foresight scenario building and multi-criteria appraisal to inform sustainable development in small

438 Pages·2014·8.36 MB·English

FORESIGHT SCENARIO BUILDING
AND MULTI-CRITERIA APPRAISAL TO
INFORM SUSTAINABLE
DEVELOPMENT IN SMALL ISLANDS

A thesis submitted for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
by

JOSÉ BENEDICTO ROYUELA

Centre for Human Geography,
School of Health Sciences and Social Care

Brunel University

January, 2014
To my parents, my sister and my brother.

“Too much sanity may be madness. And maddest of all,
to see life as it is and not as it should be.”
Don Quixote, The Man of La Mancha, adapted from Cervantes (Wasserman, 1959)

i
Abstract

This thesis is the result of applying a novel methodology which I labelled ‘participative
foresight scenario mapping’. This methodology couples participatory methods for
building holistic foresight scenarios for sustainable development in Flores Island
(Azores, Portugal) with a multi-criteria appraisal method, Multi-criteria mapping
(Stirling, 1997), to assess these scenarios alongside five sector based regional scenarios
(Secretaria Regional do Ambiente e do Mar, 2006). The main research question was to
reflect on how small isolated societies, which have a distant relation with strategic
decision-making centres, can define their transitions to sustainability. Small islands
represent interesting cases to reflect on sustainability, these small territories distant from
main decision-making centres challenge decision-making and require a consideration of
the issues of scale. Islands have also been seen as small, manageable models of the
world, providing the opportunity to explore innovative solutions at a scale that allows
inclusion of as many different factors as possible. Small islands’ populations are
especially linked to their island and they develop, by the effects of isolation, a strong
particular relation to the place, the role of identity is then crucial in fostering sustainable
practices adapted to the island.

A succession of individual scoping interviews with twenty four regional and local
decision-makers and key informants and seven focus groups with a total of thirty local
lay citizens gave me the opportunity to develop two differentiated multi-sector scenarios
for Flores Island which were identified as Standard and Balanced development
scenarios. The Balanced development scenario reflects a desire to develop an island that
bases its economy on greater self-sufficiency for agricultural products, quality and
certified products, and natural conservation and valorisation. The Standard development
scenario is based on economic growth through tourism and primary sector
intensification, and public investment in infrastructures; this scenario can be
summarized as the continuation of the actual model of development. The appraisal of
both holistic narratives allows in depth exploration of the complex issues related to
sustainability, such as the preference between weak and strong sustainability, that
otherwise would have been too difficult to assess by such a variety of research
participants. Working with holistic scenarios raised the limits of the capacity to show
proficiency in a wide variety of fields.

The research demonstrated the feasibility of applying the multi-criteria mapping method
to support the analysis of holistic non-technical scenarios. The combination of
qualitative and quantitative data brought depth to the analysis and improved the
understanding of the desired sustainable futures in islands. But the quantitative appraisal
was overshadowed by strong uncertainties that made difficult the identification of a best
scenario. Uncertainty was explained by the risks inherent to the scenarios, the limited
expertise in all the criteria, the complexity of the holistic scenarios, the time horizon (20
years), doubts on the effective implementation of the chosen scenario, and the existence
of potentially disrupting external factors. The process was also the opportunity to
understand the role that social capital might play in the transition to the desired future
for this island. It is shown in the thesis that a successful transition to sustainable
development can only be reached if the objectives are understood and shared by the
population.
ii
Contents

Contents p.iii
Figures p.ix
Tables p.xii
Ethics p.xiii
Acknowledgements p.xiv
Acronyms p.xv
Publications and conferences p.xvii

1 Introduction p.1

1.1 The beginning… p.2
1.2 Research project, frame and methodology p.4
1.3 Why study small island sustainability? p.8
1.3.1 The Azores and Flores Island p.10
1.4 Structure of the thesis p.11

2 Decision-making for sustainability in the context of islands p.14

2.1 Introduction p.15
2.2 Sustainable development p.16
2.2.1 Main debates around sustainability p.16
2.2.1.1 Weak and strong sustainability p.22
2.2.1.2 Local initiatives for sustainability and LA21 p.25
2.2.1.3 Indicators for local sustainability p.30
2.2.2 Public participation in policy making for sustainability p.31
iii
2.2.2.1 Appraising a participative process p.37
2.2.2.2 Role of social capital in local development and its limits p.39
2.2.2.3 Focus groups p.43
2.2.3 Foresight scenarios to reflect on sustainable futures p.45
2.3 Sustainability in small islands p.50
2.3.1 Islands: models of the world and sustainability p.51
2.3.1.1 Key elements for sustainability in islands p.53
2.3.1.2 Self-sufficiency in small islands p.54
2.3.1.3 Tourism in small islands p.57
2.3.2 Small island developing states and sub-national
island jurisdictions p.59
2.3.2.1 Typologies of islands p.63
2.3.3 Islands and identity p.67
2.4 Multi-criteria appraisal p.70
2.4.1 MCA methods used in deliberative and
participative processes p.70
2.4.1.1 Social-multi-criteria evaluation p.74
2.4.1.2 Three stage multi-criteria analysis p.76
2.4.1.3 Stakeholder decision analysis p.77
2.4.1.4 Deliberative mapping p.79
2.4.1.5 Multi-criteria mapping p.80
2.5 Summary p.82

iv
3 Background of case study area: Flores Island p.86

3.1 General data p.87
3.1.1 Flores Island geography and human settlement p.90
3.1.2 Population p.95
3.1.3 Tourism activity in the Azores and Flores Island p.97
3.1.3.1 Tourism in the Azores p.97
3.1.3.2 Tourism in Flores Island p.98
3.1.4 Geological risks in Flores Island p.100
3.1.5 Protected areas in Flores Island p.100
3.2 Governance structure p.103
3.2.1 The Azorean Autonomous Region political structure p.103
3.2.2 The political structure in Flores Island p.105
3.3 Regional development plans p.105
3.3.1 The Regional Plan for the Sustainable
Development of the Azores p.108
3.4 Where is Flores in the path to sustainable development? p.111
3.5 Why is Flores a good case study? p.114
3.6 Summary p.116

4 Methodology p.120

4.1 Introduction p.121
4.2 Participative foresight scenario mapping methodology p.122
4.2.1 The project and public participation p.123
v
4.2.1.1 Researching a small community: positionality and ethics p.124
4.2.1.2 Public dissemination of the research project p.127
4.2.2 Criteria selection (focus groups and MCM interviews) p.128
4.2.3 Step 1: Scoping interviews to decision-makers,
civil servants and key informants p.134
4.2.3.1 Interviewees’ selection p.135
4.2.3.2 Gathering visions and creating foresight scenarios p.138
4.2.3.3 Use of note sheets to explore and display interviewees’ visions p.142
4.2.4 Step 2: focus groups interviews with lay citizens p.143
4.2.4.1 Focus groups’ participants p.145
4.2.5 Step 3: Multi-criteria analysis p.147
4.2.5.1 MCM interviewees p.147
4.2.5.2 Previous uses of MCM method p.149
4.2.5.3 Novel use of multi-criteria mapping method p.151
4.3 Final dissemination workshop p.154
4.4 Summary p.156

5 Critical reflection on Participative foresight scenario mapping
methodology p.158

5.1 Introduction p.159
5.1.1 Public participation and the project p.160
5.2 Scoping interviews with stakeholders p.163
5.2.1 Alternative scenarios for Flores Island’s
sustainable development p.163
5.2.1.1 The epistemological framing of Balanced and
Standard development scenarios p.168
vi
5.2.1.2 Presentation of risks associated to each scenario
to stimulate critical analysis p.169
5.2.2 The use of the note sheets in the scoping interviews p.170
5.3 Focus groups p.172
5.3.1 Lay citizens’ participation and the project p.172
5.3.2 Lay citizens and the appraisal of the standard and
balanced development scenarios p.175
5.4 Multi-criteria appraisal interviews p.177
5.4.1 MCM appraisal and uncertainty p.177
5.4.1.1 Analysis of the uncertainty in the appraisal p.182
5.4.1.2 Criteria and criteria weights p.195
5.4.2 Perspectives’ grouping p.200
5.5 Summary p.209

6 Contributions to sustainability in small islands p.213

6.1 Introduction p.214
6.2 Visions for sustainability in islands p.215
6.2.1 Islands as potential ‘heavens’ and utopia p.220
6.2.2 Awareness of the limits to growth and
the environmental fragility p.222
6.2.3 Role of public participation and local authorities p.225
6.2.4 Economic diversification p.228
6.2.5 Quality vs quantity p.230
6.2.6 Self-sufficiency p.232
6.2.7 Tourism p.235
vii
6.3 Summary p.238

7 Conclusion p.241

7.1 Introduction p.242
7.2 Scenario development and appraisal p.244
7.2.1 Participative reach of the methodology p.244
7.2.2 Foresight scenario development and appraisal:
methods and limitations p.245
7.2.3 Uncertainty and expertise p.247
7.3 Understanding sustainability in islands p.249
7.3.1 Characteristics of small island communities p.249
7.3.2 Contributions to sustainability in islands p.251
7.4 Recommendations for possible improvements of the methodology p.252
7.5 Afterword… p.255

8 References p.257

Appendices Volume II

viii
Figures

Figure 1.1: The Azores p.3
Figure 1.2: Research overview p.6
Figure 1.3: Local foresight scenarios and regional sector based scenario p.7

Figure 2.1: The elements of sustainable development planning p.29
Figure 2.2: ‘Democracy cube’ p.38
Figure 2.3: Foresight scenarios, backcasting and transitions p.48
Figure 2.4: Typology of insularity in small insular spaces p.66
Figure 2.5: SMCE, scheme of the evaluation process p.75
Figure 2.6: Three stage multi-criteria analysis, elements of the model p.77
Figure 2.7: Deliberative mapping p.79
Figure 2.8: Conceptual framework p.85

Figure 3.1: Macaronesian Biogeographic Region p.87
Figure 3.2: The Azores p.88
Figure 3.3: Flores Island, the grey shades represent inhabited areas p.89
Figure 3.4: Flores’ schematic structure (own elaboration) p.91
Figure 3.5: Human settlement confined to the coastal area p.92
Figure 3.6: Inland grazing lands p.92
Figure 3.7: Central area with volcanic lake p.93
Figure 3.8: Open dump p.93
Figure 3.9: The paradox of islanders divided between the
lived and the dreamed island p.94
Figure 3.10: Flores Island population from 1900 to 2011 p.96
Figure 3.11: Flores Island, data on tourism population from 2001 to 2010 p.99
Figure 3.12: Tourism strategic, situation of the Azorean Islands p.99
Figure 3.13: Flores Natural Island Park p.102
Figure 3.14: UNESCO Biosphere Reserve map p.102
Figure 3.15: Island autonomy p.104
Figure 3.16: Diesel consumption in Flores Island p.112
ix