Linking qualitative scenarios with quantitative energy models: knowledge integration in different methodological designs
Background Linking qualitative scenarios with quantitative models is a common approach to integrate assumptions on possible future societal contexts into modeling. But reflection on how and to what degree knowledge is effectively integrated during this endeavor does not generally take place. In this...
Ausführliche Beschreibung
Autor*in: |
Prehofer, Sigrid [verfasserIn] Kosow, Hannah [verfasserIn] Naegler, Tobias [verfasserIn] Pregger, Thomas [verfasserIn] Vögele, Stefan [verfasserIn] Weimer-Jehle, Wolfgang [verfasserIn] |
---|
Format: |
E-Artikel |
---|---|
Sprache: |
Englisch |
Erschienen: |
2021 |
---|
Schlagwörter: |
Interdisciplinary knowledge integration |
---|
Anmerkung: |
© The Author(s) 2021 |
---|
Übergeordnetes Werk: |
Enthalten in: Energy, Sustainability and Society - Berlin : Springer, 2011, 11(2021), 1 vom: 12. Juli |
---|---|
Übergeordnetes Werk: |
volume:11 ; year:2021 ; number:1 ; day:12 ; month:07 |
Links: |
---|
DOI / URN: |
10.1186/s13705-021-00298-1 |
---|
Katalog-ID: |
SPR044539916 |
---|
LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
---|---|---|---|
001 | SPR044539916 | ||
003 | DE-627 | ||
005 | 20220111200520.0 | ||
007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
008 | 210713s2021 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
024 | 7 | |a 10.1186/s13705-021-00298-1 |2 doi | |
035 | |a (DE-627)SPR044539916 | ||
035 | |a (SPR)s13705-021-00298-1-e | ||
040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
041 | |a eng | ||
082 | 0 | 4 | |a 333.7 |q ASE |
100 | 1 | |a Prehofer, Sigrid |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
245 | 1 | 0 | |a Linking qualitative scenarios with quantitative energy models: knowledge integration in different methodological designs |
264 | 1 | |c 2021 | |
336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
337 | |a Computermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
338 | |a Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
500 | |a © The Author(s) 2021 | ||
520 | |a Background Linking qualitative scenarios with quantitative models is a common approach to integrate assumptions on possible future societal contexts into modeling. But reflection on how and to what degree knowledge is effectively integrated during this endeavor does not generally take place. In this paper, we reflect on the performance of a specific hybrid scenario approach (qualitative Cross-Impact Balance analysis, CIB, linked with quantitative energy models) concerning knowledge integration through 11 different process steps. In order to guide the scenario community in applying this approach, we reflect on general methodological features as well as different design options. We conceptualize different forms of interdisciplinary knowledge integration (compiling, combining and synthesizing) and analyze how and to what degree knowledge about society and uncertainty are integrated into scenario process and products. In addition, we discuss trade-offs regarding design choices and forms of knowledge integration. Results On the basis of three case studies, we identify two general designs of linking which build on each other (basic and extended design) and which differ in essence regarding the balance of power between the CIB and the energy modeling. Ex post assessment of the form of interdisciplinary knowledge integration in each step revealed that specific method properties of CIB as well as the interaction with additional quantitative as well as specific qualitative methods foster distinct forms of knowledge integration. The specific roles assigned to CIB in the hybrid scenario process can also influence the form of knowledge integration. Conclusions In this study, we use a joint process scheme linking qualitative context scenarios with energy modeling. By applying our conceptualization of different forms of knowledge integration we analyze the designs’ respective potential for and respective effects on knowledge integration. Consequently, our findings can give guidance to those who are designing their own hybrid scenario processes. As this is an explorative study, it would be useful to further test our hypotheses in different hybrid scenario designs. Finally, we note that at some points in the process a more precise differentiation of three forms of knowledge integration would have been useful and propose to further differentiate and detail them in future research. | ||
650 | 4 | |a Interdisciplinary knowledge integration |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
650 | 4 | |a Context scenarios |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
650 | 4 | |a Energy modeling |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
650 | 4 | |a Case study |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
650 | 4 | |a Cross-impact balance analysis (CIB) |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
650 | 4 | |a Hybrid scenario approach |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
700 | 1 | |a Kosow, Hannah |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Naegler, Tobias |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Pregger, Thomas |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Vögele, Stefan |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Weimer-Jehle, Wolfgang |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Energy, Sustainability and Society |d Berlin : Springer, 2011 |g 11(2021), 1 vom: 12. Juli |w (DE-627)679779221 |w (DE-600)2641015-1 |x 2192-0567 |7 nnns |
773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:11 |g year:2021 |g number:1 |g day:12 |g month:07 |
856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13705-021-00298-1 |z kostenfrei |3 Volltext |
912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
912 | |a SYSFLAG_A | ||
912 | |a GBV_SPRINGER | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_11 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_20 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_22 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_23 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_24 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_39 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_40 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_60 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_62 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_63 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_65 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_69 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_70 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_73 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_95 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_110 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_151 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_152 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_161 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_170 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_213 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_230 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_285 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_293 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_370 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_602 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2009 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2014 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2027 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2034 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2055 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2108 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2111 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2129 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2360 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4012 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4037 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4046 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4112 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4125 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4126 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4249 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4305 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4306 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4322 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4323 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4324 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4325 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4367 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4700 | ||
951 | |a AR | ||
952 | |d 11 |j 2021 |e 1 |b 12 |c 07 |
author_variant |
s p sp h k hk t n tn t p tp s v sv w w j wwj |
---|---|
matchkey_str |
article:21920567:2021----::iknqaiaiecnrowtqatttveegmdlkoldenertoid |
hierarchy_sort_str |
2021 |
publishDate |
2021 |
allfields |
10.1186/s13705-021-00298-1 doi (DE-627)SPR044539916 (SPR)s13705-021-00298-1-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 333.7 ASE Prehofer, Sigrid verfasserin aut Linking qualitative scenarios with quantitative energy models: knowledge integration in different methodological designs 2021 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © The Author(s) 2021 Background Linking qualitative scenarios with quantitative models is a common approach to integrate assumptions on possible future societal contexts into modeling. But reflection on how and to what degree knowledge is effectively integrated during this endeavor does not generally take place. In this paper, we reflect on the performance of a specific hybrid scenario approach (qualitative Cross-Impact Balance analysis, CIB, linked with quantitative energy models) concerning knowledge integration through 11 different process steps. In order to guide the scenario community in applying this approach, we reflect on general methodological features as well as different design options. We conceptualize different forms of interdisciplinary knowledge integration (compiling, combining and synthesizing) and analyze how and to what degree knowledge about society and uncertainty are integrated into scenario process and products. In addition, we discuss trade-offs regarding design choices and forms of knowledge integration. Results On the basis of three case studies, we identify two general designs of linking which build on each other (basic and extended design) and which differ in essence regarding the balance of power between the CIB and the energy modeling. Ex post assessment of the form of interdisciplinary knowledge integration in each step revealed that specific method properties of CIB as well as the interaction with additional quantitative as well as specific qualitative methods foster distinct forms of knowledge integration. The specific roles assigned to CIB in the hybrid scenario process can also influence the form of knowledge integration. Conclusions In this study, we use a joint process scheme linking qualitative context scenarios with energy modeling. By applying our conceptualization of different forms of knowledge integration we analyze the designs’ respective potential for and respective effects on knowledge integration. Consequently, our findings can give guidance to those who are designing their own hybrid scenario processes. As this is an explorative study, it would be useful to further test our hypotheses in different hybrid scenario designs. Finally, we note that at some points in the process a more precise differentiation of three forms of knowledge integration would have been useful and propose to further differentiate and detail them in future research. Interdisciplinary knowledge integration (dpeaa)DE-He213 Context scenarios (dpeaa)DE-He213 Energy modeling (dpeaa)DE-He213 Case study (dpeaa)DE-He213 Cross-impact balance analysis (CIB) (dpeaa)DE-He213 Hybrid scenario approach (dpeaa)DE-He213 Kosow, Hannah verfasserin aut Naegler, Tobias verfasserin aut Pregger, Thomas verfasserin aut Vögele, Stefan verfasserin aut Weimer-Jehle, Wolfgang verfasserin aut Enthalten in Energy, Sustainability and Society Berlin : Springer, 2011 11(2021), 1 vom: 12. Juli (DE-627)679779221 (DE-600)2641015-1 2192-0567 nnns volume:11 year:2021 number:1 day:12 month:07 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13705-021-00298-1 kostenfrei Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_152 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2108 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2360 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 11 2021 1 12 07 |
spelling |
10.1186/s13705-021-00298-1 doi (DE-627)SPR044539916 (SPR)s13705-021-00298-1-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 333.7 ASE Prehofer, Sigrid verfasserin aut Linking qualitative scenarios with quantitative energy models: knowledge integration in different methodological designs 2021 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © The Author(s) 2021 Background Linking qualitative scenarios with quantitative models is a common approach to integrate assumptions on possible future societal contexts into modeling. But reflection on how and to what degree knowledge is effectively integrated during this endeavor does not generally take place. In this paper, we reflect on the performance of a specific hybrid scenario approach (qualitative Cross-Impact Balance analysis, CIB, linked with quantitative energy models) concerning knowledge integration through 11 different process steps. In order to guide the scenario community in applying this approach, we reflect on general methodological features as well as different design options. We conceptualize different forms of interdisciplinary knowledge integration (compiling, combining and synthesizing) and analyze how and to what degree knowledge about society and uncertainty are integrated into scenario process and products. In addition, we discuss trade-offs regarding design choices and forms of knowledge integration. Results On the basis of three case studies, we identify two general designs of linking which build on each other (basic and extended design) and which differ in essence regarding the balance of power between the CIB and the energy modeling. Ex post assessment of the form of interdisciplinary knowledge integration in each step revealed that specific method properties of CIB as well as the interaction with additional quantitative as well as specific qualitative methods foster distinct forms of knowledge integration. The specific roles assigned to CIB in the hybrid scenario process can also influence the form of knowledge integration. Conclusions In this study, we use a joint process scheme linking qualitative context scenarios with energy modeling. By applying our conceptualization of different forms of knowledge integration we analyze the designs’ respective potential for and respective effects on knowledge integration. Consequently, our findings can give guidance to those who are designing their own hybrid scenario processes. As this is an explorative study, it would be useful to further test our hypotheses in different hybrid scenario designs. Finally, we note that at some points in the process a more precise differentiation of three forms of knowledge integration would have been useful and propose to further differentiate and detail them in future research. Interdisciplinary knowledge integration (dpeaa)DE-He213 Context scenarios (dpeaa)DE-He213 Energy modeling (dpeaa)DE-He213 Case study (dpeaa)DE-He213 Cross-impact balance analysis (CIB) (dpeaa)DE-He213 Hybrid scenario approach (dpeaa)DE-He213 Kosow, Hannah verfasserin aut Naegler, Tobias verfasserin aut Pregger, Thomas verfasserin aut Vögele, Stefan verfasserin aut Weimer-Jehle, Wolfgang verfasserin aut Enthalten in Energy, Sustainability and Society Berlin : Springer, 2011 11(2021), 1 vom: 12. Juli (DE-627)679779221 (DE-600)2641015-1 2192-0567 nnns volume:11 year:2021 number:1 day:12 month:07 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13705-021-00298-1 kostenfrei Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_152 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2108 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2360 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 11 2021 1 12 07 |
allfields_unstemmed |
10.1186/s13705-021-00298-1 doi (DE-627)SPR044539916 (SPR)s13705-021-00298-1-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 333.7 ASE Prehofer, Sigrid verfasserin aut Linking qualitative scenarios with quantitative energy models: knowledge integration in different methodological designs 2021 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © The Author(s) 2021 Background Linking qualitative scenarios with quantitative models is a common approach to integrate assumptions on possible future societal contexts into modeling. But reflection on how and to what degree knowledge is effectively integrated during this endeavor does not generally take place. In this paper, we reflect on the performance of a specific hybrid scenario approach (qualitative Cross-Impact Balance analysis, CIB, linked with quantitative energy models) concerning knowledge integration through 11 different process steps. In order to guide the scenario community in applying this approach, we reflect on general methodological features as well as different design options. We conceptualize different forms of interdisciplinary knowledge integration (compiling, combining and synthesizing) and analyze how and to what degree knowledge about society and uncertainty are integrated into scenario process and products. In addition, we discuss trade-offs regarding design choices and forms of knowledge integration. Results On the basis of three case studies, we identify two general designs of linking which build on each other (basic and extended design) and which differ in essence regarding the balance of power between the CIB and the energy modeling. Ex post assessment of the form of interdisciplinary knowledge integration in each step revealed that specific method properties of CIB as well as the interaction with additional quantitative as well as specific qualitative methods foster distinct forms of knowledge integration. The specific roles assigned to CIB in the hybrid scenario process can also influence the form of knowledge integration. Conclusions In this study, we use a joint process scheme linking qualitative context scenarios with energy modeling. By applying our conceptualization of different forms of knowledge integration we analyze the designs’ respective potential for and respective effects on knowledge integration. Consequently, our findings can give guidance to those who are designing their own hybrid scenario processes. As this is an explorative study, it would be useful to further test our hypotheses in different hybrid scenario designs. Finally, we note that at some points in the process a more precise differentiation of three forms of knowledge integration would have been useful and propose to further differentiate and detail them in future research. Interdisciplinary knowledge integration (dpeaa)DE-He213 Context scenarios (dpeaa)DE-He213 Energy modeling (dpeaa)DE-He213 Case study (dpeaa)DE-He213 Cross-impact balance analysis (CIB) (dpeaa)DE-He213 Hybrid scenario approach (dpeaa)DE-He213 Kosow, Hannah verfasserin aut Naegler, Tobias verfasserin aut Pregger, Thomas verfasserin aut Vögele, Stefan verfasserin aut Weimer-Jehle, Wolfgang verfasserin aut Enthalten in Energy, Sustainability and Society Berlin : Springer, 2011 11(2021), 1 vom: 12. Juli (DE-627)679779221 (DE-600)2641015-1 2192-0567 nnns volume:11 year:2021 number:1 day:12 month:07 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13705-021-00298-1 kostenfrei Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_152 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2108 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2360 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 11 2021 1 12 07 |
allfieldsGer |
10.1186/s13705-021-00298-1 doi (DE-627)SPR044539916 (SPR)s13705-021-00298-1-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 333.7 ASE Prehofer, Sigrid verfasserin aut Linking qualitative scenarios with quantitative energy models: knowledge integration in different methodological designs 2021 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © The Author(s) 2021 Background Linking qualitative scenarios with quantitative models is a common approach to integrate assumptions on possible future societal contexts into modeling. But reflection on how and to what degree knowledge is effectively integrated during this endeavor does not generally take place. In this paper, we reflect on the performance of a specific hybrid scenario approach (qualitative Cross-Impact Balance analysis, CIB, linked with quantitative energy models) concerning knowledge integration through 11 different process steps. In order to guide the scenario community in applying this approach, we reflect on general methodological features as well as different design options. We conceptualize different forms of interdisciplinary knowledge integration (compiling, combining and synthesizing) and analyze how and to what degree knowledge about society and uncertainty are integrated into scenario process and products. In addition, we discuss trade-offs regarding design choices and forms of knowledge integration. Results On the basis of three case studies, we identify two general designs of linking which build on each other (basic and extended design) and which differ in essence regarding the balance of power between the CIB and the energy modeling. Ex post assessment of the form of interdisciplinary knowledge integration in each step revealed that specific method properties of CIB as well as the interaction with additional quantitative as well as specific qualitative methods foster distinct forms of knowledge integration. The specific roles assigned to CIB in the hybrid scenario process can also influence the form of knowledge integration. Conclusions In this study, we use a joint process scheme linking qualitative context scenarios with energy modeling. By applying our conceptualization of different forms of knowledge integration we analyze the designs’ respective potential for and respective effects on knowledge integration. Consequently, our findings can give guidance to those who are designing their own hybrid scenario processes. As this is an explorative study, it would be useful to further test our hypotheses in different hybrid scenario designs. Finally, we note that at some points in the process a more precise differentiation of three forms of knowledge integration would have been useful and propose to further differentiate and detail them in future research. Interdisciplinary knowledge integration (dpeaa)DE-He213 Context scenarios (dpeaa)DE-He213 Energy modeling (dpeaa)DE-He213 Case study (dpeaa)DE-He213 Cross-impact balance analysis (CIB) (dpeaa)DE-He213 Hybrid scenario approach (dpeaa)DE-He213 Kosow, Hannah verfasserin aut Naegler, Tobias verfasserin aut Pregger, Thomas verfasserin aut Vögele, Stefan verfasserin aut Weimer-Jehle, Wolfgang verfasserin aut Enthalten in Energy, Sustainability and Society Berlin : Springer, 2011 11(2021), 1 vom: 12. Juli (DE-627)679779221 (DE-600)2641015-1 2192-0567 nnns volume:11 year:2021 number:1 day:12 month:07 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13705-021-00298-1 kostenfrei Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_152 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2108 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2360 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 11 2021 1 12 07 |
allfieldsSound |
10.1186/s13705-021-00298-1 doi (DE-627)SPR044539916 (SPR)s13705-021-00298-1-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 333.7 ASE Prehofer, Sigrid verfasserin aut Linking qualitative scenarios with quantitative energy models: knowledge integration in different methodological designs 2021 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © The Author(s) 2021 Background Linking qualitative scenarios with quantitative models is a common approach to integrate assumptions on possible future societal contexts into modeling. But reflection on how and to what degree knowledge is effectively integrated during this endeavor does not generally take place. In this paper, we reflect on the performance of a specific hybrid scenario approach (qualitative Cross-Impact Balance analysis, CIB, linked with quantitative energy models) concerning knowledge integration through 11 different process steps. In order to guide the scenario community in applying this approach, we reflect on general methodological features as well as different design options. We conceptualize different forms of interdisciplinary knowledge integration (compiling, combining and synthesizing) and analyze how and to what degree knowledge about society and uncertainty are integrated into scenario process and products. In addition, we discuss trade-offs regarding design choices and forms of knowledge integration. Results On the basis of three case studies, we identify two general designs of linking which build on each other (basic and extended design) and which differ in essence regarding the balance of power between the CIB and the energy modeling. Ex post assessment of the form of interdisciplinary knowledge integration in each step revealed that specific method properties of CIB as well as the interaction with additional quantitative as well as specific qualitative methods foster distinct forms of knowledge integration. The specific roles assigned to CIB in the hybrid scenario process can also influence the form of knowledge integration. Conclusions In this study, we use a joint process scheme linking qualitative context scenarios with energy modeling. By applying our conceptualization of different forms of knowledge integration we analyze the designs’ respective potential for and respective effects on knowledge integration. Consequently, our findings can give guidance to those who are designing their own hybrid scenario processes. As this is an explorative study, it would be useful to further test our hypotheses in different hybrid scenario designs. Finally, we note that at some points in the process a more precise differentiation of three forms of knowledge integration would have been useful and propose to further differentiate and detail them in future research. Interdisciplinary knowledge integration (dpeaa)DE-He213 Context scenarios (dpeaa)DE-He213 Energy modeling (dpeaa)DE-He213 Case study (dpeaa)DE-He213 Cross-impact balance analysis (CIB) (dpeaa)DE-He213 Hybrid scenario approach (dpeaa)DE-He213 Kosow, Hannah verfasserin aut Naegler, Tobias verfasserin aut Pregger, Thomas verfasserin aut Vögele, Stefan verfasserin aut Weimer-Jehle, Wolfgang verfasserin aut Enthalten in Energy, Sustainability and Society Berlin : Springer, 2011 11(2021), 1 vom: 12. Juli (DE-627)679779221 (DE-600)2641015-1 2192-0567 nnns volume:11 year:2021 number:1 day:12 month:07 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13705-021-00298-1 kostenfrei Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_152 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2108 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2360 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 11 2021 1 12 07 |
language |
English |
source |
Enthalten in Energy, Sustainability and Society 11(2021), 1 vom: 12. Juli volume:11 year:2021 number:1 day:12 month:07 |
sourceStr |
Enthalten in Energy, Sustainability and Society 11(2021), 1 vom: 12. Juli volume:11 year:2021 number:1 day:12 month:07 |
format_phy_str_mv |
Article |
institution |
findex.gbv.de |
topic_facet |
Interdisciplinary knowledge integration Context scenarios Energy modeling Case study Cross-impact balance analysis (CIB) Hybrid scenario approach |
dewey-raw |
333.7 |
isfreeaccess_bool |
true |
container_title |
Energy, Sustainability and Society |
authorswithroles_txt_mv |
Prehofer, Sigrid @@aut@@ Kosow, Hannah @@aut@@ Naegler, Tobias @@aut@@ Pregger, Thomas @@aut@@ Vögele, Stefan @@aut@@ Weimer-Jehle, Wolfgang @@aut@@ |
publishDateDaySort_date |
2021-07-12T00:00:00Z |
hierarchy_top_id |
679779221 |
dewey-sort |
3333.7 |
id |
SPR044539916 |
language_de |
englisch |
fullrecord |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">SPR044539916</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20220111200520.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">210713s2021 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1186/s13705-021-00298-1</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)SPR044539916</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(SPR)s13705-021-00298-1-e</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">333.7</subfield><subfield code="q">ASE</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Prehofer, Sigrid</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Linking qualitative scenarios with quantitative energy models: knowledge integration in different methodological designs</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2021</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">© The Author(s) 2021</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Background Linking qualitative scenarios with quantitative models is a common approach to integrate assumptions on possible future societal contexts into modeling. But reflection on how and to what degree knowledge is effectively integrated during this endeavor does not generally take place. In this paper, we reflect on the performance of a specific hybrid scenario approach (qualitative Cross-Impact Balance analysis, CIB, linked with quantitative energy models) concerning knowledge integration through 11 different process steps. In order to guide the scenario community in applying this approach, we reflect on general methodological features as well as different design options. We conceptualize different forms of interdisciplinary knowledge integration (compiling, combining and synthesizing) and analyze how and to what degree knowledge about society and uncertainty are integrated into scenario process and products. In addition, we discuss trade-offs regarding design choices and forms of knowledge integration. Results On the basis of three case studies, we identify two general designs of linking which build on each other (basic and extended design) and which differ in essence regarding the balance of power between the CIB and the energy modeling. Ex post assessment of the form of interdisciplinary knowledge integration in each step revealed that specific method properties of CIB as well as the interaction with additional quantitative as well as specific qualitative methods foster distinct forms of knowledge integration. The specific roles assigned to CIB in the hybrid scenario process can also influence the form of knowledge integration. Conclusions In this study, we use a joint process scheme linking qualitative context scenarios with energy modeling. By applying our conceptualization of different forms of knowledge integration we analyze the designs’ respective potential for and respective effects on knowledge integration. Consequently, our findings can give guidance to those who are designing their own hybrid scenario processes. As this is an explorative study, it would be useful to further test our hypotheses in different hybrid scenario designs. Finally, we note that at some points in the process a more precise differentiation of three forms of knowledge integration would have been useful and propose to further differentiate and detail them in future research.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Interdisciplinary knowledge integration</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Context scenarios</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Energy modeling</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Case study</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Cross-impact balance analysis (CIB)</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Hybrid scenario approach</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Kosow, Hannah</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Naegler, Tobias</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Pregger, Thomas</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Vögele, Stefan</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Weimer-Jehle, Wolfgang</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">Energy, Sustainability and Society</subfield><subfield code="d">Berlin : Springer, 2011</subfield><subfield code="g">11(2021), 1 vom: 12. Juli</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)679779221</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2641015-1</subfield><subfield code="x">2192-0567</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:11</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2021</subfield><subfield code="g">number:1</subfield><subfield code="g">day:12</subfield><subfield code="g">month:07</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13705-021-00298-1</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_SPRINGER</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_152</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_370</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2009</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2027</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2034</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2055</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2108</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2111</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2129</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2360</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4046</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">11</subfield><subfield code="j">2021</subfield><subfield code="e">1</subfield><subfield code="b">12</subfield><subfield code="c">07</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
author |
Prehofer, Sigrid |
spellingShingle |
Prehofer, Sigrid ddc 333.7 misc Interdisciplinary knowledge integration misc Context scenarios misc Energy modeling misc Case study misc Cross-impact balance analysis (CIB) misc Hybrid scenario approach Linking qualitative scenarios with quantitative energy models: knowledge integration in different methodological designs |
authorStr |
Prehofer, Sigrid |
ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv |
@@773@@(DE-627)679779221 |
format |
electronic Article |
dewey-ones |
333 - Economics of land & energy |
delete_txt_mv |
keep |
author_role |
aut aut aut aut aut aut |
collection |
springer |
remote_str |
true |
illustrated |
Not Illustrated |
issn |
2192-0567 |
topic_title |
333.7 ASE Linking qualitative scenarios with quantitative energy models: knowledge integration in different methodological designs Interdisciplinary knowledge integration (dpeaa)DE-He213 Context scenarios (dpeaa)DE-He213 Energy modeling (dpeaa)DE-He213 Case study (dpeaa)DE-He213 Cross-impact balance analysis (CIB) (dpeaa)DE-He213 Hybrid scenario approach (dpeaa)DE-He213 |
topic |
ddc 333.7 misc Interdisciplinary knowledge integration misc Context scenarios misc Energy modeling misc Case study misc Cross-impact balance analysis (CIB) misc Hybrid scenario approach |
topic_unstemmed |
ddc 333.7 misc Interdisciplinary knowledge integration misc Context scenarios misc Energy modeling misc Case study misc Cross-impact balance analysis (CIB) misc Hybrid scenario approach |
topic_browse |
ddc 333.7 misc Interdisciplinary knowledge integration misc Context scenarios misc Energy modeling misc Case study misc Cross-impact balance analysis (CIB) misc Hybrid scenario approach |
format_facet |
Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource |
format_main_str_mv |
Text Zeitschrift/Artikel |
carriertype_str_mv |
cr |
hierarchy_parent_title |
Energy, Sustainability and Society |
hierarchy_parent_id |
679779221 |
dewey-tens |
330 - Economics |
hierarchy_top_title |
Energy, Sustainability and Society |
isfreeaccess_txt |
true |
familylinks_str_mv |
(DE-627)679779221 (DE-600)2641015-1 |
title |
Linking qualitative scenarios with quantitative energy models: knowledge integration in different methodological designs |
ctrlnum |
(DE-627)SPR044539916 (SPR)s13705-021-00298-1-e |
title_full |
Linking qualitative scenarios with quantitative energy models: knowledge integration in different methodological designs |
author_sort |
Prehofer, Sigrid |
journal |
Energy, Sustainability and Society |
journalStr |
Energy, Sustainability and Society |
lang_code |
eng |
isOA_bool |
true |
dewey-hundreds |
300 - Social sciences |
recordtype |
marc |
publishDateSort |
2021 |
contenttype_str_mv |
txt |
author_browse |
Prehofer, Sigrid Kosow, Hannah Naegler, Tobias Pregger, Thomas Vögele, Stefan Weimer-Jehle, Wolfgang |
container_volume |
11 |
class |
333.7 ASE |
format_se |
Elektronische Aufsätze |
author-letter |
Prehofer, Sigrid |
doi_str_mv |
10.1186/s13705-021-00298-1 |
dewey-full |
333.7 |
author2-role |
verfasserin |
title_sort |
linking qualitative scenarios with quantitative energy models: knowledge integration in different methodological designs |
title_auth |
Linking qualitative scenarios with quantitative energy models: knowledge integration in different methodological designs |
abstract |
Background Linking qualitative scenarios with quantitative models is a common approach to integrate assumptions on possible future societal contexts into modeling. But reflection on how and to what degree knowledge is effectively integrated during this endeavor does not generally take place. In this paper, we reflect on the performance of a specific hybrid scenario approach (qualitative Cross-Impact Balance analysis, CIB, linked with quantitative energy models) concerning knowledge integration through 11 different process steps. In order to guide the scenario community in applying this approach, we reflect on general methodological features as well as different design options. We conceptualize different forms of interdisciplinary knowledge integration (compiling, combining and synthesizing) and analyze how and to what degree knowledge about society and uncertainty are integrated into scenario process and products. In addition, we discuss trade-offs regarding design choices and forms of knowledge integration. Results On the basis of three case studies, we identify two general designs of linking which build on each other (basic and extended design) and which differ in essence regarding the balance of power between the CIB and the energy modeling. Ex post assessment of the form of interdisciplinary knowledge integration in each step revealed that specific method properties of CIB as well as the interaction with additional quantitative as well as specific qualitative methods foster distinct forms of knowledge integration. The specific roles assigned to CIB in the hybrid scenario process can also influence the form of knowledge integration. Conclusions In this study, we use a joint process scheme linking qualitative context scenarios with energy modeling. By applying our conceptualization of different forms of knowledge integration we analyze the designs’ respective potential for and respective effects on knowledge integration. Consequently, our findings can give guidance to those who are designing their own hybrid scenario processes. As this is an explorative study, it would be useful to further test our hypotheses in different hybrid scenario designs. Finally, we note that at some points in the process a more precise differentiation of three forms of knowledge integration would have been useful and propose to further differentiate and detail them in future research. © The Author(s) 2021 |
abstractGer |
Background Linking qualitative scenarios with quantitative models is a common approach to integrate assumptions on possible future societal contexts into modeling. But reflection on how and to what degree knowledge is effectively integrated during this endeavor does not generally take place. In this paper, we reflect on the performance of a specific hybrid scenario approach (qualitative Cross-Impact Balance analysis, CIB, linked with quantitative energy models) concerning knowledge integration through 11 different process steps. In order to guide the scenario community in applying this approach, we reflect on general methodological features as well as different design options. We conceptualize different forms of interdisciplinary knowledge integration (compiling, combining and synthesizing) and analyze how and to what degree knowledge about society and uncertainty are integrated into scenario process and products. In addition, we discuss trade-offs regarding design choices and forms of knowledge integration. Results On the basis of three case studies, we identify two general designs of linking which build on each other (basic and extended design) and which differ in essence regarding the balance of power between the CIB and the energy modeling. Ex post assessment of the form of interdisciplinary knowledge integration in each step revealed that specific method properties of CIB as well as the interaction with additional quantitative as well as specific qualitative methods foster distinct forms of knowledge integration. The specific roles assigned to CIB in the hybrid scenario process can also influence the form of knowledge integration. Conclusions In this study, we use a joint process scheme linking qualitative context scenarios with energy modeling. By applying our conceptualization of different forms of knowledge integration we analyze the designs’ respective potential for and respective effects on knowledge integration. Consequently, our findings can give guidance to those who are designing their own hybrid scenario processes. As this is an explorative study, it would be useful to further test our hypotheses in different hybrid scenario designs. Finally, we note that at some points in the process a more precise differentiation of three forms of knowledge integration would have been useful and propose to further differentiate and detail them in future research. © The Author(s) 2021 |
abstract_unstemmed |
Background Linking qualitative scenarios with quantitative models is a common approach to integrate assumptions on possible future societal contexts into modeling. But reflection on how and to what degree knowledge is effectively integrated during this endeavor does not generally take place. In this paper, we reflect on the performance of a specific hybrid scenario approach (qualitative Cross-Impact Balance analysis, CIB, linked with quantitative energy models) concerning knowledge integration through 11 different process steps. In order to guide the scenario community in applying this approach, we reflect on general methodological features as well as different design options. We conceptualize different forms of interdisciplinary knowledge integration (compiling, combining and synthesizing) and analyze how and to what degree knowledge about society and uncertainty are integrated into scenario process and products. In addition, we discuss trade-offs regarding design choices and forms of knowledge integration. Results On the basis of three case studies, we identify two general designs of linking which build on each other (basic and extended design) and which differ in essence regarding the balance of power between the CIB and the energy modeling. Ex post assessment of the form of interdisciplinary knowledge integration in each step revealed that specific method properties of CIB as well as the interaction with additional quantitative as well as specific qualitative methods foster distinct forms of knowledge integration. The specific roles assigned to CIB in the hybrid scenario process can also influence the form of knowledge integration. Conclusions In this study, we use a joint process scheme linking qualitative context scenarios with energy modeling. By applying our conceptualization of different forms of knowledge integration we analyze the designs’ respective potential for and respective effects on knowledge integration. Consequently, our findings can give guidance to those who are designing their own hybrid scenario processes. As this is an explorative study, it would be useful to further test our hypotheses in different hybrid scenario designs. Finally, we note that at some points in the process a more precise differentiation of three forms of knowledge integration would have been useful and propose to further differentiate and detail them in future research. © The Author(s) 2021 |
collection_details |
GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_152 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2108 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2360 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 |
container_issue |
1 |
title_short |
Linking qualitative scenarios with quantitative energy models: knowledge integration in different methodological designs |
url |
https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13705-021-00298-1 |
remote_bool |
true |
author2 |
Kosow, Hannah Naegler, Tobias Pregger, Thomas Vögele, Stefan Weimer-Jehle, Wolfgang |
author2Str |
Kosow, Hannah Naegler, Tobias Pregger, Thomas Vögele, Stefan Weimer-Jehle, Wolfgang |
ppnlink |
679779221 |
mediatype_str_mv |
c |
isOA_txt |
true |
hochschulschrift_bool |
false |
doi_str |
10.1186/s13705-021-00298-1 |
up_date |
2024-07-04T01:11:41.944Z |
_version_ |
1803608918019014656 |
fullrecord_marcxml |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">SPR044539916</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20220111200520.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">210713s2021 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1186/s13705-021-00298-1</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)SPR044539916</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(SPR)s13705-021-00298-1-e</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">333.7</subfield><subfield code="q">ASE</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Prehofer, Sigrid</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Linking qualitative scenarios with quantitative energy models: knowledge integration in different methodological designs</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2021</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">© The Author(s) 2021</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Background Linking qualitative scenarios with quantitative models is a common approach to integrate assumptions on possible future societal contexts into modeling. But reflection on how and to what degree knowledge is effectively integrated during this endeavor does not generally take place. In this paper, we reflect on the performance of a specific hybrid scenario approach (qualitative Cross-Impact Balance analysis, CIB, linked with quantitative energy models) concerning knowledge integration through 11 different process steps. In order to guide the scenario community in applying this approach, we reflect on general methodological features as well as different design options. We conceptualize different forms of interdisciplinary knowledge integration (compiling, combining and synthesizing) and analyze how and to what degree knowledge about society and uncertainty are integrated into scenario process and products. In addition, we discuss trade-offs regarding design choices and forms of knowledge integration. Results On the basis of three case studies, we identify two general designs of linking which build on each other (basic and extended design) and which differ in essence regarding the balance of power between the CIB and the energy modeling. Ex post assessment of the form of interdisciplinary knowledge integration in each step revealed that specific method properties of CIB as well as the interaction with additional quantitative as well as specific qualitative methods foster distinct forms of knowledge integration. The specific roles assigned to CIB in the hybrid scenario process can also influence the form of knowledge integration. Conclusions In this study, we use a joint process scheme linking qualitative context scenarios with energy modeling. By applying our conceptualization of different forms of knowledge integration we analyze the designs’ respective potential for and respective effects on knowledge integration. Consequently, our findings can give guidance to those who are designing their own hybrid scenario processes. As this is an explorative study, it would be useful to further test our hypotheses in different hybrid scenario designs. Finally, we note that at some points in the process a more precise differentiation of three forms of knowledge integration would have been useful and propose to further differentiate and detail them in future research.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Interdisciplinary knowledge integration</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Context scenarios</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Energy modeling</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Case study</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Cross-impact balance analysis (CIB)</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Hybrid scenario approach</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Kosow, Hannah</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Naegler, Tobias</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Pregger, Thomas</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Vögele, Stefan</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Weimer-Jehle, Wolfgang</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">Energy, Sustainability and Society</subfield><subfield code="d">Berlin : Springer, 2011</subfield><subfield code="g">11(2021), 1 vom: 12. Juli</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)679779221</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2641015-1</subfield><subfield code="x">2192-0567</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:11</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2021</subfield><subfield code="g">number:1</subfield><subfield code="g">day:12</subfield><subfield code="g">month:07</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13705-021-00298-1</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_SPRINGER</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_152</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_370</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2009</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2027</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2034</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2055</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2108</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2111</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2129</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2360</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4046</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">11</subfield><subfield code="j">2021</subfield><subfield code="e">1</subfield><subfield code="b">12</subfield><subfield code="c">07</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
score |
7.4003916 |