Principle for the assessment of
insidious/trend-led processes
The assessment of insidious/trend-led processes is based on the series of steps given below:
1. The scenario working group puts together a first general description of the scenario line for an identified insidious/trend-led process on the basis of an initial exploration of the scenario theme.
2. On the basis of the first general scenario line as described, then the drivers or influence variables are determined for every impact criterion that could have consequences for the relevant impact criterion. The relationship between influence variables and their associated class labels (A to E). More than one type of influence variable can be determined for any given impact criterion.
3. Once all the impact criteria have been scored, then the ‘choice process’ is carried out: the influence variables are now filled in. If it is important to choose different values for influence variables, then this can result in multiple scenario variations, which provide not only a more detailed and coherent description of the insidious/ trend-led developments, but which are also internally consistent. Some of the previously determined influence variables are given a logical place within the broad entirety of the detailed scenario line in every scenario variation.
4. The final class label is determined for the individual impact criteria for every scenario variation (on the basis of the influence variables actually included in the scenario, as well as the actual circumstances caused thereby) and then the total impact score is set. 5. Then the likelihood is determined for every scenario
variation, depending on the time period of five years in which the insidious/trend-led process is being considered.
The use of system dynamic modelling in steps 2 and 3. If the influence factors and ‘drivers’ described, as well as their effects, are characterised by a high level of uncertainty, complexity and mutual influences, then the development of a system dynamic model, in which the influence factors and the mutual relationships are described and are quantitavely calculated in, is a possible solution for arriving at relevant scenario variations.
The conclusion to follow this alternative approach should be reached during the working tasks as described in 3, but possibly already during step 2. In that case the process will have to be repeated from the start of step 2, but then with the development and application of a system dynamic model as guideline.
Characterisation of insidious/trend-led
processes
This concerns processes that cannot be described by a defined incident with its negative consequences, but which develop over time and the consequences of which, as time progresses, have an increasingly negative effect on the functioning of (sections of) Dutch society.
The character of such a process can be identified by two groups of aspects.
In the first place, there are the identifying characteristics that:
• it continues unnoticed, driven by underlying influence factors that are not yet recognised as such, or • it is possibly noticed, but then still continues unavoid-
ably due to influence factors on which the relevant actors have an insufficient grip, or
• it is possibly noticed, but the necessary ‘interventions’ have serious negative consequences in the short term, meaning that the urgency and feasibility of the interventions are lacking, or
• it is (partly) recognised and tackled, but not yet over the full breadth of the effects and/or suchlike.
In all cases, the current impact on national safety and security is still limited, but the impact can be substantial in the long term and vital interests in the Netherlands can be damaged.
The process can become visible sooner or later due to: • an incident (a sudden escalation), and/or
• a very clear transgression of a standard or threshold value or acceptance limit, and/or
• media or (academic) institutions, etc. give (large-scale) attention to the situation, whereby relevant actors are forced to take measures.
N.B.: This may lead to a choice arising during the
scenario development whether to handle the phenomenon under consideration still as an ‘incident scenario’ or as a ‘process scenario’, as described in this document.
Moreover, an insidious/trend-led process is characterised by:
• the fact that the process is not only to be seen in the Netherlands, but also manifests itself internationally; • the consequences being strategic in nature, in the sense
it concerns the fundamental changes to existing (social) structures, organisations, institutions, social status quo, etc.;
• the fact that complex relationships exist between the influence factors and high levels of uncertainty about the actual scenario development over the course of time.
Working with scenarios, risk assessment and capabilities in the National Safety and Security Strategy of the Netherlands | 83
Steps in a process scenario
The following gives a more detailed description of the step system.
This is supported and further explained using a scenario that has been rudimentarily worked out of ‘Development of Lyme disease’.
Step 1: Setting the scenario line
The scenario working group compiles a first description of the scenario line for an identified insidious/trend-led process. On the basis of the first exploration of the scenario theme, a description is given of:
• the nature of the theme and the potential social (and geographical) spread of influence,
• a general process line with possible alternatives, • potential influence factors that could determine
relevant developments,
• uncertainties surrounding factors and developments, • relevant factual information.
Setting the scenario line is described in greater detail using a scenario that has been rudimentarily worked out of ‘Development of Lyme disease’.