Co-constructing future land-use scenarios for the Grenoble region, France

Abstract

Highlights  A Participatory Scenario Planning process for downscaling regional normative scenarios.  19 institutions from economic sectors involved throughout a two-year process.  Two trend and two break-away scenarios with storylines and projected land cover.  Three spatial models to project land use change by 2040 at 15 m resolution.  Multi-scale participatory normative scenarios for supporting land planning.

Design and implementation of a national ecosystem assessment – insights from the French mountain systems’ experience

“…based on participatory scenario-planning, is a way to co-design future pathways to sustainability (e.g. Kohler et al 2017;Vannier et al 2019a).…”

Spatial Simulation of Codesigned Land Cover Change Scenarios in New England: Alternative Futures and Their Consequences for Conservation Priorities

“…While the scenarios were divergent in the amount and distribution of LULC, none envisioned wholly new dynamics at play (e.g., new technologies, pandemics, or transformational events) and it is unclear whether the scenarios sufficiently broadened the perspectives of stakeholders regarding the future. Other recent examples of scenario planning in socioecological systems have also noted similar difficulties in generating highly divergent, novel scenarios, often finding relatively similar narratives were developed across scenario groups, for example, Totin et al (2018), Falardeau et al (2019), Vannier et al (2019), and Raudsepp‐Hearne et al (2020).…”

Modeling Alternative Approaches to the Biodiversity Offsetting of Urban Expansion in the Grenoble Area (France): What Is the Role of Spatial Scales in ‘No Net Loss’ of Wetland Area and Function?

“…), urban sprawl and intensive agriculture occupy most of the valleys and lowlands. High-resolution Land Use and Land Cover (LULC) maps of the Grenoble region were simulated for 2009-2040 under various socioeconomic scenarios using a spatially explicit statistical model combining a GIS deterministic approach and the probabilistic platform Dinamica EGO [44,45]. Our analysis focused on the conversion of wetlands under a "business as usual" scenario, under which LULC change occurs as set out in existing zoning regulations such as the 2011 Schéma de COhérence Territorial (SCOT) [46,47].…”

“…valleys and lowlands, where the agriculture is the dominant LULC: annual crops (cereals such as maize), perennial crops (including some vineyards and orchards, such as walnut) and some permanent grasslands. The following areas and land cover types were not considered as potential offsetting zones: (1) wetlands located in natural habitats and forests because they are in good condition overall and provide limited opportunities for ecological gain, (2) bodies of water and other aquatic habitats that are not readily restorable as wetlands, (3) wetlands in urban areas because they would probably not be accepted by regulators as offset sites due to continued pressures and unfavorable ecological contexts, and because we cannot change urban sprawl projections by Vannier et al [44] (post-treatment of the outputs). The general method specifically designed for this study includes three main steps described in more detail in the following subsections: …”