paper, it can be fruitfully applied to study citizens’ values and weightings with regard to sustainability issues. Additionally, we present findings from six focus groups that unveil the reasons behind citizens’ preferences and choices.
Conclusions: Our combined empirical methods provide main insights with strong implications for the future development and assessment of energy pathways: while environmental and climate-related effects significantly influenced citizens’ preferences for or against certain energy pathways, total systems and production costs were of far less importance to citizens than the public discourse suggests. Many scenario studies seek to optimize pathways according to total systems costs. In contrast, our findings show that the role of fairness and distributional justice in transition processes featured as a dominant theme for citizens. This adds central dimensions for future multi-criteria assessments that, so far, have been neglected by current energy systems models.