Integrated assessment models (IAM) and resulting scenarios have become increasingly institutionalised and relevant in the science-policy interface of climate policy. Despite their analytical strengths to conceive low-carbon futures, their co-evolution with the transnational science-policy interface of climate politics has also led to a focus on a specific set of techno-economic futures that are typically based on a relatively narrow set of assumptions. This deviates attention from alternatives that are hardly studied by IAMs, but might be more desirable from a societal perspective. We argue that research-based models and scenarios should support rather than narrow down deliberations on possible and desirable futures and provide an impetus to enact socially desirable change. Accordingly, we propose three future directions regarding the development and use of IAMs: 1) incorporate a plurality of perspectives on plausibility and desirability through iterative participatory engagement and worldview-based scenario exploration, 2) seek collaboration with the arts and humanities to expand the range of imagined futures beyond the status quo and 3) make projected futures more tangible and experiential so that diverse societal actor groups can understand and genuinely engage with them. By deploying the indisputable analytical strengths of IAMs optimally within these suggestions, we believe they can facilitate broader societal debates about transformative pathways to low-carbon futures.

综合评估模型 (IAM) 和由此产生的情景在气候政策的科学政策界面中变得越来越制度化和相关。尽管他们在设想低碳未来方面具有分析优势，但他们与气候政治的跨国科学政策界面的共同进化也导致了对一组特定的技术经济未来的关注，这些未来通常基于相对狭窄的一组假设。这偏离了 IAM 几乎没有研究过的替代方案，但从社会角度来看可能更受欢迎。我们认为基于研究的模型和场景应该支持而不是缩小范围对可能和理想的未来进行审议，并推动实现社会理想的变革。因此，我们提出了关于 IAM 的开发和使用的三个未来方向：1）通过迭代参与和基于世界观的场景探索，将多种关于合理性和可取性的观点结合起来，2）寻求与艺术和人文科学的合作以扩大范围超越现状的想象未来和 3) 使预计的未来更加有形和经验，以便不同的社会行动者群体能够理解并真正参与其中。通过在这些建议中最佳地部署 IAM 无可争议的分析优势，我们相信它们可以促进关于低碳未来转型途径的更广泛的社会辩论。