Short Summary

 The Kyoto Climate Change Adaptation Center is experimenting with a Future Design approach for adaptation planning focusing on the agricultural sector. This methodology allows for flexible discussions on a vision for a future resilient society.

Description (Details)

In adaptation planning, it is important to incorporate a local perspective and create a plan that aligns with the needs and preferences of local communities and relevant stakeholders while addressing the region's unique challenges. However, traditional policy approaches have often focused on incremental changes, and more transformative approaches have rarely been included in policy discussions. Recognizing this gap, the Kyoto Climate Change Adaptation Center (KCCAC) in Kyoto, Japan, is experimenting with a novel method to have policy dialogue using the "Future Design" approach.

Future Design is a method of participatory dialogue where individuals imagine themselves as people living in the future—at a specific time—and then discuss what they envision for society based on that assumption. In this trial dealing with agricultural policies in Kyoto, participants included farmers, policymakers, and researchers. These different categories of people were included in the dialogue to simulate the decision-making process and engage with different stakeholders and experts. They assumed the role of people living in the 2050s and discussed what agricultural production and distribution systems should look like by that time, considering the expected impacts of climate change. After establishing a vision for the future, they worked backward to identify the policies and measures that need to be implemented today to achieve that vision. The discussions were held over several rounds and alternated between envisioning the future as people at that time and evaluating those visions from the perspective of the present day. To ensure that the envisioned future was sound and convincing, researchers played a key role in organizing the discussions, offering insights based on scientific knowledge and evidence.

As a result of these discussions, the participants were able to debate the advantages and disadvantages of various options that are difficult to address under current policy conditions. The results were compiled following several rounds of discussions and the repeated process of refining and reflections. For example, they explored the feasibility of factory farming and food distribution systems that use artificial intelligence and robotics. Differences in opinion arose over whether the focus should be on traditional outdoor cultivation or factory farming, and these debates highlighted divergent perceptions among the participants about the current situation and their hopes for the future. The exercise of imagining the future allowed for a broader, more open dialogue, free from the constraints of existing policies and regulations.

While this experimental discussion has yet to be integrated into real-world policy, it offers valuable insights for future planning. It underscores the need for flexibility and innovation in policy design, especially when addressing complex challenges like climate adaptation. Engaging in future-oriented discussions not only helps participants think beyond present-day limitations but also fosters creative solutions that might otherwise go unexplored. However, further research and reflection are needed to determine how experimental discussions like these can influence real policy development. In conclusion, the Future Design approach, as trialed by KCCAC, has demonstrated the potential to facilitate more expansive and forward-thinking policy discussions on climate adaptation. Focusing on long-term goals and involving diverse stakeholders creates a space for dialogue that bridges the gap between the present and future, encouraging the development of policies that are better suited to addressing the evolving challenges posed by climate change.