The new normative: synergistic scenario planning for carbon-neutral cities and regions

REFERENCES

• Albrechts, L. (2012). Reframing strategic spatial planning by using a coproduction perspective. Planning Theory, 12(1), 46–63. doi: 10.1177/1473095212452722
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alexander, E. (2010). Introduction: Does planning theory affect practice, and if so, how? Planning Theory, 9(2), 99–107. doi: 10.1177/1473095209357862
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Allmendinger, P., & Haughton, G. (2010). Spatial planning, devolution, and new planning spaces. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 28(5), 803–818. doi: 10.1068/c09163
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anderson, K. (2015, December). Duality in climate science. Nature Geoscience, 8(12), 898–900. doi: 10.1038/ngeo2559
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anderson, K., & Bows, A. (2011). Beyond ‘dangerous’ climate change: Emission scenarios for a new world. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 369(1934), 20–44. doi: 10.1098/rsta.2010.0290
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Argyris, C., & Schön, D. A. (1996). Organizational learning II: Theory, method, and practice. Addison-Wesley.
   Google Scholar
• Asheim, B. T. (2018). Smart Specialisation, innovation policy and regional innovation systems: What about new path development in less innovative regions? Innovation: European Journal of Social Science Research, 32, 8–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/13511610.2018.1491001.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bäcklund, P., Häikiö, L., Leino, H., & Kanninen, V. (2018). Bypassing publicity and transparency for getting things done: Between informal and formal planning practices in Finland. Planning Practice and Research, 33(3), 309–325. https://doi.org/10.1080/02697459.2017.1378978
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Balducci, A., & Mäntysalo, R. (Eds.). (2013). Urban planning as a trading zone (Urban and Landscape Perspectives, Vol. 13. Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Bansard, J. S., Pattberg, P., & Widerberg, O. (2017). Cities to the rescue? Assessing the performance of transnational municipal networks in global climate governance. International Environmental Agreements, 17(2), 229–246. doi: 10.1007/s10784-016-9318-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bartholomew, K. (2007). Land use–transportation scenario planning: Promise and reality. Transportation, 34(4), 397–412. doi: 10.1007/s11116-006-9108-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Börjeson, L., Höjer, M., Dreborg, K.-H., Ekvall, T., & Finnveden, G. (2006). Scenario types and techniques: Towards a user’s guide. Futures, 38(7), 723–739. doi: 10.1016/j.futures.2005.12.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Borrás, S., & Edler, J. (2020). The roles of the state in the governance of socio-technical systems’ transformation. Research Policy, 49(5), 1–9. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2020.103971
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bulkeley, H., Castán Broto, V., & Maassen, A. (2013). Governing urban low carbon transitions. In H. Bulkeley, V. Castán Broto, M. Hodson, & S. Marvin (Eds.), Cities and low carbon transitions (pp. 29–41). Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Carbon Neutral Cities Alliance. (2016). Framework for long-term deep carbon reduction planning. Innovation Network for Communities. Retrieved from https://carbonneutralcities.org/initiatives/resources-and-reports/
   Google Scholar
• Castan Broto, V., & Bulkeley, H. (2013). A survey of urban climate change experiments in 100 cities. Global Environmental Change, 23(1), 92–102. doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2012.07.005
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chakraborty, A., Kaza, N., Knaap, G., & Deal, B. (2011). Robust plans and contingent plans. Journal of the American Planning Association, 77(3), 251–266. doi: 10.1080/01944363.2011.582394
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cooke, P. (2012). Complex adaptive innovation systems: Relatedness and transversality in the evolving region. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Deas, I. (2014). The search for territorial fixes in subnational governance: City-regions and the disputed emergence of post-political consensus in Manchester, England. Urban Studies, 51(11), 2285–2314. doi: 10.1177/0042098013510956
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra). (2019). UK’s carbon footprint 1997–2015. Defra.
   Google Scholar
• Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC). (2009). Low carbon transition plan for the UK. DECC.
   Google Scholar
• Dreborg, L. (1996). Essence of backcasting. Futures, 28(9), 813–828. doi: 10.1016/S0016-3287(96)00044-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eftec, Environmental Finance and Countryscape. (2019). Greater Manchester natural capital investment plan. GMCA.
   Google Scholar
• Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L. (2000). The dynamics of innovation: From national systems and ‘mode 2’ to a triple helix of university–industry–government relations. Research Policy, 29(2), 109–123. doi: 10.1016/S0048-7333(99)00055-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Evans, J., Karvonen, A., & Raven, R. (Eds.). (2017). The experimental city. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Fischer, H., Meissner, K. J., Mix, A. C., Abram, N. J., Austermann, J., Brovkin, V., Capron, E., Colombaroli, D., Daniau, A.-L., Dyez, K. A., Felis, T., Finkelstein, S. A., Jaccard, S. L., McClymont, E. L., Rovere, A., Sutter, J., Wolff, E. W., Affolter, S., Bakker, P., … Zhou, L. (2018). Palaeoclimate constraints on the impact of 2°C anthropogenic warming and beyond. Nature Geoscience, 11, 474–485. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41561-018-0146-0
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Freestone, R. (2012). Futures thinking in planning education and research. Journal for Education in the Built Environment, 7(1), 8–38. doi: 10.11120/jebe.2012.07010008
   Google Scholar
• Fuller, B. (2006). Trading zones: Cooperating for water resource and ecosystem management when stakeholders have apparently irreconcilable differences. MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Galison, P. (1997). Image and logic: A material culture of microphysics. University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Galison, P. (2010). Trading with the enemy. In M. E. Gorman (Ed.), Trading zones and interactional expertise: Creating new kinds of collaboration (pp. 25–52). MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Georghiou, L., Edler, J., Uyarra, E., & Jillian Yeow, J. (2014). Policy instruments for public procurement of innovation: Choice, design and assessment. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 86, 1–12. doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2013.09.018
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goodhart, D. (2017). The road to somewhere: The populist revolt and the future of politics. Hurst.
   Google Scholar
• Granqvist, K., & Mäntysalo, R. (2020). The strategic turn in planning and the role of institutional innovation. In A. Hagen, & U. Higdem (Eds.), Innovation in public planning. Calculate, communicate and innovate (pp. 73–90). Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Greater Manchester Combined Authority (GMCA). (2013). GM climate change strategy. GMCA.
   Google Scholar
• Greater Manchester Combined Authority (GMCA). (2015). GM spatial framework: Strategic options. GMCA.
   Google Scholar
• Greater Manchester Combined Authority (GMCA). (2019). 5-Year environment plan. GMCA.
   Google Scholar
• Greenhouse Gas Protocol. (2016). FAQ | Greenhouse Gas Protocol. Retrieved from www.ghgprotocol.org
   Google Scholar
• Grubb, M., with Hourcade, J.-C., & Neuhoff, K. (2014). Planetary economics: Energy, climate change and the three domains of sustainable development. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Guertler, P., & Rosenow, J. (2016). Buildings and the 5th carbon budget. Association for Conservation of Energy.
   Google Scholar
• Harris, T. M. (2016). From PGIS to participatory deep mapping and spatial storytelling: An evolving trajectory in community knowledge representation in GIS. Cartographic Journal, 53(4), 318–325. doi: 10.1080/00087041.2016.1243864
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haughton, G., Deas, I., Hincks, S., & Ward, K. (2016). Mythic Manchester: Devo Manc, the Northern Powerhouse and rebalancing the English economy. Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, 9, 355–370. doi:10.1093/cjres/rsw004.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Healey, P. (2009). In search of the ‘strategic’ in spatial strategy-making. Planning Theory and Practice, 10(4), 439–457. doi: 10.1080/14649350903417191
   Google Scholar
• Hendriks, F. (2014). Understanding good urban governance: Essentials, shifts, and values. Urban Affairs Review, 50(4), 553–576. doi: 10.1177/1078087413511782
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hodson, M., Marvin, S., & McMeekin, A. (2018). The amenable city-region: The symbolic rise and the relative decline of Greater Manchester’s low carbon commitments, 2006–17. In A. Luque-Ayala, S. Marvin, & H. Bulkeley (Eds.), Rethinking urban transitions: Politics in the low carbon city (pp. 73–88). Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Hodson, M., McMeekin, A., Froud, J., & Moran, M. (2019). State-rescaling and re-designing the material city-region: Tensions of disruption and continuity in articulating the future of Greater Manchester. Urban Studies, 57(1), 198–217. doi:10.1177/0042098018820181.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Höjer, M., & Mattsson, L.-G. (2000). Determinism and backcasting in future studies. Futures, 32(7), 613–634. doi: 10.1016/S0016-3287(00)00012-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Inayatullah, S. (2011). City futures in transformation: Emerging issues and case studies. Futures, 43(7), 654–661. doi: 10.1016/j.futures.2011.05.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ING Bank. (2015). Rethinking finance in a circular economy: Financial implications of circular business models. ING Bank.
   Google Scholar
• Johanson, J.-E., & Vakkuri, J. (2018). Governing hybrid organizations: Exploring diversity of institutional life. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Komninos, N. (2015). The age of intelligent cities: Smart environments and innovation-for-all strategies. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Kuriakose, J., Anderson, K., Broderick, J., & McLachlan, C. (2018). Quantifying the implications of the Paris Agreement for Greater Manchester. Tyndall Centre.
   Google Scholar
• Lippert, I. (2012). Carbon classified? Unpacking heterogeneous relations inscribed into corporate carbon emissions. Ephemera, 12(1/2), 138–161.
   Google Scholar
• Loveridge, D. (2008). Foresight: The art and science of anticipating the future. Taylor & Francis.
   Google Scholar
• Luque-Ayala, A., Marvin, S., & Bulkeley, H. (2018). Introduction. In A. Luque-Ayala, S. Marvin, & H. Bulkeley (Eds.), Rethinking urban transitions: Politics in the low carbon city (pp. 1–12). Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Mäntysalo, R., & Grišakov, K. (2017). Framing ‘evidence’ and scenario stories in strategic spatial planning. In L. Albrechts, A. Balducci, & J. Hillier (Eds.), Situated practices of strategic planning. An international perspective (pp. 348–361). Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Mäntysalo, R., & Jarenko, K. (2014). Communicative planning theory following deliberative democracy theory: Critical pragmatism and the trading zone concept. International Journal of e-Planning Research, 3(1), 38–50. doi: 10.4018/ijepr.2014010104
   Google Scholar
• Mäntysalo, R., Jarenko, K., Nilsson, K. L., & Saglie, I.-L. (2015). Legitimacy of informal strategic urban planning – Observations from Finland, Sweden and Norway. European Planning Studies, 23(2), 349–366. doi: 10.1080/09654313.2013.861808
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mäntysalo, R., Olesen, K., & Granqvist, K. (2020). ‘Artefactual anchoring’ of strategic spatial planning as persuasive storytelling. Planning Theory, 19(3), 285–305. doi: 10.1177/1473095219893002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mäntysalo, R., Tuomisaari, J., Granqvist, K., & Kanninen, V. (2019). The strategic Incrementalism of Lahti master planning: Three lessons. Planning Theory and Practice, 20(4), 555–572. doi: 10.1080/14649357.2019.1652336
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McKillop, T., O’Neill, J., Glaeser, E., Coyle, D., & Kestenbaum, J. (2009). Manchester independent economic review. AGMA.
   Google Scholar
• Moran, M., & Williams, K. (2015). ‘Devo Manc’: ‘Northern Powerhouse’ or ‘Northern Poorhouse’? Retrieved from http://speri.dept.shef.ac.uk/2015/04/07/devo-manc-northern-powerhouse-northern-poorhouse/
   Google Scholar
• Mulgan, G. (2016). Big mind: How collective intelligence can change our world. Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Myers, D., & Kitsuse, A. (2000). Constructing the future in planning: A survey of theories and tools. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 19(3), 221–231. doi: 10.1177/0739456X0001900301
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Neuvonen, A., & Ache, P. (2017). Metropolitan vision making – Using backcasting as a strategic learning process to shape metropolitan futures. Futures, 86, 73–83. doi: 10.1016/j.futures.2016.10.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Newman, P. (2008). Strategic spatial planning: Collective action and moments of opportunity. European Planning Studies, 16(10), 1371–1383. doi: 10.1080/09654310802420078
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2015). System innovation: Synthesis report. Directorate of Science, Technology and Innovation.
   Google Scholar
• Petrov, L. O., Shahumyan, H., Williams, B., & Convery, S. (2011). Scenarios and indicators supporting urban regional planning. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 21, 243–252. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.07.012
   Google Scholar
• Phaal, R., Farrukh, C. J. P., & Probert, D. R. (2007). Strategic roadmapping: A workshop-based approach for identifying and exploring innovation issues and opportunities. Engineering Management Journal, 19(1), 16–24. doi: 10.1080/10429247.2007.11431716
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Phdungsilp, A. (2011). Futures studies’ backcasting method used for strategic sustainable city planning. Futures, 43(7), 707–714. doi: 10.1016/j.futures.2011.05.012
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Plastrik, P., & Cleveland, J. (2019). Life after carbon: The next global transformation of cities. Island.
   Google Scholar
• Quist, J. (2007). Backcasting for a sustainable future: The impact after 10 years. Eburon.
   Google Scholar
• Quist, J., Thissen, W., & Vergragt, P. J. (2011). The impact and spin-off of participatory backcasting: From vision to niche. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 78(5), 883–897. doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2011.01.011
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ratcliffe, J., & Krawczyk, E. (2011). Imagineering city futures: The use of prospective through scenarios in urban planning. Futures, 43(7), 642–653. doi: 10.1016/j.futures.2011.05.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ravetz, J. (2000). City-Region 2020: Integrated planning for a sustainable environment. Earthscan with the Town & Country Planning Association.
   Google Scholar
• Ravetz, J. (2006). Regional innovation & resource productivity – New approaches to analysis and communication. In S. Randles, & K. Green (Eds.), Industrial ecology & spaces of innovation (pp. 63–81). Ashgate.
   Google Scholar
• Ravetz, J. (2008). State of the stock: What do we know about existing buildings and their future prospects. Energy Policy, 36(12), 4462–4470. doi: 10.1016/j.enpol.2008.09.026
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ravetz, J. (2010). Rethinking low-carbon strategy in the regions: Applications of the territorial principle in a networked landscape. In Regions and the environment (pp. 136–142). Regional Studies Association (RSA).
   Google Scholar
• Ravetz, J. (2015). The future of the urban environment & ecosystem services in the UK (Report to the Government Foresight on Future of Cities). Government Office of Science.
   Google Scholar
• Ravetz, J. (2020). Deeper city; Collective intelligence and the pathways from smart to wise. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Ravetz, J., & Miles, I. D. (2016). Foresight in cities: On the possibility of a ‘strategic urban intelligence’. Foresight, 18(5), 469–490. doi: 10.1108/FS-06-2015-0037
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Revi, A., Satterthwaite, D., Aragón-Durand, F., Corfee-Morlot, J., Kiunsi, R. B. R., Pelling, M., Roberts, D., Solecki, W., Gajjar, S. P., & Sverdlik, A. (2014). Towards transformative adaptation in cities: The IPCC’s Fifth Assessment. Environment and Urbanization, 26(1), 11–28. doi: 10.1177/0956247814523539
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robinson, J., Burch, S., Talwar, S., O’Shea, M., & Walsh, M. (2011). Envisioning sustainability: Recent progress in the use of participatory backcasting approaches for sustainability research. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 78(5), 756–768. doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2010.12.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schot, J., & Steinmueller, W. E. (2018). Three frames for innovation policy: R&D, systems of innovation and transformative change. Research Policy, 47(9), 1554–1156. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2018.08.011
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sherriff, G. (2013). From burden to asset – The political ecology of sustainable transport. Town and Country Planning, 82(10), 431–434.
   Google Scholar
• Star, S. L., & Griesemer, J. (1989). Institutional ecology, ‘translations’ and boundary objects: Amateurs and professionals in Berkeley’s Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907–39. Social Studies of Science, 19(3), 387–420. doi: 10.1177/030631289019003001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Steele, W., & Ruming, K. J. (2012). Flexibility versus certainty: Unsettling the land-use planning shibboleth in Australia. Planning Practice and Research, 27(2), 155–176. doi: 10.1080/02697459.2012.662670
   Google Scholar
• Tyndall Centre. (2018). The implications of global warming of 1.5°C and 2°C: WP 164. Tyndall Centre.
   Google Scholar
• UKGBC. (2017). Regeneration and retrofit: Task group report. UKGBC.
   Google Scholar
• Uyarra, E., & Flanagan, K. (2010). From regional systems of innovation to regions as innovation policy spaces. Environment and Planning C, 28(4), 681–695. doi: 10.1068/c0961
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van den Broeck, J. (2013). Balancing strategic and institutional planning: The search for a pro-active planning instrument. disP, 49(3), 43–47. https://doi.org/10.1080/02513625.2013.859007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Viguié, V., Hallegatte, S., & Rozenberg, J. (2014). Downscaling long term socio-economic scenarios at city scale: A case study on Paris. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 87, 305–324. doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2013.12.028
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Watson, V. (2008). Down to Earth: Linking planning theory and practice in the ‘metropole’ and beyond. International Planning Studies, 13(3), 223–237. doi: 10.1080/13563470802521408
   Google Scholar
• Webber, P., Gouldson, A., & Kerr, N. (2015). The impacts of household retrofit and domestic energy efficiency schemes: A large scale, ex post evaluation. Energy Policy, 84, 35–43. doi: 10.1016/j.enpol.2015.04.020
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weber, M., & Truffer, B. (2017). Moving innovation systems research to the next level: Towards an integrative agenda. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 33(1), 101–121. doi: 10.1093/oxrep/grx002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wolfram, M. (2016). Conceptualizing urban transformative capacity: A framework for research and policy. Cities, 51, 121–130. doi: 10.1016/j.cities.2015.11.011
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zapata, M. A., & Kaza, N. (2015). Radical uncertainty: Scenario planning for futures. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 42(4), 754–770. doi: 10.1068/b39059
   Google Scholar
• Zegras, C., & Rayle, L. (2012). Testing the rhetoric: An approach to assess scenario planning’s role as a catalyst for urban policy integration. Futures, 44(4), 303–318. doi: 10.1016/j.futures.2011.10.013
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar