Mapping Public and Private Scenario Planning: Lessons from regional projects
- PDF / 144,008 Bytes
- 6 Pages / 539 x 703 pts Page_size
- 45 Downloads / 203 Views
Dialogue
Mapping Public and Private Scenario Planning: Lessons from regional projects1
JAY OGILVY AND ERIK SMITH
ABSTRACT How different is scenario planning done for public versus private purposes? In asking this question, Jay Ogilvy and Erik Smith look at regional projects done in the public interest, and distill a set of lessons through a brief examination of regional scenario planning projects run by Global Business Network throughout the 1990s. They then apply these lessons to a case conducted in 2001–2002: the future of California’s Central Valley. They argue that scenario planning in the public domain demands greater clarity of client attention to different constituencies – particularly in regions – even though the art and craft of the actual practice is very similar across public and private projects. KEYWORDS client; funding; facilitation; turf battles; outreach; marketing; participation; uncertainty
Introduction Some practitioners of scenario planning believe that scenario engagements done in the public domain2 must differ in fundamental ways from engagements in the private sector. We would suggest that the differences are not as great as they might seem. After many years of experience in different private and public projects, we can see key distinctions, particularly when it comes to defining the purpose and objectives of a given project, identifying the client, and considering different constituencies. But when it comes to actually doing the work ^ interviewing, workshops, drafting scenarios, drawing implications, and communicating the work to wider audiences ^ the art and craft are actually very similar. Indeed, work in the public interest can shed light that will better illuminate some of the darkness that remains in private sector work. To map these similarities and differences, we focus on scenario planning projects that Global Business Network (GBN) has conducted for regional areas. We first give brief highlights of several different projects, and draw some lessons for regional work in the public interest ^ as well as for scenario planning more generally. The second section plunges into a more detailed review of the GBN scenarios for the future of California’s Great Central Valley, which examined a range of futures for a region 450 miles long ^ almost a nation in itself, home to some of the richest farmland in the world, and a potential hotbed of competing interests. Development (2004) 47(4), 67–72. doi:10.1057/palgrave.development.1100084
Development 47(4): Dialogue Experience from the regions Since the1970s, scenario planners have worked on many projects that serve the public interest. There were, among others, projects for the Environmental Protection Agency inWashington, for the California Energy Commission, and for the city of Austin,Texas. These projects met with varying degrees of success. While the project for Austin might be hailed as partly responsible for the remarkable economic growth that city has enjoyed, some see the inaction of bureaucrats in Washington as hobbling project result
Data Loading...
