at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Ocean & Coastal Management 68 (2012) 189e200

Contents lists available

Ocean & Coastal Management

journal homepage: www.elsevier .com/locate/ocecoaman

Scenarios as a tool for supporting policy-making for the Wadden Sea

Frederick G. Wortelboer a,*, Bärbel G. Bischof b

a PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency, PO Box 303, 3720 AH Bilthoven, The NetherlandsbUniversity of Miami, Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science, 4600 Rickenbacker Cswy, Miami, FL 33149, USA

Article history:

a r t i c l e i n f o

Available online 30 June 2012

* Corresponding author. Tel.: þ 31 30 2743128.E-mail addresses: rick.wortelboer@pbl.nl (F.G. W

barbiemail@gmail.com (B.G. Bischof).

0964-5691/$ e see front matter � 2012 Elsevier Ltd.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2012.05.027

a b s t r a c t

The Wadden Sea region along the Dutch coast is currently an area undergoing a turning point in thecontext of both environmental change and economic growth and development, which will inevitablyresult in pivotal alterations of its natural systems. In this work, we apply scenarios as a tool to explorepossible futures of both environmental conditions and use-regimes in this region. Implications ofdivergent world-views about the Wadden Sea environment and its development potential are evaluatedwith this methodology to find common ground among stake-holders regarding management trajectoriesand the possible environmental conditions that may result from prospective policy options. Particularconsiderations of how to generate and evaluate scenarios are identified and applied to reveal howcurrent environmental tensions regarding development, resource exploitation, and conservation in theWadden Sea region can be useful to frame feasible policy prescriptions and mitigate conflict among user-groups. Two scenarios, “Nature First” and “Food and Energy” were constructed based on present-dayattitudes and perceptions of how this region should be managed, given its particular status asa unique and sensitive ecosystem that also harbors abundant resources and industrial growth capacity.We show that by looking ahead into potential outcomes of current trends in development efforts, thesescenarios can effectively inform the decision-making processes by revealing the potential consequences,both beneficial and adverse, that could result from the variety of development goals currently beingconsidered for the Wadden Sea region. We show that this heavily-utilized coastal zone requires a stra-tegic long-term integrated vision that includes the flexibility to accommodate unexpected circumstancesthat result from short-term management decisions.

� 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction

In current environmental policy circles, there has been anupsurge in discussions of how to bridge the gap between scienceand policy in order to draw conclusions that support conservationgoals and promote sustainable development. This discourse hasbecome particularly intense when managing natural systems lyingadjacent to densely-populated, high-use coastal regions like thosealong the Wadden Sea. Interdisciplinary research plans are inte-grating social and natural sciences to find a variety of strategies thatcan reveal the potential toward viable policy-options for a sustain-able future in these regions. It is therefore becoming morecommon, and indeed necessary, for sociologists, political scientists,business managers and natural scientists to collaborate, andtogether with stakeholders, translate knowledge of these systemsto work toward successful and adaptable policy solutions. In thiswork, we apply scenario analysis and describe the variety of

ortelboer), bgb06@fsu.edu,

All rights reserved.

environmental forecasts that are relevant to the Wadden Sea areaalong the Dutch coast. We use this region to show how scenariostudies can be engaged toward directing scientific debates,addressing public opinion and applying science in policy decisions.

TheWadden Sea is the intertidal zone in the southeastern part ofthe North Sea, lining the coast of the northern Netherlands, north-western Germany and the southwest coast of Denmark, north toEsbjerg. The low-lying wetland, sand bars, barrier islands, and tidalmarshes that define the Wadden Sea area extend some 500 km andcover an expanse of about 15,000 km2. At present, this region isa home to a rich variety of fish and intertidal species. Among itsecosystem services, this area functions as a nursery ground formarine fishes and a transit zone for migrating fishes and birds.Millions of shore and wading birds visit the area each year on theirmigrations to and from their northern breeding grounds, attractedby the high feeding potential offered by the rich intertidal areas andsalt marshes (Birdlife, 2009; Baptist et al., 2007). This area alsohouses a viable and growing population of harbor and gray seals.

The Dutch region of the Wadden Sea, the focus of this work, isa rich and biodiverse ecosystem, while also hosting a variety ofhuman uses, including fishing, artisan communities, recreation and

F.G. Wortelboer, B.G. Bischof / Ocean & Coastal Management 68 (2012) 189e200190

tourism, andwind, coal and gas energy production. Its natural valueand landscape draws in around 2 million visitors1 to the WaddenSea islands with a total of 4.4 million overnight stays each year(Toerdata Noord, 2011). With the growing popularity of thiscoastline for recreation, as well as the increasing pressures ofenergy production, fisheries, aquaculture, and conservation efforts,conflicts among stakeholders are intensifying and endangersustainable development of this region. Thus tensions betweenconserving the region’s rich environment and its potential fordevelopment are mounting.

The importance and potential of the rich natural systems of theWadden Sea were recognized decades ago, when in 1978, Danish,German and Dutch governments formed the Trilateral Wadden SeaCooperation, establishing a governing body and a cooperativeministry to oversee policy-development of the ecosystem theyshare. In 1987, the Common Wadden Sea Secretariat (CWSS) wasestablished as a secretariat for the Trilateral Cooperation, a branchassigned to support, facilitate, implement and coordinate collabo-rative activities in the shared region. The area has also receivedinternational recognition as a region of importance. Since 2002 thisregion has been listed as a Particularly Sensitive Sea Area (PSSA) bythe International Maritime Organization (IMO). In 2009 the Dutchand German sections, nearly 10,000 km2, were listed as a UNESCOWorld Heritage Site on the basis of its potential as a protectivebarrier to rising sea level, its biodiversity, and its relative pristine,undisturbed state as one of the “last remaining natural large-scaleintertidal ecosystems, where natural processes continue to functionlargely undisturbed.2

1.1. Current development trends and industries

Current developments in the Dutch Wadden area generatediverse and contrasting signals: on the one hand there is an explicitappreciation of the natural beauty and environmental condition ofthe Wadden Sea, which is expressed in governmental plans forenhancing both its natural and recreational value. The Wadden Seais classified as a natural water body for the European WaterFramework Directive, and it has the status of a Natura 2000 area,protecting its habitats and species. Its newly-acquired WorldHeritage status adds to its recognition as an internationallyimportant area of natural beauty, providing crucial ecosystemservices. Conserving its unique open character is the aim of nationalspatial planning, however development in the coastal area of themainland point toward an ongoing effort of industrialization andmaximizing resource-extraction, resulting in encroachment of theregion’s coastal fringe. For example, an extensive complex ofgreenhouses was erected on the mainland in the Western part ofthe Dutch Wadden area. Permission to expand this effort waseventually denied by the Dutch supreme court on the basis ofinsufficient attention to effects on the natural systems of theWadden Sea.3 Nevertheless, new plans are being drawn that aresimilar to those rejected.4 In the same region, a garbage-incinerating power plant has been built on the shore, acceptingraw waste and materials from surrounding regions of Europe,which has increased traffic, noise-levels and emissions to the area.

1 Figures from the Dutch Wadden Sea Islands’ websites combined (http://www.texel.net; http://www.vlieland-info.nl; http://www.terschelling.nl; http://www.ameland.nl; http://www.schiermonnikoog.nl).

2 United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), TheWorld Heritage List. http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/1314.

3 Raad van State, 2009. Case number 200902703/1/R2. http://www.raadvanstate.nl.

4 Netherlands Commission on Environmental Assessment (MER commissie),2011. Case number 2457. http://www.commissiemer.nl.

Extractive environmental pressures, such as natural gasexploitation, are ongoing, which result in bottom level depressionnear the extraction-sites on the order of millimeters (mm) per year.Permits are also being sought to expand salt-mining with the intentto drill and excavate the resource from sediment layers beneath theWadden Sea, which will inevitably contribute to significantbottom-level depression given that subsidence resulting frommining efforts on the fringes of the sea have already beenmeasuredto be up to 2 cm annually. Seemingly small, this rate is significantfor any low-lying, intertidal region, especially considering that themaximum bottom depression the Wadden Sea can cope with vianatural sedimentation processes is estimated at about 6 mm peryear (Delta Commission, 2008; Houtenbos, 2011).

In the eastern part of the Dutch Wadden area, the industrialharbor of Eemshaven is being developed with the construction ofnew gas and coal-burning power plants, thus further entrenchingenergy production as the dominant regional industry. A nuclearpower plant is currently under consideration. Additionally, thetrend of utilizing larger ships to transport coal and other extractedresources requires additional dredging to deepen the Ems estuary.Local authorities plan on extending harbors into theWadden Sea toaccommodate the trend of growing industrial development andmaritime commerce, and the bigger ships that come with it.Dredged sediments from channel maintenance and expansion aredeposited on nearby areas, altering natural dynamics andcommonly damaging important natural areas such as mussel-beds.

The shrimp fishery in this region is becoming less profitable andcomprises the least capital-rich usage in the area, while fixed-equipment mussel aquaculture from outside the Wadden area isextending its reach and environmental impact in the region. Theexpansion of these shellfish operations also overlaps into shrimpfishing areas and infringes on shrimping activities, generatingadditional conflict among user-groups. Moreover, the growingdevelopment of the Eemshaven industrial area represents a signif-icant potential loss of biodiversity in the Wadden Sea, despitemonetary compensation amounting to a buy-out of shrimp fishers.5

The concepts of sustainable fishery in theWadden Sea are currentlybeing established and await implementation (Regional Commissionon the Wadden Sea (RCW), 2010).

Human-nature interactions such as the intensification of ship-ping and port development and the expansion of fishing effortsdescribed above will place increasing pressure on the Wadden Seaecosystems and potentially alter the natural dynamics. In fact, inaddition to these issues, considerable concern among scientistsexists that can be distilled into four main themes when consideringenvironmental issues of the Wadden Sea: 1) the competition forfood between animals and people; 2) the sediment behavior in thesystem; 3) problems related to extensive dredging, and 4) theadaptive capacity of theWadden Sea in coping with future sea levelrise as a consequence of a changing climate. Several researchprograms are investigating these aspects which are financed by theWadden Fund (a national governmental fund fed by Wadden Seagas production revenues). The Wadden Academy is a board ofscientists, also funded by the Wadden Fund, that proposed anintegrated and multidisciplinary approach to scientific research inthe Dutch Wadden Sea (Kabat et al., 2009).

1.2. Environmental history, policy, and conflict in the Wadden Sea

Through the centuries, the Wadden Sea area has been an areawhere land and water frequently change places. Extreme floods

5 Raad van State, 2009. Case number 200902744/2/R2. http://www.raadvanstate.nl.

F.G. Wortelboer, B.G. Bischof / Ocean & Coastal Management 68 (2012) 189e200 191

once wiped away intertidal areas and marshes that had beenformed in the preceding decades, or sometimes centuries(Wiersma et al., 2009). In one of the last major flooding events,occurring around 1700 AD, the present morphology of the WaddenSea was more-or-less established. The rapidly growing economy inthe 1960s led to the proposal of reclaiming land for the purpose offood production, but not without conflict and opposition froma variety of organizations (Enemark, 2005). Following large protestsand several studies on the intrinsic value of the Wadden Seaenvironment, the region was officially declared a nature area. TheWadden Sea Memorandum (PKB) mandates this region to be pro-tected, conserved and, where necessary, “restored” (version 1976),which was replaced by “sustainable protection and development asa nature area” in the 2007 version (VROM et al., 2007).

The PKB Memorandum introduced the precautionary approachto this region, approving use of the area only if negative effectswould not occur. Although this principle was in place, possiblybecause of the difficulty in defining “negative effects,” permits forcockle dredging and young mussel trawling were still provided bythe government and thus landings increased. The yearly permits forcockle dredging were questioned in court on an annual basis(Verbeeten, 2000; Van Nieuwaal, 2011). In the early 1990s, star-vation and death of thousands of common eiders (Somateria mol-lissima) in the Wadden Sea and North Sea coastal zone resultedfrom the fishery-induced reduction in populations of cockles andmussels upon which these and other birds depend. This mortalityevent led to a system where a resource-reserve to sustain theWadden Sea birds was established, and only the “excess” amount ofbiomass was allowed to be fished. In 2004, a second scientificevaluation of the shellfish fisheries revealed the flaws of the foodreservation policy: it was not the biomass present in the system butrather the biomass available to the birds that should be the criterionon which to base fisheries quotas (Ens et al., 2004). In addition,a ruling by the European Court of Justice that same year determinedthat the permits for shellfish fisheries in the Dutch Wadden Seawere, in fact, illegal because of insufficient application of theprecautionary principle. This ruling also established that the permitapplicant had to prove that their efforts would not damage theenvironment, rather than leaving this assessment to the govern-ment or those contesting the permits (Runhaar and Van Nieuwaal,2010).

In 2004, a political decision was then made by the Dutchgovernment to address inconsistencies in the current managementof the area and enable economic development in the region. Acomplete closure of the mechanical cockle fishery was thereforedecided, because it was deemed unlikely that it could develop intoa sustainable fishery within 7 years. The mussel fishery wasallowed to plan for reaching sustainability (excluding bottomtrawling) within 15 years. Concurrently, the moratorium on gasextraction from beneath the Wadden Sea was lifted, with thestipulation that gas extractionwould be diminished or closed downif adverse effects to the ecosystem of the Wadden Sea shouldemerge, as determined by monitoring efforts. A portion of the gasextraction revenues would be used to establish a fund for WaddenSea-related research until 2020, now called the Wadden Fund(Hanssen et al., 2009; Runhaar and Van Nieuwaal, 2010).

The Wadden Fund has since boosted scientific research andcooperation between scientific groups and stakeholders, and hasled to a broader and more multi-disciplinary view on the sustain-ability and development potential of the Wadden region. Althoughthe situation has improved in the past two decades, legal actionsregarding development and exploitation of theWadden Sea are nota thing of the past. In 2008 the permits for the trawling of youngmussels were voided, again because of possible damage to theecosystem. Such court rulings, especially by the European court in

2004, were decisive events that changed the way the Dutchgovernment manages theWadden Sea (Runhaar and Van Nieuwaal,2010). Currently, legal procedures are being drawn up to opposefurther industrialization projects on the shores of the Wadden Sea,specifically the garbage incinerator and the coal power plantexpansion efforts.

To work toward conserving this sensitive environment and yetstill retain access to its rich resources for a variety of use-regimes,policy-making targets today are aiming at sustainable develop-ment in terms of how resources are valued. Gaining this perspec-tive and clarifying the potential costs and benefits of value-baseddecision-making thus requires a look forward in time to under-stand potential consequences in terms of environmental planningand the associated human-nature interactions. To engage insustainable planning for this region, a range of strategies can beapplied, from complex computer simulation models to enableforecasting specific features, to conceptualizing future socio-cultural constructs. Among these forecasting methods is theconcept of scenarios, a method that lays out a variety of possiblephysical, socio-economic and environmental geographic circum-stances, which are based on forecasting the pathways of currentpolicy-directives that favor particular goals (conservation, foodsecurity, etc.). Scenario analyses attempt to envision futurecircumstances in the environment in terms of current human-nature linkages and development trajectories, thereby providinginsight into what issues will likely require attention.

It is our aim to demonstrate how different interests and opin-ions lead to different views on potential development trends for theWadden Sea region by focusing on a variety of distinct, possiblefutures based on current circumstances. By deconstructing thesedifferences through applying this methodology, it is possible toreveal commonalities that are shared by the varying view points,and with that, identify the most promising and robust policyoptions for the future.

1.3. Theoretical foundations of scenario-building

Concerns about deciding on themost effective policy options forany environment inherently include the physical changes thatresult from implementing new management structures and theunforeseen circumstances that may consequently arise, and whichcannot be addressed under defined policy measures. These types ofuncertainties fall within distinct categories, and for environmentalissues, often embed ecological, economic, and societal trans-formations. Uncertainties are generally grounded in the followingpoints (adapted from Zinn, 2008):

1) Assumptions are based on experiences from the past, whichfollows that the perception of uncertainty is a personalconstruct and thereby differs between individuals;

2) The knowledge (amount and quality) about the current situa-tion influences our (un)certainty about the future;

3) The certainty regarding expectations regarding the near futureis greater than those of the distant future;

4) Adaptation to uncertain situations is compensated by takingprecautionary measures;

5) Destructive events and anomalies can occur unexpectedly andcannot always be avoided.

The handling of uncertainties also involves non-rational aspectssuch as intuition, trust, individual preference, and emotion (Zinn,2008). Successful policies are those able to apply rational andpragmatic aspects within complex social contexts and are thereforegenerally robust (in the sense that they are effective under a varietyof circumstances) and adaptable to actual circumstances or

F.G. Wortelboer, B.G. Bischof / Ocean & Coastal Management 68 (2012) 189e200192

unexpected conditions that may arise. Scenarios can help identifythese robust and adaptable policy options by constructing possiblefutures based on a combination of policy choices made undercurrent conditions and identifying possible uncertainties.

1.4. Defining scenarios

Several formalized definitions of scenarios have been developed.The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) defines themas “descriptions of journeys to possible futures [that] reflectdifferent assumptions about how current trends will unfold, howcritical uncertainties will play out, and what new factors will comeinto play” (UNEP, 2002). Other formalized definitions of scenariosinclude Van Notten (2006), who defines them as “consistent andcoherent descriptions of alternative hypothetical futures that reflectdifferent perspectives on past, present, and future developments,which can serve as a basis for action.” Rotmans and others (2000)define scenarios as hypothetical, describing possible future path-ways and dynamic processes and sequences of events over a periodof time that are causally related andare created frommentalmapsormodels reflecting different perspectives on past, present and futuredevelopment (Rotmans et al., 2000). Regardless of such definitionalvariations, the common thread in all scenarios approaches is totackle the uncertainties in decision-making by exploring the varietyof possible futures based on current trends and directives.Depending on the type of scenario analysis, the results will differ inthe amount of divergence in the scenario outcomes (Fig. 1).

To build viable scenarios for environmental systems such as theWadden Sea, it is crucial to include scientific information as thescenario-building strategy includes considering the potential envi-ronmental consequences that result from the range of humanactivities. Knowledge of human-nature interaction when buildingscenarios will also provide insight about how particular activitiesmay align or compete with specific conservation goals and policyprescriptions. This particular dynamic implies that scenarios aboutan environment are, at least inpart, a reflectionof the availability andthe interpretation of scientific knowledge, which are both inevitablyinfluenced by deep-seated cultural values and norms that determineresearch priorities and how results are framed (Latour, 1983). Thefeatures and trends described in these scenarios thus inherentlyembed value-systems, priorities and development preferences,which inevitably manifest in the environment via managementstructures that were built by the networks that interpret truth-claims. Exploring scenarios of the Wadden Sea in terms of differentsocietal valuation and preferred development trajectories for theregionwill allowus to better understand the impactof currentpolicy,while gaining insight on future policy planning.

2. Methodology

To apply the concept of scenarios in place, it becomes necessaryto distill the specific elements that are most relevant to the desired

Fig. 1. Scenario types. Adapted from Börjeson et al. (2006).

policy directive from the multitude of possible features. Regardlessof intended adaptations and the enormous variation such a methodaffords, as a formalized method it nevertheless demands distinct(and defined) procedural steps, which not only provide a repeatablestructured approach but also lend traction to questions of cogencyand validation.

Five phases can be distinguished in constructing scenarios(adapted from Scearce and Fulton, 2004):

1) Questions: define the question to be addressed:

The questions for this workwere: howwill theWadden Sea looklike in 30 years? Starting from the point where court orders to theDutch government were regularly presented, what policy-optionsexist? What are the apparent as well as the less apparent optionsfor the area?

2) Exploration: identify and outline the driving forces anduncertainties:

The developments and controversies in the Wadden Sea areahave centered around opposing national and regional interests andthe variety of particular positions on these issues. From aneconomic perspective, the national government proposed polder-ing of theWadden Sea in themid 1960s and gas extraction from the1980s onward. Regional governments facilitated the industrializa-tion on the shores of the Wadden Sea, obviously a significantdriving force. The othermain driving forces we applied in this studywere the alliance of nature conservation organizations that areactively engaged in monitoring the environmental status of thearea and which question the permits that were provided to exploitthe area that often did not alignwith the government’s own targets.These organizations were backed mostly by the European legisla-tion of the Birds and Habitat Directive.

In these contexts, uncertainties stemming from these drivingforces include to what extent the industrial developments cancontinue and at what point national and/or regional governmentscould or should step in to prevent the disappearance or attrition ofnatural resources and cultural heritage, and the economic activitiesthat depend on them.

3) Synthesis: prioritize the main driving forces and sources ofuncertainty; construct scenarios and describe the variousfutures; develop the stories that contextually ground thescenarios:

Priorities of driving forces were outlined from the tensionsbetween conservation efforts and features of current environ-mental exploitation. The basis of the story-lines that were appliedto develop the scenarios included the current status of the Wad-den Sea Area and the changes that took place in the past asdetermined from policy-records and peer-reviewed articles (e.g.Reise et al., 2010; Wolff et al., 2010; Eriksson et al., 2010). Addi-tionally, visits to the area were made and informal interviews heldwithin the scope of the project Nature Outlook 2010e2040 (PBL,2012).

4) Action: learn about the scenarios; decide on common actionsthat are valid for all scenarios; personalize the scenarios.

Possible actions that can be determined from the scenarios arepragmatic in that the reality of current conditions are taken intoaccount; thus “action” generally involves an enormous network ofinterested parties, and can be framed and developed in a widevariety of ways depending on the goals and power structures of

F.G. Wortelboer, B.G. Bischof / Ocean & Coastal Management 68 (2012) 189e200 193

those involved, and how thesemay change in the process of movingforward.

5) Monitoring: track the indicators that reveal which scenario isunfolding and any changes in trends.

Schwartz and Randall (2007) stress the importance of moni-toring, whereby the learning phase is extended and studyingfutures becomes a permanent process instead of a once-upon-a-time activity. This may be achieved with a follow-up on thisfoundational study. Several research and management programsnow operating in the Wadden Sea will provide a variety of indi-cators that will be monitored, such as the implementation of theWater Framework Directive and the Dutch program ‘Towards a RichWadden Sea’ (PTRWS, 2011).

For this work, the scenario study on the Wadden Sea was per-formedwithin the context of the Dutch Nature Outlook (PBL, 2012).The aim of the Nature Outlook was to evaluate the current state ofnature areas in The Netherlands and to investigate the relationsbetween possible future developments in nature and other possibledevelopments in the rural areas. Although agriculture (and foodavailability and security) and urbanizationwere included as drivingforces for the Netherlands as awhole, the Outlook was notmeant toinclude all societal aspects and industrial and political develop-ments. In fact, the intended outcome of Nature Outlook was toprovide view points and policy options that could fuel public andpolitical debate about the future of environmental systems ingeneral, and the Wadden Sea region in particular. For the WaddenSea area, differentiations in trends of industrial development weremade to tackle the different perspectives on industrialization andemployment that exist in the area.

2.1. Sociological Foundations for environmental Scenariodevelopment and analysis

Direct goals of a scenario study are to gather, discuss and assesscurrent knowledge on the system under study, to integrate theknowledge into a good understanding of the system, and togenerate knowledge of its possible future states in relation tocomplex interactions with external factors (Wiek et al., 2006).However, the impacts of futures studies should be set in broadercontexts. They can range from pure scientific knowledge generationto presenting societal-based policy-options. In such awide-range ofpossibilities, scenario analysis is situated in the category ofstudying scientific aspects with the purpose to function as anagenda-setting exercise that inevitably shapes social attitudes andopinions. To reach the level of impact on policy making, scenariostudies need to incorporate a number of social aspects that arepresent in environmental decision-making.

2.2. Thinking inside or outside the box

A pitfall in scenario studies, and especially studies that claim tohave undertaken a thorough search for all possible futures, is thatthey are partially based upon memories of events occurring in thepast and knowledge of current trends and their projections into thefuture (Godet, 2010; Van Asselt et al., 2010). As such, the scenariooutcomes may all seem very likely and plausible, but the lessons tobe learned from such studies may be fairly limited because of theirreliance on what is remembered and what is known. Furthermore,handling uncertainty in general (and especially uncertainty aboutpossible disruptive events that can cause discontinuity in thefuture) is an aspect that is difficult to include in futures studies (VanAsselt et al., 2010). Major accidents and natural disasters are thetypical “low probabilitye high impact” events that can significantly

alter expected attitudes about certain topics. Events that have a lowprobability, but can lead to high impacts, are a significant challengeto attempt to incorporate into scenario studies as they tend offset orto create discontinuities in future trends.

Discontinuities also occur in environmental systems when, dueto certain pressures on the ecosystem, thresholds are exceeded andthe ecosystem is altered from one state to a very different andhighly unexpected state (Godet, 2010; Petraitis and Hoffman, 2010;Scheffer et al., 2001). Such potentially radical environmentalchanges are inherently difficult to predict and therefore difficult, ifnot impossible, to include in scenarios. Discontinuities (also calledsurprises or wild-cards) may occur in other fields of interestcommonly included in scenarios, such as economies, publicopinion, and political climate (Smith and Dubois, 2010). Differentstrategies to anticipate possible surprises and to deal with them inscenario studies exist (Schwartz and Randall, 2007; Van Nottenet al., 2005). For example, by including wild-cards in scenariostudies in a systematic way, valuable additional informationmay bederived that may lead to more resilient policies (Schwartz andRandall, 2007; Van Notten et al., 2005; Wardekker et al., 2010).To improve the utility of scenarios and provide an accurateframework of likely social and environmental contexts, identifyingthe social, technological, economic and political driving forces thatexist on a wide-range of geographic scales e regional, national andinternational e becomes a particularly relevant. The driving forcesthat can result in radical and unexpected views regarding theWadden Sea have been identified and monitored, and as such,the different ways in which social priorities change could beanticipated (Scearce and Fulton, 2004).

2.3. Scientific uncertainties

Sources of uncertainty that are social in nature play a significantrole in producing and incorporating scientific knowledge, andstructuring public debate. This should come as no surprise giventhat individuals involved in environmental science and decision-making are part of unique social networks and are bound by anarray of socio-political preferences and allegiances, thereby influ-encing how knowledge is framed. Scientists themselves alsobecome partial to the facts they produce and hypotheses theypropose. They must also consider funding-potential of theirresearch ideas, and potential financial consequences of theirresults. Finally, geographic components have also been demon-strated to be relevant in scientific production and debate given thattruth-claims emerge from located field areas and conducted byparticular institutions that seek particular goals, have specificresearch preferences, cultural connections, and dependencies(Bischof, 2010; Latour, 1983). Such realities, especially in environ-mental issues results in competing narratives that are commonlydriven by personal preferences and beliefs, and a range of diverseinterpretations. Thus accepting uncertainties and focusing onmatters of fact have the potential to open an avenue for knowledge-based policy making (Latour, 2004).

Bischof (2010) has shown that even among those who areinvested in an environmental issue, science and sound logic donot tend to override social affiliations and individual identities.Scientific uncertainty remains an insoluble factor in any environ-mental decision-making and is an inherently significant variablewhen making projections of future circumstances, such as inscenario construction. When it comes to decision-making thatapplies continuously-changing scientific discourses, which inevi-tably contain a significant amount of uncertainty, the questions thatenter public debate are better answered by distinguishing betweenthose items that are issues of fact versus issues of concern.As scientific uncertainty is an inevitable feature in any study,

F.G. Wortelboer, B.G. Bischof / Ocean & Coastal Management 68 (2012) 189e200194

distinguishing between those features that are known (matters offact) from the larger topic being addressed (matters of concern) ethe latter often replete with unknowns e allows debate to befocused and critique to be limited to the most relevant issues,avoiding a significant obstacle in the process of environmentalpolicy-making (Latour, 2004).

Uncertainty is also an iterative feature in future studies thatrepresents a significant consideration as to how scenarios mayunfold by determining the controlling driving forces, and decidingwhich of them should be included. According to Van Asselt andothers (2010), futures studies are qualitative by definition. However,there is no clear divide between qualitative and quantitativeapproaches, given that both can be applied toward gaining insightinto the problemat hand. Although the results from scenario studiesand futures studies may lead to enhancing the scientific knowledgeabout environmental problems as they influence research initia-tives, their conclusions may also steer and fuel public debate(Kloprogge et al., 2011; Refsgaard et al., 2007; Van der Sluijs et al.,2003, 2008; Walker et al., 2003). Groups in society can becomeacquainted with the problem itself, the manner in which solutionsare sought, and the possible outcomes and implications. The degreeof embedded values contained in scientific research is one of thesources of uncertainty when determining its potential impact (Vander Sluijs et al., 2008). Scientific results and their uncertainties canalsobeused in existingpublic discussions andmaybegivendifferentmeanings by groups striving for different goals. These subjectiveframes of what are reported as neutral “facts” can generate narra-tives that tend to dissociate the original ideas from their originalcontexts so to fit them within social norms and expectations, andcan, in fact, reveal important factors (Shapin, 2012). Examples ofthese kinds of uncertainties include belief in the existence ofconspiracies, profound distrust of government, and feelings towardglobalismwhich are applied to shape worldviews and realities. Thevariety of ways in which preferences, attitudes and core beliefsinfluence interpretations of information also greatly determine themeaning and the value that is given to scientific results.

The status and purpose of scientific researches, and the scien-tists involved, also present additional questions of informationflows and access (Bischof, 2010; Hajer, 2009; Shapin, 1998). Whatsome now term our information age, however, also enhancescommunication of ideas and knowledge that was once distributedmainly through hard-copy journals or other such subscription-dependent resources that could reach only limited audiences.More open access to information and the annihilation of distanceby instant communication networks highlights the need to re-position how uncertainty may be negotiated in order to achievesalient results in generating sustainable environmental systems(Shapin, 1998; Van der Sluijs et al., 2003, 2008). Given the power ofglobally-connected social networks and media to rapidly transmitinformation, there is great potential to address inherent scientificuncertainties as they emerge, which has the potential to achievemore transparency and focus debate.

Uncertainties and subjectivities will always be a residual ofscientific efforts, however more important is how they ricochetwithin specific policies, cultural norms and taboos as they areinjected into the public sphere. Such influences on scientific dataand interpretations modify scientific discourse and competingperspectives. These subjective versions of scientific information,regardless of their accuracy, accumulate traction and are woveninto the storylines from which decisions are made.

2.4. Science, knowledge, values and public debate

The same scientific results can therefore amount to an enormousvariety of interpretations as they are filtered through socio-political

and cultural preferences, social networks and institutional affilia-tions and thus can have an immensely polarizing effect on thosedebating an issue of common concern (Bischof, 2010; Latour, 2004).The presumed mismatch between one’s own values and that ofothers’ may trigger emotional responses and personifications thatare not related to substantive scientific arguments (see also Van derKlundert, 2008). The discussion on human interaction with thewild seals in the Wadden Sea is an example of the use of suchsubjective frames. It starts with the semantics: Is seal rehabilitationa “business” or a “societal/community service” toward animals inneed? Is it about capturing and doctoring of seals from a self-sufficient population that undergoes natural fluctuations; or is itabout the rescue and rehabilitation of mortally wounded and sickseals and abandoned young? On one side, the public debate is fedwith reports arguing on scientific grounds that seal rescue is nolonger needed and should be stopped (CWSS, 2006). These reports,however, have a very limited distributional range and are accessiblean understandable to a very limited group of people. Conversely, tosupport seal-rescue operations, the public is presented full-pageadvertisements in national newspapers showing photos of wide-eyed seal pups and pose questions of whether these “poor littleseal babies” should be left sick and dying in the rough and inhospi-tableWadden Sea. In the build-up to the debate in Dutch Parliament,both groups tried to get the favor of the representatives. In the end,the Dutch parliament voted in favor of the seal rescue, thereby dis-regarding the scientific information. Recently, the premise of theanimal rehabilitation debate has gotten an extra dimensionwith thecaptureof anorca fromtheWaddenSea.Because theorca’shealthhasimproved in captivity, arguments have been posed to refrain fromreleasing the animal back into the wild based on concerns over thesocial structure of orca pods and the possible inability for the captivewhale to find its family. The orcawas subsequently turned over to anamusementpark. A rehabilitatedhooded seal, however,was releasedwithout any scientific assessment of its survival potential, andsubsequently shot in Greenland (SRRC, 2011). Science alone istherefore not the only decisive factor in environmental decision-making (Hajer, 2009).

Consequently, as long as uncertainties in the scientific results arepresented openly, there exists room for discussion of viable solutionsthrough the exchange of ideas and information. The differing viewpoints thatemerge fromsuchdebates,andnot theveracityof scientificinformation, are among the features that are important to considerwhentaking intoaccount thevarietyofperspectives in futures studies.However, all possible world-views do not necessarily need to beincluded provided that the diversity of the views that are included areof direct relevance to the concerns and features that are driving publicdebate. The particular social constructs, cultural aspects, and indi-vidual preferences that influence and alter scientific perceptions asthey resonate in the social systems that produce and reproduce them,makesother factors suchaspublicopinion,playavital role indecision-making. How such public opinion is formed, steered or manipulatedhas shown to influence the usefulness and impact of research effortsand institutional support systems. Therefore, translating andcommunicating the scientific results to the public is becoming moreand more important as information has the potential to spreadinstantaneously through our information-oriented society.

2.5. Considerations for selecting indicators and data

Choosing the right indicators for evaluating scenarios is para-mount. To measure biodiversity, for example, a multitude of indi-cators andmetrics are available (Purvis and Hector, 2000). More arebeing developed in the context of the European Marine StrategyFramework Directive and its Biodiversity descriptor, mostly derivedfrom species monitoring. However, lists of species may not satisfy

F.G. Wortelboer, B.G. Bischof / Ocean & Coastal Management 68 (2012) 189e200 195

the criteria for scenario indicators, given that such lists do notprovide useful insight in terms of recognizing change, risks andpressures, and trends that may indicate projected status; neither isthere any guarantee that the information in such lists is complete oraccurate, or easily organized. Aggregation of data is necessary,although disaggregation must also be possible to go back to thedetails and hint at potential causative factors. Some aggregatedindicators for biodiversity have been proposed and applied inscenario studies (e.g. Alkemade et al., 2009; Pereira et al., 2010;Sijtsma et al., 2011; Ten Brink, 2007; Wessels et al., 2011). Never-theless, environmental indicators are likely to contain greaterprobabilities of uncertainty, as environmental responses aresomewhat more difficult to predict amid potential unexpected (orunnoticed) perturbations.

Alternatively, economic indicators are easier to calculate thanenvironmental indicators andmore often than not, are expressed inmonetary units and therefore easily aggregated. Socioeconomicand social indicators are more diverse, must consider issues ofgeographic scale, geopolitics, and include factors such as a healthyeconomy, sustainable economy, food availability, public health,public safety, social cohesion, cultural integrity, inspirational value,social acceptance, access to clean air and water, and heritage value,all of which are frequently-used indicators (Belfiore et al., 2006; DeGroot et al., 2003; Molnar et al., 2009; Thomassin et al., 2010).Collecting social indicators is a challenge. Some of them areanalyzed and aggregated in assessments of ecosystem services iftheir value for human use can be agreed-upon, readily quantifiedand monetized (Alcamo et al., 2005; Constanza et al., 2005;Perrings et al., 2010; TEEB, 2010). Nevertheless, if a scenario study ismeant to be useful to society and for policy making, then theinclusion of economic, social and environmental indicators isobligatory to facilitate the generation of balanced policy options (inaccordance with the UNEP-adapted principle of people-planet-profit).

2.6. Evaluating Wadden Sea scenarios

These scenarios of the Wadden Sea were evaluated on theirrelative impact on each other’s targets. In it simplest form,scenarios are loosely scored, based on their positive and negativeaspects for each scenario category, and then compared by eachcategory of listed features of interest. In this study, we dividedissues into biodiversity, landscape, tourism and recreation, foodproduction, energy production and industrial development tocover the core features of interest in environmental issues of theregion. Other important social-economic indicators that couldexpand these scenarios, such as heritage value, employment andfood availability are also relevant, however outside of the scopeof this work, which focuses on first establishing possible envi-ronmental conditions and their relationships to main drivingforces.

For biodiversity, the evaluation was along the lines of theNational Capital Index (Ten Brink, 2007), however no predictivemodels are available to make quantitative estimates. In esti-mating the effects on biodiversity, for example, different speciesgroups were assessed separately: algae, macrofauna, macro-phytes, birds and mammals. Aspects of both habitat area andpopulation size were taken into account. The aspect of landscapevalue was assessed on the basis of the potential for naturalprocesses, the possibility to recognize cultural and historicalaspects of its development, and the openness and serenity of thelandscape.

Economic values were split into different sectors, given theymight profit or be hampered in different ways. Industrial devel-opment represents the potential for growth of industrial activities

that are not linked to the natural resource assets of the area, such aschemical production plants and incinerators. Tourism and recrea-tion is evaluated on the grounds of attractiveness or beauty of thelandscape, both as a final destination and as transient stoppingpoint on the way to the highly popular barrier islands. Foodproduction is assessed on both the amount and the potential forproducing area specific products. Energy production potential isassessed taking into account the different forms of current energyproduction, as well as growing potential for new productionmethods.

3. Results

The scenarios that were constructed and which represent thecompeting interests of the Wadden Sea region can be categorizedinto distinct development trajectories, one focusing onconservation/ecosystem-oriented institutions while the other usesthe region primarily for intensive food and energy production.These scenarios represent the appearance and function of theWadden Sea area in about 30 years from the present, as expectedgiven current trends and conditions.

Table 1 reveals the scores of the particular features included inthe scenarios. Positive scores mean an expected greater emphasis/value/importance of that feature, while a negative score implies theopposite.

3.1. Scenario summary: Nature First

In this scenario, the policy for the whole of theWadden Sea areais oriented toward the recovery of nature and natural processes(Fig. 2). The Wadden Sea itself is a United Nations World Heritagesite and a national park where (limited) access is granted bypermits. The Wadden area is appointed National Park status whereall use and developments are aimed at strengthening its naturalvalue and enhancing natural processes. Within the Wadden Sea noshipping is allowed, thus ending the continuous dredging of sandand the dumping of sludge that counteract the natural dynamicsand formation of channels and mud- and sand-flats. Touristsdestined for the barrier islands are brought in via the North Sea.Large-scale commercial fishing and aquaculture in the Wadden Seais abandoned. Extensive estuarine areas re-establish permanentsalinity gradients and fish migration routes to fresh water in thewestern (IJsselmeer), central (Lauwersmeer) and eastern part(Eems-Dollard) of theWadden Sea. Geomorphological processes onthe islands are left undisturbed to develop natural sediment andsand transport dynamics from the North Sea into the Wadden Sea,thereby restoring the region’s ability to cope with sea level risewhen needed. The natural food web is restored, compared to theearlier situation where food availability was hampered andcontrolled on the basis of resource exploitation. Lower disturbanceof sediments has lead to extensive seagrass beds, including thereintroduction of related fauna, such as seahorses. Mussel andcockle beds and other species of shellfish have increased, guaran-teeing an abundant food source for both resident andmigrant birds.Sea eagles breed on the borders of the National Park and feed in theextensive estuarine areas. The Wadden Sea as a nursery ground foryoung marine fish is re-established. Rays, sharks, seals and harborporpoises use the area as breeding grounds and for feeding. Bot-tlenose dolphins and humpback whales frequent the area becauseof the abundant food sources.

3.2. Scenario summary: Food and Energy

The increasing international demand for food has led to a switchin priorities from nature to more functional aspects of ecosystems

Table 1Evaluation of scenario features. Positive scores means an expected greater emphasis/value/importance of that feature, while a negative score implies the opposite.

Nature First Food and Energy

Biodiversity þ Decrease in phytoplankton as emissions fromland are converted into biomass in the intertidal zone

þ Dynamic dune systems, enabling natural sand transportþ Increase in seagrass beds because of diminished disturbance of sea floorþ Increase in macrofauna quality as shrimp and mussel

fishery is abandoned (and erosion with it); natural 3D assemblagesþ Reoccur; food goes to natural mussels (and will be

available as bird food) instead of mussel aquacultureþ Increase in fish quality as migration from salt to fresh

water is enhanced and seagrass beds again give shelterto young fish; Wadden Sea is restored to its original state as nursery.

þ Increase in bird quality because of rich sub-tidal and intertidalareas; no disturbance from recreational vessels.

þ Increase in mammal quality because of abundance of availablefish; reappearance of harbor porpoises

� Spill-over of organic material and nutrients fromextensive aquaculture plots (more phytoplankton,more biomass, less characteristic species)

� Anoxic conditions� Introduction of exotic species involved with aquaculture� Extensive disturbance by fast carriers and intensive use

(building, maintenance, production)� Virtually no room for bird colonies and mammal hauling sites� Large areas of intertidal flats in use for food production;

patchiness of areas where birds can feed following thetides; impact on East-Atlantic flyway

Landscape þ Natural, cultural and historical characteristicspreserved en enhanced

þ Open and serene landscapeþ No light pollution

� Industrial landscape� Openness severely affected� Restless landscape with activities on a large scale� Light pollution by navigational and safety lighting

of objects in the seaIndustrial development � Strongly limited because of shipping ban

� No chemical and waste industries on the shoresþ Potential for small scale artisan products

þ No restrictions, depending on economic trendsþ Much room for expansion (area is relatively sparsely

populated)Tourism and recreation � Limitation on number of tourists

þ Enhanced attractivenessþ High status (the place to be)

� Mainland shores (as departure point to barrier islands)less attractive

� Tourism on islands becomes one-sided (toward the North Sea)þ faster connections

Energy production � No coal plantsþ Alternative energy sources that fit into the landscape

þ Variety of possible energy productionþ Lots of space for expansionþ Infrastructure available

Food production � No bulk food� No bottom trawlingþ Specialized and small-scale selective fishing possible:

ecologically sustainableþ Potential for high-quality regional food brands

þ Bulk food production as well as specialized productsþ Efficient capital-intensive productionþ Rapid connections to inland markets and tourist markets� No strong regional brand but rather a tendency toward

generic products

F.G. Wortelboer, B.G. Bischof / Ocean & Coastal Management 68 (2012) 189e200196

(Fig. 3). The World Heritage status has been abandoned. Foodproduction from the Wadden Sea is rationalized and organized instationary units. Extensive shellfish aquaculture is situated in thewestern region. Semi-enclosed fish farms are grouped togetherthroughout the Sea, enabled by deepening of these areas bydredging. The valuable large fish that these aquaculture effortsproduce are mainly shipped to Asian countries. Food for the

Fig. 2. Impression of the scenario ‘Nature

regional aquaculture industry is produced on land in the numerousglass structures that were formerly used for producing less-profitable vegetables. Shipping routes have been rationalized intocommercial and recreational routes, leading straight from harborsto the North Sea and the islands. New highways provide ampleaccess to the production plants and harbors. The high energydemand from households, aquaculture and industries results in the

First’ for the Dutch Wadden Sea area.

Fig. 3. Impression of the scenario ‘Food and Energy’ for the Dutch Wadden Sea area.

F.G. Wortelboer, B.G. Bischof / Ocean & Coastal Management 68 (2012) 189e200 197

expansion of wind turbines throughout the Wadden area, both onthe coast and in the sea as extensive wind farms. Dikes have beenlayered with solar panels to provide an additional energy sources.Several new energy plants (both gas and coal-burning) have beenestablished in the eastern part of the Wadden Sea, where access tothe North Sea by big ships is guaranteed by additional dredging andport-maintenance. The most accommodating transportation facil-ities have attracted other industries, such as extensive garbagehandling and burning. Tourism has withdrawn from the WaddenSea to the North Sea coast of the barrier islands. Tourists arebrought on fast boats over the straightened shipping lanes, therebyreducing travel times. This has enabled daily trips to the islandsfrom the center of the country, presumably causing an increase inthe number of visitors to the islands. Nature in the Wadden Sea isparsed fundamentally into industrial-scale food-production andaquaculture. Predation of farmed species is kept at a low level. Sealsare allowed only in selected areas, mainly where they can beapproached by recreational vessels from the islands so to serve asa tourism draw. The food web is dominated by lower trophic levelanimals and scavengers. Shrimp thrive and are fished between theaquaculture farms.

4. Discussion

Although the evaluation of the scenarios presented here is inessence qualitative, the results were rated in five grades, from verynegative to very positive, depending on the extent of the effects inboth area covered and intensity. A color chart (Fig. 4) providesa summary overview of the results. As previously mentioned, thechoice of driving forces has a significant impact on the study resultsand interpretations. For example, in a complex scenario study, if thedriving forces that give contrast to the scenarios are chosen on thebasis of high impact on the economy, then the resulting scenarioswill likely inadequately reflect the most contrasting features forenvironmental aspects. Some solutions will consequently beexcluded in the development of policy options that relate toa complete survey of possible environmental management arrays.In such a case, the scenarios may be given additional storylinesfrom other available sources and general understandings asnecessary in order to retain the scenario’s purpose for findingviable options for environmental policies.

4.1. Relationships between scenarios

The methods of scenario construction can also be combined inan iterative way, thus providing an opportunity to improve thefocus and the divergence of the scenarios (Dammers, 2010) andapply the many techniques that can be used in future studies(Bishop et al., 2010). As Coates (2010) pointed out, no fixed protocolexists that suits all futures studies thus allowing significant flexi-bility and adaptation. In the example of the Wadden Sea above, thescenarios were intended to envision the evolution of currentpolarizing conflicts. Both, scenarios, however, score mostly nega-tively for the aspects that the other scenario is designed for.Scenarios that are not so mutually exclusive will yield more subtleresults, e.g. scenarios that focus on sustainable use strategies,leisure, or a Food and Energy scenario that is less extreme than theone described here.

Although the scenarios are quite extreme, certain combinationsof interests might be merged, and in fact represent the likelyrealities that will manifest in both natural and social systems. If thescoring method has sufficient resolution, i.e. gradations betweenpositive and negative scores, then such combinations may show ina scoring chart. Even in the extreme “Nature First” scenario, theeconomic sectors of recreation and tourism may react positively onthe abundance of nature value and landscape beauty. However, theintensity of an impacting factor (e.g. the intensity of local recreationor the volume and kind of artisanal production), will determinewhether the final score is positive or negative. A more quantitativescenario evaluation method, using for example a doseeresponsemodel, may provide more detailed results and present potentialoptions for further study.

4.2. Nature First

The “Nature First” scenario obviously scores positive forrestorative natural systems because of its return to a highlydynamic, “natural” ecosystem. The region experiences uninhibitedsediment dynamics, and with that, the adaptive potential torespond to sea-level rise. This scenario also clearly promotesbiodiversity and natural cycles. Although industrial development isrestricted in this scenario, opportunities nevertheless arise for localentrepreneurs to offer products that are related to the unique

Indicator

Scenario

Impact

Biodiversity

Landscape

Economy

Industrialdevelopment

Tourism andrecreation

Energy production

Food production

Nature First

Very positive

Positive

Neutral

Negative

Very negative

Food and Energy

Nature

Fig. 4. Scores of the Wadden Sea scenarios for different indicators.

F.G. Wortelboer, B.G. Bischof / Ocean & Coastal Management 68 (2012) 189e200198

appeal of the region. However, these opportunities exist ona smaller scale in what would be essentially artisan economies thatare geared toward sustaining and promoting the exceptionalcondition of the natural environment. Tourism and recreation scorepositively because of the improved attractiveness of the landscapeand the abundance of popular animals such as sea eagles, seals anddolphins, and the likely tourist attraction they represent. Theamount of tourists is limited, however. Energy production and foodproduction score neutral because although invasive forms ofproduction (as permitted in the “Food and Energy” scenario) arenot allowed, sustainable production is still possible and is, in fact,a likely pathway of economic engagement.

At the moment, the Wadden Sea and most of the area of theWadden islands are protected under Natura 2000. Unlike someterrestrial systems, aquatic Natura 2000 areas are generally open tothe public and different types of human activities are allowed. The“Nature First” scenario poses the question whether a coastal regionshould be allowed to have one dominant use (i.e. nature andabsence of human uses). There are ample arguments in favor of thismanagement strategy, notably its size, the potential to providea buffer between land and the open sea, the resulting high biodi-versity, its continued importance to migrating birds, and itspotential to facilitate achieving EU environmental regulatorymandates, both within and outside theWadden Sea (e.g. nursery ofNorth Sea fish and other animals, migration of eel to polders, etc.).In relation to the current situation this would impose big changeson current use patterns. A thorough assessment of the potential ofa natural Wadden Sea in reaching targets in other areas is currentlylacking.

4.3. Food and Energy

The “Food and Energy” scenario for the Wadden Sea includesa switch in priorities set by society. It might seem far-fetched andunlikely when taking the current European legislation for nature(Natura, 2000) into account, however, this legislation includesexemptions for situations of great public interest (EC, 2000) thatfacilitate the re-direction of public priorities. This scenario, notsurprisingly, scores negatively for biodiversity and landscape. Theecologically sensitive systems in the Wadden Sea in this scenariohave become resources intended for purely extractive purposes on

large, industrial scales to achieve the highest possible productionrates. However, the ecological health of this scenario is particularlymalleable and depends heavily on the manner in which itsproposed projects iterate within the human-nature dynamic. Somedevelopment possibilities revealed in this scenario may thereforelead to environmental problems that could throw it off-track. Forexample, construction and attendant landscape alterations mayinadvertently promote eutrophication or toxic algal blooms, whichwould inhibit or compromise aquaculture potential. Large-scaleproduction of goods and the associated increase in trade andcommerce will inevitably result in increased ship-traffic and portuses. Persistent dredging to maintain shipping lanes and waterdepth for open aquaculture will directly affect turbidity and sedi-mentation patterns. Whether mussel beds and hanging musselaquaculture can still thrive under these conditions, remains to beseen. Indirect effects associated with the changes in the landscapeare possible as well. In this scenario, the open landscape has dis-appeared, thereby limiting its recreational value and the associatedeconomic contribution to various tourism and cross-scale econo-mies. The North Sea-facing beaches of the Wadden islands will beimpacted less than other recreational sites. However, if the otherareas of the Wadden Sea itself becomes less attractive, and tourismis instead increasingly concentrated on the beaches of the NorthSea, these beaches may become overcrowded and therewith alsohave the potential to loose their value and draw as nature areas.Such indirect impacts require additional analysis and monitoring.

5. Conclusion

These scenarios for theWadden Seawere developed to point outthe consequences of the variety of choices that can be maderegarding the future development of the area. Diverging viewpoints on the development of the Wadden Sea and concerns aboutthe effects of a changing climate represent potentially significantuncertainties. The scenarios may seem eccentric and unrealistic;but the contrasts they give serve to clarify the choices and benefitsof the range of possibilities that emerge from the driving forces andfeatures that are taken into consideration. Moreover, more “real-istic” scenarios may too closely resemble the current circumstancesso that no structural choices may present themselves, defeating thepurpose of such an exercise. Although this work provides an in-

F.G. Wortelboer, B.G. Bischof / Ocean & Coastal Management 68 (2012) 189e200 199

depth framework for constructing and applying scenarios, furtherwork would be necessary to apply these core-scenarios to actualpolicy processes.

Whether the Wadden Sea is big enough to accommodate all theclaims that are proposed in the scenarios remains to be seen,considering that scenario studies cannot foresee actual politicaldevelopments and environmental anomalies. Indeed, some currenttrends already show evidence of being incompatible with estab-lished targets. At the very least, tourist economies will likely profitfrom choosing the Nature First path, along with overall long-termenvironmental integrity and biodiversity, potentially making thisamong the few remaining relatively pristine nature-regions on theAtlantic seaboard of Europe. This implies that an alliance amongstakeholders to support such efforts could potentially be necessaryto generate a productive strategy to achieve sustainable conserva-tion goals. It is also apparent in the “Food and Energy” scenario thatsevere impacts on nature and landscape are to be expected ifresources are exploited to their fullest potential, and calls intoquestion long-term environmental impacts as a considerablenegative factor that could, in fact, undermine sustaining this type ofeconomy in the region over the long-term. From a national view-point, however, the added food and energy availability mightprevail. This attitude demonstrates the need for consistency innational and regional environmental targets and managementpolicies.

Ideally, the scenario results could present an incentive to lookfor ways of producing food and energy that have a less devastatingimpact on the environment as the extreme scenario presents,thereby also considering pathways toward balancing exploitiveefforts with sustainable nature and recreational value. Although thecurrent situation in the Wadden Sea does not yet resemble eitherscenario presented here, these futures provide a tool towardunderstanding the possible pathways that could ease the currentpolarization between stakeholders in the Wadden Sea area byclarifying the possibilities and better focus public debate regardingpragmatic development and integrate competing long-termvisions.

Describing the different existing worldviews and perspectivesand the impact they can have on policy decisions is a worthwhileexercise, as these features begin to frame possible options withinthe contexts of how the environment is currently perceived. Basingscenario studies on social perceptions, one can assess the robust-ness of different policy options for reaching specific targets in thefuture. However, the results of such studies are not necessarilya prediction of the future. In most cases, there is no quantifiableprobability associated with them and picking one as the basis forpolicy making may lead to unexpected side effects. The results ofscenario analyses and futures studies can, however, be effectivelyused to feed scientific arguments into the public debate, therebybroadening the scope of the debate and pointing out possibleoptions in the form of a range of possible storylines. This approachprovides a clear and geographically specific framework of possiblerealities and potentially lead to strategies that can result in moresustainable policies and less conflict regarding managing ourcoastal environment, especially in high-use, high-value and highly-sensitive ecosystems such as the Wadden Sea region.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank the anonymous reviewers fortheir valuable comments and suggestions for improvement of thetext. This study was performed within the context of the project"Nature Outlook 2010e2040", which was carried out by PBLNetherlands Environmental Assessment Agency.

References

Alcamo, J., Van Vuuren, D., Cramer, W., 2005. Changes in ecosystem services andtheir drivers across the scenarios. In: Carpenter, S.R., Pingali, P.L., Bennett, E.M.,Zurek, M.B. (Eds.), Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Scenarios. MillenniumEcosystem Assessment, vol. 2. Island Press, Washington, pp. 297e374. www.maweb.org.

Alkemade, R., Van Oorschot, M., Miles, L., Nellemann, C., Bakkenes, M., Ten Brink, B.,2009. GLOBIO3: a framework to investigate options for reducing globalterrestrial biodiversity loss. Ecosystems 12, 374e390.

Baptist, M.J., Dankers, N., Smit, C., 2007. The Outstanding Universal Values of theWadden Sea: an Ecological Perspective. Imares report C037/07. Imares,IJmuiden.

Belfiore, S., Barbiere, J., Bowen, R., Cicin-Sain, B., Ehler, C., Mageau, C., McDougall, D.,Siron, R., 2006. A handbook for measuring the progress and outcomes ofintegrated coastal and ocean management. In: IOC Manuals and Guides No. 46.ICAM Dossier, vol. 2. UNESCO, Paris.

Birdlife, 2009. The Wadden Sea: a Vision for the Conservation of a Natural Heritage.Bischof, B.G., 2010. Negotiating uncertainty: framing attitudes, prioritizing issues,

and finding consensus in the coral reef environment management “crisis”.Ocean Coast. Manag. 53, 597e614.

Bishop, P., Hines, A., Collins, T., 2010. The current state of scenario development: anoverview of techniques. Foresight 9, 5e25.

Börjeson, L., Höjer, M., Dreborg, K.-H., Ekvall, T., Finnveden, G., 2006. Scenario typesand techniques: towards a user’s guide. Futures 38, 723e739.

Coates, J.F., 2010. The future of foresight e a US perspective. Technol. Forecast. Soc.Change 77, 1428e1437.

Constanza, R., D’Arge, R., De Groot, R., Farberk, S., Grasso, M., Hannon, B.,Limburg, K., Naeem, S., O’Neill, R.V., Paruelo, J., Raskin, R.G., Sutton, P., Van denBelt, M., 2005. The value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital.Nature 387, 253e260.

CWSS, 2006. Conservation and Management Plan for the Wadden Sea Seal Pop-ulation 2007e2010. Common Wadden Sea Secretariat, Wilhelmshaven. www.waddenseasecretariat.org.

Dammers, E., 2010. Making territorial scenarios for Europe. Futures 42, 785e793.De Groot, R., Van der Perk, J., Chiesura, A., Van Vliet, A., 2003. Importance and threat

as determining factors for criticality of natural capital. Ecol. Econ. 44, 187e204.Delta Commission, 2008. Working Together with Water. A Living Land Builds for Its

Future. www.deltacommissie.com.EC, 2000. Managing Natura 2000 sites: the Provisions of Article 6 of the ‘Habitats’

Directive 92/43/EEC. European Commission, Luxembourg.Enemark, J., 2005. The Wadden Sea protection and management scheme-towards

an integrated coastal management approach. Ocean Coast. Manag. 48,996e1015.

Ens, B.J., Smaal, A.C., De Vlas, J., 2004. The Effects of Shellfish Fishery on the Ecosys-tems of the Dutch Wadden Sea and Oosterschelde: Final Report on the SecondPhase of the Scientific Evaluation of theDutch Shellfish Fishery Policy (EVA II). In:Rapport RIKZ, vol. 031. Alterra, Wageningen, The Netherlands, 212 pp.

Eriksson, B.K., Van der Heide, T., Van de Koppel, J., Piersma, T., Van der Veer, H.W.,Olff, H., 2010. Major changes in the ecology of the Wadden sea: human impacts,ecosystem engineering and sediment dynamics. Ecosystems 13, 752e764.

Godet, M., 2010. Future memories. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 77, 1457e1463.Hajer, M., 2009. Authoritative Governance. Policy Making in the Age of Media-

tization. Oxford University Press, Oxford.Hanssen, L., Rouwette, E., Van Katwijk, M.M., 2009. The role of ecological science in

environmental policy making: from a pacification toward a facilitation strategy.Ecol. Society 14 (1), 43 [online] URL. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol14/iss1/art43/.

Houtenbos, A.P.E.M., 2011. BodemdalingWaddenzee 1977e2011. www.waddenzee.nl.Kabat, P., Bazelmans, J., Van Dijk, J., Herman, P.M.J., Speelman, H., Deen, N.R.J.,

Hutjes, R.W.A., 2009. Knowledge for a Sustainable Future of the Wadden.Integrated Research Agenda of the Wadden Academy. KNAW, Amsterdam.

Kloprogge, P., Van der Sluijs, J.P., Petersen, A.C., 2011. A method for the analysis ofassumptions in model-based environmental assessments. Environ. Model.Softw 26, 289e311.

Latour, B., 1983. Science in Action: How to Follow Scientists and Engineers ThroughSociety. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, MA, 274 pp.

Latour, B., 2004. Why has critique run out of steam? Frommatters of fact to mattersof concern. Crit. Inq. 30, 225e248.

Molnar, M., Clarke-Murray, C., Whitworth, J., Tam, J., 2009. Marine and CoastalEcosystem Services. A Report on Ecosystems Services in the Pacific North CoastIntegrated Management Area (Pncima) on the British Columbia Coast. DavidSuzuki Foundation, Vancouver. www.davidsuzuki.org.

PBL, 2012. Nature Outlook 2010e2040. www.natuurverkenning.nl (in Dutch).Pereira, H.M., Leadley, P.W., Proença, V., Alkemade, R., Scharlemann, J.P.W., Fer-

nandez-Manjarrés, J.F., Araújo, M.B., Balvanera, P., Biggs, R., Cheung, W.W.L.,Chini, L., Cooper, H.D., Gilman, E.L., Guénette, S., Hurtt, G.C., Huntington, H.P.,Mace, G.M., Oberdorff, T., Revenga, C., Rodrigues, P., Scholes, R.J., Sumaila, U.R.,Walpole, M., 2010. Scenarios for global biodiversity in the 21st century. Science330, 1496e1501.

Perrings, C., Naeem, S., Ahrestani, F., Bunker, D.E., Burkill, P., Canziani, G.,Elmqvist, T., Ferrati, R., Fuhrman, J., Jaksic, F., Kawabata, Z., Kinzig, A.,Mace, G.M., Milano, F., Mooney, H., Prieur-Richard, A.-H., Tschirhart, J.,Weisser, W., 2010. Ecosystem services for 2020. Science 330, 323e324.

F.G. Wortelboer, B.G. Bischof / Ocean & Coastal Management 68 (2012) 189e200200

Petraitis, P.S., Hoffman, C., 2010. Multiple stable states and relationship betweenthresholds in processes and states. Mar. Ecol. Progr. Ser. 413, 185e304.

PTRWS, 2011. Program Towards a Rich Wadden Sea. www.rijkewaddenzee.nl (inDutch).

Purvis, A., Hector, A., 2000. Getting the measure of biodiversity. Nature 405,212e219.

Refsgaard, J.C., Van der Sluijs, J.P., Højberg, A.L., Vanrolleghem, P.A., 2007. Uncer-tainty in the environmental modelling process e a framework and guidance.Environ. Model. Softw 22, 1543e1566.

Regional Commission of the Wadden Sea (RCW), 2010. Brede visie op duurzamevisserij in de Waddenzee (A broad view on sustainable fisheries in the WaddenSea) (in Dutch).

Reise, K., Baptist, M., Burbridge, P., Dankers, N., Fischer, L., Flemming, B., Oost, A.P.,Smit, C., 2010. The Wadden Sea e a universally outstanding tidal wetland. In:Wadden Sea Ecosystem No. 29. Common Wadden Sea Secretariat, Wilhelm-shaven. www.waddensea-secretariat.org.

Rotmans, J., Van Asselt, M., Anastasi, C., Greeuw, S., Mellors, J., Peters, S.,Rothman, D., Rijkens, N., 2000. Visions for a sustainable Europe. Futures 32,809e831.

Runhaar, H., Van Nieuwaal, K., 2010. Understanding the use of science in decision-making on cockle fisheries and gas mining in the Dutch Wadden Sea: puttingthe science-policy interface in a wider perspective. Environ. Sci. Policy 13,239e248.

Scearce, D., Fulton, K., 2004. What if? The art of scenario thinking for nonprofits.Glob. Business Network. www.gbn.org.

Scheffer, M., Carpenter, S., Foley, J.A., Folke, C., Walker, B., 2001. Catastrophic shiftsin ecosystems. Nature 413, 591e596.

Schwartz, P., Randall, D., 2007. Ahead of the Curve: anticipating strategic surprise.In: Fukuyama, F. (Ed.), Blindsides: How to Anticipate Forcing Events and WildCards in Global Politics. An American Interest Book, pp. 93e108.

Shapin, S., 1998. Placing the view from nowhere: historical and Sociological prob-lems in the Location of science. Transactions of the Institute of British Geog-raphers, New Ser. 23 (1), 5e12.

Shapin, S., 2012. The sciences of subjectivity. Soc. Stud. Sci. 42 (2), 170e184.Sijtsma, F.J., Van der Heide, C.M., Van Hinsberg, A., 2011. Biodiversity and decision

support: integrating CBA and MCA. In: Hull, A., Khakee, A., Woltjer, J.,Alexander, E. (Eds.), Evaluation for Participatory and Sustainable Planning.Routledge, London, pp. 197e218.

Smith, C.J., Dubois, A., 2010. The ‘wild cards’ of European futures: planning fordiscontinuities? Futures 42, 846e855.

SRRC, 2011. Stories from the Dollard. Part 4: Greenland. News item 7-4-2011. SealRehabilitation and Research Centre, Pieterburen.

TEEB, 2010. The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity: Mainstreaming theEconomics of Nature: a Synthesis of the Approach, Conclusions and Recom-mendations of TEEB. www.teebweb.org.

Ten Brink, B., 2007. The Natural Capital Index Framework (NCI). Contribution toBeyond GDP “Virtual Indicator Expo”, November 2007, Brussels. http://www.beyond-gdp.eu/proceedings/bgdp_proceedings_indicatorexhibition.pdf.

Thomassin, A., White, C.S., Stead, S.S., David, G., 2010. Social acceptability ofa marine protected area: the case of Reunion Island. Ocean Coast. Manag. 53,169e179.

Toerdata Noord, 2011. Toerisme in cijfers 2011. In: Provinces of Groningen, Fryslanand Drenthe. http://www.fryslan.nl (in Dutch).

UNEP, 2002. Global Environmental Outlook 3: Past, Present and Future Perspectives.Earthscan, London.

Van Asselt, M.B.A., Van’t Klooster, S.A., Van Notten, P.W.F., Smits, L.A., 2010. Fore-sight in Action. Earthscan, London.

Van der Klundert, B., 2008. Verlangen goed te leven. Duurzame ontwikkeling tussenmaakbaarheid, mondialisering en moraal. Uitgeverij Jan van Arkel, Utrecht (inDutch).

Van der Sluijs, J.P., Risbey, J.S., Kloprogge, P., Ravetz, J.R., Funtowicz, S.O., CorralQuintana, S., Guimaraes Pereira, A., De Marchi, B., Petersen, A.C., Janssen, P.H.M.,Hoppe, R., Huijs, S.W.F., 2003. RIVM/MNP Guidance for Uncertainty Assessmentand Communication. Detailed Guidance. Utrecht University, Utrecht, ISBN 90-393-3536-2.

Van der Sluijs, J.P., Petersen, A.C., Janssen, P.H.M., Risby, J.S., Ravetz, J.R., 2008.Exploring the quality of evidence for complex and contested policy decisions.Environ. Res. Lett. 3, 1e9.

Van Nieuwaal, K., 2011. The institutional survival path. A case study on mechanicalcockle fishery and gas extraction in the Dutch Wadden Sea. Thesis, VUAmsterdam.

Van Notten, P., 2006. Scenario development: a typology of approaches. In: OECD,Think Scenarios. Rethink Education.

Van Notten, P.W.F., Sleegers, A.M., Van Asselt, M.B.A., 2005. The future shocks: ondiscontinuity and scenario development. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 72,175e194.

Verbeeten, M., 2000. Wise Use of the Wadden Sea? A Study of Policy-OrientedLearning. In: Wadden Sea Newsletter, vol. 2000-2. Common Wadden SeaSecretariat, pp. 7e9.

VROM, LNV, VenW, EZ, 2007. Ontwikkeling van de Wadden voor natuur en mens.Deel 4 van de planologische kernbeslissing Derde Nota Waddenzee, tekst naparlementaire instemming (Wadden Sea Memorandum: Development of theWadden area for nature and people. Text after approval in parliament) (inDutch).

Walker, W.E., Harremoës, P., Rotmans, J., Van der Sluijs, J.P., Van Asselt, M.B.A.,Janssen, P., Krayer von Krauss, M.P., 2003. Defining uncertainty e a conceptualbasis for uncertainty management in model-based decision support. Integr.Assessm 4, 5e17.

Wardekker, A., De Jong, A., Knoop, J.M., Van der Sluijs, J.P., 2010. Operationalisinga resilience approach to adapting an urban delta to uncertain climate changes.Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 77, 987e998.

Wessels, S., Jaspers, H., Wortelboer, R., Van Puijenbroek, P., Zwaneveld, P.,Grevers, W., 2011. Nature value index for the Closure Dam. New method tocompare the effects on nature. Toets 03-11, 24e29 (in Dutch).

Wiek, A., Binder, C., Scholz, R.W., 2006. Functions of scenarios in transitionprocesses. Futures 38, 740e766.

Wiersma, A.P., Oost, A.P., Van der Berg, M.W., Vos, P.C., Marges, V., De Vries, S., 2009.Geomorphology. Thematic Report No. 9. In: Marencic, H., De Vlas, J. (Eds.),Quality Status Report 2009. WaddenSea Ecosystem No. 25. Common WaddenSea Secretariat, Trilateral Monitoring and Assessment Group, Wilhelmshaven,Germany.

Wolff, W.J., Bakker, J.P., Laursen, K., Reise, K., 2010. The Wadden Sea quality statusreport e synthesis report 2010. In: Wadden Sea Ecosystem No. 29. CommonWadden Sea Secretariat, Wilhelmshaven. www.waddensea-secretariat.org.

Zinn, J.O., 2008. Heading into the unknown: everyday strategies for managing riskand uncertainty. Health Risk Society 10, 439e450.