The Plausibility Project
Plausibility is a contested term in the scenarios and foresight literature. It is often used in juxtaposition to probability and used to distinguish more qualitatively led work. However, what plausibility actually (and symbolically) means, how it matters for practice, and why it is important for the contemporary coping with uncertainty is unclear. This multi-year obsession seeks to unravel these mysteries.
In 2009, I co-organized (with Arnim Wiek, in cooperation with the Institute for Science, Society and Innovation at the University of Oxford), a 2-day International Workshop on Plausibility to:
* identify the ‘state of the art’ (concepts, empirical studies)
* account for research and knowledge gaps
* develop a coordinated research agenda.
In preparation for the workshop, the participating internationally recognized scholars and practitioners developed initial thoughts on plausibility in their Portraits of Plausibility. Additionally, we created a Bibliography which presents a cursory collection of the scholarly literature relevant to plausibility.
In 2011, with Ângela Guimarães Pereira (EC-JRC), I organized a writing workshop in Ispra which eventually led to a special issue in the International Journal of Foresight and Innovation Policy. The introduction to that special issue, and other key writings on plausibility introduced below.
In 2009, I co-organized (with Arnim Wiek, in cooperation with the Institute for Science, Society and Innovation at the University of Oxford), a 2-day International Workshop on Plausibility to:
* identify the ‘state of the art’ (concepts, empirical studies)
* account for research and knowledge gaps
* develop a coordinated research agenda.
In preparation for the workshop, the participating internationally recognized scholars and practitioners developed initial thoughts on plausibility in their Portraits of Plausibility. Additionally, we created a Bibliography which presents a cursory collection of the scholarly literature relevant to plausibility.
In 2011, with Ângela Guimarães Pereira (EC-JRC), I organized a writing workshop in Ispra which eventually led to a special issue in the International Journal of Foresight and Innovation Policy. The introduction to that special issue, and other key writings on plausibility introduced below.
Pursuing Plausibility
There is a need for a corrective to the cultural and institutional mindsets that seek to calculate incalculable futures. Plausibility is an undertheorised and illusive concept yet one that critically moves beyond a search for a factual encounter with the future. While not assuming that plausibility will unproblematically lift policy making and technology assessment from failures of both imagination and prediction, teasing apart the tensions latent in the concept is helpful and timely. The articles in this special issue ask: is plausibility another mode of relating to the future that acknowledges an intrinsically uncertain and contingent future? Does plausibility offer a pathway away from the pathologies of prediction and probabilistic thinking to create a more fruitful space to make better decisions? This introductory article describes the intellectual pursuit of plausibility through a description of the contemporary conditions that necessitate a revised approach to uncertainty and a historical account of the rise of probabilistic thinking.
Selin, C. & A. Pereira. 2013. “Pursuing Plausibility.” Int. J. of Foresight and Innovation Policy, 9 (2/3/4): 93 – 109.
Selin, C. & A. Pereira. 2013. “Pursuing Plausibility.” Int. J. of Foresight and Innovation Policy, 9 (2/3/4): 93 – 109.
Plausibility and Probability in Scenario Planning
In this paper we unpack and examine the oft-repeated claim by many in the scenario planning community that a key performance indicator of scenarios effectiveness is
plausibility. We explore what lies behind this claim and how it works in practice, as well as theoretically. The paper contributes to a more rigorous theoretical understanding of plausibility, its relations with and differences with probability, and how they have been and still are related. We suggest that the links between them have been more complex than has generally been accepted, and clarify how the distinction can be more helpfully drawn to enhance the effectiveness of scenario work.
Ramírez, R. and C. Selin. 2014. “Plausibility and probability in scenario planning.” foresight, 16(1): 54 – 74.
plausibility. We explore what lies behind this claim and how it works in practice, as well as theoretically. The paper contributes to a more rigorous theoretical understanding of plausibility, its relations with and differences with probability, and how they have been and still are related. We suggest that the links between them have been more complex than has generally been accepted, and clarify how the distinction can be more helpfully drawn to enhance the effectiveness of scenario work.
Ramírez, R. and C. Selin. 2014. “Plausibility and probability in scenario planning.” foresight, 16(1): 54 – 74.
Negotiating Plausibility: Intervening in the Future of Nanotechnology
The national-level scenarios project NanoFutures focuses on the social, political, economic, and ethical implications of nanotechnology, and is initiated by the Center for Nanotechnology in Society at Arizona State University (CNS-ASU). The project involves novel methods for the development of plausible visions of nanotechnology-enabled futures, elucidates public preferences for various alternatives, and, using such preferences, helps refine future visions for research and outreach. In doing so, the NanoFutures project aims to address a central question: how to deliberate the social implications of an emergent technology whose outcomes are not known. The solution pursued by the NanoFutures project is twofold. First, NanoFutures limits speculation about the technology to plausible visions. This ambition introduces a host of concerns about the limits of prediction, the nature of plausibility, and how to establish plausibility. Second, it subjects these visions to democratic assessment by a range of stakeholders, thus raising methodological questions as to who are relevant stakeholders and how to activate different communities so as to engage the far future. This article makes the dilemmas posed by decisions about such methodological issues transparent and therefore articulates the role of plausibility in anticipatory governance.
Selin, C. 2011. “Negotiating Plausibility: Intervening in the Future of Nanotechnology.” Science and Engineering Ethics, 17(4): 723-737.
Selin, C. 2011. “Negotiating Plausibility: Intervening in the Future of Nanotechnology.” Science and Engineering Ethics, 17(4): 723-737.