Abstract Participatory visioning in transport scenario building can be particularly useful to anticipate and examine unexpected outcomes over long-term future timelines, providing broad legitimacy to today’s decision-making processes. However, the strategic value of participatory approaches is increasingly being contested due to the difficulty to operationalize non-linear thinking, resulting in long-term visions similar to business-as-usual projections. To address this challenge, we developed and implemented a novel participatory visioning approach based on using semi-structured interviews that incorporate two types of wild cards – low probability and high impact processes – as disruptive visioning triggers: imaginable and unimaginable processes. A group of experts evaluated the level of disruptive thinking in the generated future visions. The Henares Corridor in the Metropolitan Area of Madrid, Spain provided the empirical focus. The results present a total of seven 2050 visions: one desired common vision plus six wild card visions. Higher levels of disruptive thinking were mainly present in those future visions generated by unimaginable processes, as such processes initiate highly diverging participant future views. It was also noted that smaller and specific groups of participants can visualize 2050 futures more disruptively. Conclusions and reflections on the strengths and weakness of the presented approach are drawn.

中文翻译：

---

为交通和土地使用规划构建颠覆性未来场景的参与式愿景

摘要 交通场景构建中的参与式愿景对于预测和检查长期未来时间表中的意外结果特别有用，为当今的决策过程提供了广泛的合法性。然而，由于非线性思维难以操作，参与式方法的战略价值越来越受到质疑，从而导致类似于常规预测的长期愿景。为了应对这一挑战，我们开发并实施了一种新颖的参与式愿景方法，该方法基于使用半结构化访谈，其中包含两种类型的通配符——低概率和高影响过程——作为破坏性愿景触发器：可想象的和不可想象的过程。一组专家评估了生成的未来愿景中颠覆性思维的水平。西班牙马德里大都市区的埃纳雷斯走廊提供了经验重点。结果显示了总共七个 2050 愿景：一个理想的共同愿景加上六个通配符愿景。更高水平的颠覆性思维主要存在于那些由难以想象的过程产生的未来愿景中，因为这些过程引发了参与者未来观点的高度分歧。还指出，较小和特定的参与者群体可以更具破坏性地想象 2050 年的未来。得出了对所提出方法的优点和缺点的结论和反思。更高水平的颠覆性思维主要存在于那些由难以想象的过程产生的未来愿景中，因为这些过程引发了参与者未来观点的高度分歧。还指出，较小和特定的参与者群体可以更具破坏性地想象 2050 年的未来。得出了对所提出方法的优点和缺点的结论和反思。更高水平的颠覆性思维主要存在于那些由难以想象的过程产生的未来愿景中，因为这些过程引发了参与者未来观点的高度分歧。还指出，较小和特定的参与者群体可以更具破坏性地想象 2050 年的未来。得出了对所提出方法的优点和缺点的结论和反思。