A major challenge in planning for adaptation to climate change is to assess future development not only in relation to climate but also in relation to social, economic and political changes that affect the capacity for adaptation or otherwise play a role in decision making. One approach is to use scenario methods. This article presents a methodology that combines top-down scenarios and bottom-up approaches to scenario building, with the aim of articulating local so-called extended socio-economic pathways. Specifically, we used the Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSPs) of the global scenario framework as developed by the climate research community to present boundary conditions about potential global change in workshop discussion with local and regional actors in the Barents region. We relate the results from these workshops to the different elements of the global SSPs and discuss potential and limitations of the method in relation to use in decision making processes

Meaningful engagement between scientists and stakeholders has been extensively promoted as a tool for increasing public participation in science, as well as for increasing the relevance and impact of scientific research. Yet, co-production of knowledge entails practical challenges, since participants with diverse worldviews, expertise and interests are expected to collaborate. These obstacles have not received enough attention, as current debate has focused more on the merits and principles of this approach. We address this gap by reflecting upon our experiences with both practical and methodological challenges stemming from research projects based on co-production of knowledge, thereby exposing what we see as common but under-discussed obstacles, as well as guidance for tackling them. We highlight the role of social scientists in the process not merely as facilitators but also as agents that promote critical reflection and safeguard the salience, credibility, and legitimacy of both the process and its outputs.

Northern coastal regions are facing multiple challenges from accelerating global environmental and socioeconomic changes, such as ecosystem degradation, climate change, intensified resource extraction, land use change and declining populations. Based on interviews with 13 farmers, fishers and aquaculture employees from coastal Nordland, northern Norway, this study demonstrates how the local stakeholders’ perceptions of change and experiences of vulnerability are closely linked to their livelihood values and worldviews. What the informants consider a sustainable and meaningful way of coastal living does not coincide with national goals for sustainable, natural resource dependent development of the region. The article demonstrates the importance of attending to local values if policymakers and managers are to ensure successful local mobilisation, reduce vulnerability to ongoing and future processes of change, and ensure legitimacy and consistency in development goals of coastal zone management. Insights from this study are useful for local and regional decision makers with responsibility for natural resource policies and development efforts.

Finding the right way to move forward with seaweed cultivation requires the relevant stakeholders to reach agreement on what goals/limits to set and subsequently what measures should be taken to achieve them. Using a Q-method approach and an analytical framework based on in-put legitimacy and the four pillars of sustainability, we discuss the answers of a diverse set of stakeholders to the question: how should commercial seaweed cultivation in Scotland develop? Our results reveal three main discourses. The first focused on environmental and social sustainability, the second on accessing global markets, economic and environmental sustainability and the third prioritized jobs and social and institutional sustainability. The areas of consensus across the factors included the perception that large-scale and multi-national owned farms are not the ideal model for development of the industry in Scotland. All participants advised that the current regulatory regime for seaweed cultivation requires improvement. These results are discussed within the analytical framework and a prediction of the factors required to establish a legitimate seaweed cultivation industry in Scotland is presented.