This note introduces how to create scenarios by using the knowledge that has been generated by the participants on the driving forces. Besides, it goes into detail on how these could evolve in the future. This document was used by Robin Bourgeois, Senior Foresight Advisor, GFAR Secretariat for the "Grassroots Foresight initiative - Training of Resource persons Participatory Prospective Analysis –Scenario Building." This workshop was held on February 1-7, 2015 in Quezon City, The Philippines. Check out "Empowering local organisations through foresight" by Robin Bourgeois at: http://bit.ly/17GoTt4

1. Methodological Note
S2.7: Building scenarios
This steps aims at creating scenarios, using the knowledge that has been generated by the
participants on the driving forces and how they could evolve in the future. A scenario is not a
prediction, not a forecast. It is an anticipation of plausible transformation through the exploration
of alternative paths. What matters in scenario building is that this exploration is broad enough so
that multiple and contrasted transformations can be envisaged. These transformations can be
desirable or undesirable for some or all participants.
What is a scenario?
A scenario is a description of how the future may unfold according to an explicit, coherent and
internally consistent set of assumptions about key relationships and driving forces. The scenario
building process presented here relies on the assumptions made through the exploration of the
plausible future states of the driving forces during the previous step (S2.6 Defining the states of the
driving forces). A scenario is a plausible combination of driving forces in different states.
In theory, the total number of scenarios that can be created is the product of multiplying the
number of forces by the number of states of each force. In the table below (example from Guyana),
the five driving forces had respectively four, two, three, five and four states. This would give a total
number of scenarios of 4x2x3x5x4 = 480 scenarios.
Driving force State 1 State 2 State 3 State 4 State 5
A. Willingness to
welcome visitors
Everyone is
accepted
Only family,
friends and
workers are
allowed
Only those who
agrees to
respect the
local rules and
legislation is
accepted
People who agree
to respect local
rules and the law
are accepted in
limited number
B. Info Daily Life
Wayana
Not available
or false
information
Reliable
information
available
C. Customary
authority
Respected by
residents but
not by
outsiders
No longer
respected
Respected by all
in the area of
influence
D. Current
Regulation
Current rules
but strictly
enforced
Current rules
with limited
enforcement
No more rules News rules more
suited to the
context and the
aspirations of the
population
New rules do
not take into
account the
aspirations of
the people
E. Amenities for
local inhabitants
Provision and
maintenance
of new
amenities
Deterioration
of current
amenities
Only
maintenance of
current
amenities
New amenities
without
maintenance
However, the number of plausible scenarios can be reduced by cross-checking the mutual
compatibility between different states. To do this, a list of states that cannot coexist together is
established. Two states are incompatible if the elements of the future each one describe cannot
logically and plausibly co-exist simultaneously/together.

2. 2
To facilitate the identification of incompatible states, each driving force is given a reference code (for
example a capital letter) and each state a number. The experts first reflect on the states that are not
compatible using the letter and number codes. In the above table, the red lines show some mutually
incompatible states. In this case for example, states A3 and D3 (that is the third state of force A and
the third state of force D) cannot coexist because if there is no more rule (D3), people cannot require
visitors to comply with the regulations for accepting to host them (A3). They are mutually
incompatible. A scenario that would include an A3-D3 combination would not be plausible.
Therefore any scenario with this combination must be discarded. This method is effective to reduce
the number of possible scenarios by avoiding inconsistent scenarios to be selected.
Creating scenarios
After identifying the incompatibilities across states, the experts can convene to consider either
working with a pre-set number of scenarios or working without pre-determining the number of
scenarios. In any case it is highly advised and recommended to work with at least five scenarios. Five
scenarios represent a good compromise to allow experts to be creative. In practice experts tend to
define only three scenarios: a "positive / desirable" scenario, a "neutral / trend / status quo"
scenario and a "negative / adverse" scenario. Results with two scenarios are even more Two
scenarios produce results of good-bad type. Five scenarios provide margins to provide alternative
views from each expert.
Coloured cards can be used to describe the combination of states that frames each scenario. It is
also possible to use tables, where lines drawn between varying states represent different scenarios.
Each scenario is identified through the corresponding combination of states of the driving forces. For
example in the table above a plausible scenario is represented by the combination of states A2-B1-
C1-D2-E3, in italics and grey shade. This is a scenario where the current situation would prevail in the
future. Representing each scenario using a codified frame of letters and numbers facilitate the
process of grouping in clusters and sorting the scenarios. It makes also possible to discard redundant
scenarios, consolidate them and discuss the results. Indeed the selection of plausible scenarios is
based on the idea of providing contrasting visions of the future.
At this stage the outputs of this scenario building process is a coded combination for each scenario.
The number of scenarios identified during this process can be high. In Mayotte for example the first
output was 23 scenarios. This number was progressively reduced to nine using different methods.
Hints for reducing the number of contrasted scenarios
 Scenarios differing because of the state of one single force may not represent very significant
alternative visions. In this case, the most contrasted scenario is selected and those with only
little variations are discarded.
 Scenarios which differ due to several well-contrasted states of forces are very useful to scan the
plausible futures. Therefore defining well-contrasted states of the driving forces, including
disruptions is extremely important for building a diversity of contrasted and plausible scenarios.
Developing the narratives of the scenarios
Once there is an agreement on the scenarios that are considered sufficiently contrasted and diverse
to explore these possible futures, each scenario will require a more complete description, that is, a
narrative, a story. The steps for developing scenarios through coherent narratives are as follows:
 Write down the frame of the scenario by putting together in a single paragraph the full
description of the states of driving forces corresponding to each scenario. This is the base of the
story. It represents a specific image of the future.

3. 3
 For each scenario, keeping in mind this base of the story, progressively complete the story by
adding compatible states of the other forces. This requires identifying plausible states which will
fit with the “story” told by the combination of the states of the driving forces which are
characterizing each scenario.
 Add first the states of the outputs (the forces located in the lower-right quadrant of the matrix),
starting with the forces that are at the lowest right part of that quadrant and working
progressively on the other force going up and left.
 Once compatible states of the outputs have been included in the story, the image of the future
becomes more detailed and more precise. Add then the compatible states of the leverages
forces (those in the upper right quadrant which have not already used for the creation of the
scenario). Start with the lowest right forces in this quadrant and progress towards the left and
up.
 Once these states have been entered the scenario is narrative/story is almost developed. Include
then compatible states of the bunch forces.
 At the end of the process each scenario will consist in a story which will have a t least a number
of sentences equal to the number of states of the forces used for developing the scenario.
 Finally, take a look at the outliers and reflect on how they could connect with the story of each
scenario.
Hints for developing scenarios:
 Split the work among small groups of the participants. Usually groups of three to four
persons are more effective to develop a scenario. Have each group sharing the story of the
scenario with the other groups.
 The final story of each scenario can be improved by linking the different states with some
logical connections taking into consideration that usually the story starts with the driving
forces and the leverage, then the bunch forces and finally the outputs forces. Note that this
order for presenting the story is different from the order for developing the scenario.