Global_Environmental_Research_Vol.25No1&2
32/124

26 of a determined input value is the lifetime of shared cars, which was set at longer than seven years (Onozuka et al., 2021). In terms of the workshop’s efficiency, the number of iterative processes was lower because the participants were able to get a grasp of the situation to achieve that goal easily. However, the participants could not propose other discussion points during the workshop because the scenario designer did not present the results of sensitivity analyses of other parameters. Although the workshop participants could see related information, they felt that it was still difficult to establish plausible input values for what might occur in 2050. *(+) indicates positive feedback from the workshop participants and (₋) indicates negative or constructive criticisms. Table 2 List of experimental workshops. Narrative scenario quantified (see Table 1) Goal to be achieved Overview of the quantification process Persons involved in the process Information provided to workshop participants by scenario designers Discussion points Examples of chenged parameters (discussion points) (not exhaustive) Outcomes Feedback from the participants In the third experiment, the target product was changed from automobiles to refrigerators because the content of the target narrative scenario changed to sharing an electric appliance among many people. To address the challenges found in the second workshop, the scenario designer prepared results of sensitivity analyses of ten parameters in advance, considering the content of the narrative scenario. At this workshop, the participants chose discussion points from candidate discussion points proposed by the scenario designer such as the electricity consumption of a the participants could not determine the input values within the workshop for two reasons. One was a lack of information for determining plausible input parameter refrigerator. Nevertheless, Experimental workshop 1 A: BICS Society (BICS: Business-Individual-Customer-Sharing)To halve CO2 emissions relating to passenger cars in 2050 compared with those in the BaU scenarioParticipants determined input parameter values without any additional information and checked their results One scenario designer and four participantsScenario storyline Participants chose discussion points by themselves Penetration rate of electric vehicles, How many people share a carConfirmed a series of values for realizing SCP but without clear rationales (+) Participants could discuss whatever they wanted to (₋) Too much repetition during the process (₋) Difficult to determine the values and rationales S. ONOZUKA et al. Experimental wokshop 2 Participants determined two input parameter values proposed by the scenario designer by checking the results of sensitivity analysesScenario storyline, information on current situations, future forecasts and the results of sensitivity analyses Scenario designers chose discussion points Penetration rate of car sharing services, Lifetime of shared carsConfirmed the state of two parameters needed to achieve SCP (+) Fewer reiterations in the process because it was easy to understand how the results changed when the two values were changed (₋) Participants could not propose other discussion points Experimental workshop 3 B: Beauty is only skin deepTo halve CO2 emissions relating to refrigerators Participants determined two input parameter values by checking the results of sensitivity analyses Scenario designers proposed discussion points and participants selected from them Electricity consumption of a refrigeratorQuantification unfinished because the participants determined the values (+) Participants could choose discussion points (+)Fewer reiterations in the process because it was easy to understand how the results changed when the two values were changed (₋) The discussion stopped when the scenario desiger operated the simulation model or serached for information on the model values. This time, we quantified narrative scenarios in terms of CO2 emissions relating to refrigerators. There was less information about refrigerators in Vietnam than about passenger cars. The other reason lay in the workshop’s facilitation. During the workshop, if the scenario designer could not recall information, he would try to find it in the simulation model or on the Internet, leaving him unavailable to facilitate the discussion, so the discussion would stop. This may have led to insufficient discussion. 3.1.3 Problems Identified from the Experimental Through the experimental workshops, we identified the following three problems:  The rationales behind the input parameter values are important to consider for reasonably determining the future parameter values described in the target narrative scenarios, e.g., for 2050. For this purpose, sufficient information should be provided to the participants of quantification workshops.  It is more efficient and effective to limit the number of discussion points, because not all parameters need to be discussed and determined precisely at the workshop.  It is difficult for scenario designers to facilitate the the simulation model, workshop while operating particularly in a virtual environment. Workshops

元のページ  ../index.html#32

このブックを見る