Abstract
This article subjects five global risk scenarios — drawn from the author’s cascading-risks research program — to a place-based stress test using Nigeria as a critical case. Rather than forecasting Nigeria’s future, the analysis interrogates these scenarios as methodological artifacts: what assumptions about agency, shock propagation, and institutional capacity do they embed, and where do those assumptions fail? Using an evidence-to-scenario protocol adapted from PRISMA-inspired review methodology, scenario claims are linked to auditable empirical anchors across six domains — governance, demography, economy, climate, technology, and migration — and a critical futures rubric is applied to each scenario. The analysis reveals recurring methodological limitations: linear impact narratives, passive-periphery assumptions, and technology-centered causality that systematically under-specify the informal institutions and social cohesion dynamics that drive adaptive capacity in heterogeneous contexts. The contribution is methodological: a replicable framework for interrogating the worldview commitments embedded in globally-oriented scenarios before they are applied across heterogeneous contexts. The article concludes with a constructive proposal for epistemically pluralist scenario design drawing on African futures scholarship and indigenous forecasting traditions.
Keywords
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
