New future perspectives through constructive conflict: Exploring the future of gas in the Netherlands. (April 2016)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Ligtvoet, Andreas; Cuppen, Eefje; Di Ruggero, Olga; Hemmes, Kas; Pesch, Udo; Quist, Jaco; Mehos, Donna
• Is Part Of: Futures. Volume 78/79(2016:Feb.)
• Page Start: 19
• Page End: 33
• Publication Date: 2016-04
• Subjects: Energy futures -- Q methodology -- Stakeholder dialogue -- Constructive conflict methodology -- Explorative scenarios -- The Netherlands; Economic forecasting -- Periodicals; Technological forecasting -- Periodicals; Economic policy -- Periodicals; Prévision économique -- Périodiques; Prévision technologique -- Périodiques; Politique économique -- Périodiques; Economic forecasting; Economic policy; Technological forecasting; Periodicals; Electronic journals; 330.0112
• DOI: 10.1016/j.futures.2016.03.008
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0016-3287

Abstract

Highlights: Constructive conflict methodology is relevant for policy making, future visioning, and backcasting. 6 diverse perspectives on the future of gas have been developed which go beyond the usual high, middle, low scenarios. Stakeholder dialogue workshops clarified underlying assumptions, strategies and policy options. In cases of presumed groupthink, CCM can clarify positions and emphasise differences of opinion. Gas is largely uncontested by Dutch energy stakeholders and economic growth an unchallenged assumption. Abstract: This paper reports on the refinement of constructive conflict methodology (CCM) combining Q methodology and stakeholder dialogue workshops for gas futures for the Netherlands. Since the end of the 1950s, natural gas exploration and exploitation has been a major focus of the Dutch energy policy. Discussions about the future of energy in the Netherlands tend to focus either on pro-gas or pro-renewable energy. Using Q methodology we have constructed more nuanced perspectives on the future of energy in the Netherlands. We used these perspectives in a stakeholder dialogue, in which the participants further detailed the perspectives and discussed future policy options. Analysis of the outcomes of this process teaches us that the Netherlands remain gas-focused, that renewable energy sources are as much a dogma as nuclear power was in the 1960s, and that the prospect of an austere future is a non-debatable issue. From a methodological perspective it can be concluded that the refined methodology contributed to diversity in views, opened up the dominant discourse and led to learning among participating stakeholders.