This page presents a database with key resources in the foresight world that indicate the diversity of themes, timescales, perspectives, and regional cover. This resource database includes large-scale studies, reports, and academic articles.
From the menu bar, you can filter your search by category. Click the “View more” button to see the resource’s full citation, and a link to the full article or report.
Abstract Motivation Recurring urban flooding in Bengaluru, India, has brought multiple intersecting development challenges to the forefront. While climate change is a catalyst for flooding, rapid urbanisation has aggravated the problem by neglecting its ecological history. Repeated floods have particularly affected migrants living in the slums, further worsening their already vulnerable conditions. Currently, only about 40% of slums are formally recognized by city authorities, leaving most slum dwellers with limited access to public benefits and basic infrastructure. Although the city offers piecemeal solutions, it currently lacks foresight for long-term planning that includes marginalized voices. Purpose We explore the multiple and intertwined development challenges faced by Bengaluru city, attempting to frame them from the perspective of migrant slum dwellers experiencing flooding. We try to bring to the forefront the everyday risks and vulnerabilities of the marginalized populations in Indian cities, which have received limited attention both in research and policy. The results of this exercise are intended to create sustainable collaborative processes to inform future decisions, particularly addressing the problem of urban flooding. Methods and approach Our proposed methodology integrates climate risk assessment?urban flood modelling and exposure mapping of slums across the city?with vulnerability assessments at the household level including analysis of life histories to capture the relative vulnerabilities of slum dwellers and the slums in which they live. Findings We deconstruct urban flooding, particularly from the perspective of migrant slum dwellers to identify some critical challenges, especially that of recognition, to foresight thinking. By incorporating marginalized voices, our methods aim to be inclusive and contextually relevant, while considering intersectional variations among those marginalized. A mixed-methods approach allows climate risk assessment to be augmented by life histories of vulnerable slum populations to collaboratively reimagine a more inclusive future. Policy implications To make policy more inclusive, more participatory processes are needed. The proposed methods will contextualize everyday vulnerabilities and risks of migrant slum dwellers to bring these perspectives into conventional climate risk assessment. Thus, a more inclusive future with lower impacts from urban floods can be envisaged.
This guide is a basic reference on systems thinking and practice tailored to the context and needs of the UK Government’s Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office (FCDO). It is an output of the FCDO Knowledge for Development Programme (K4D), which facilitated a Learning Journey on Systems Thinking and Practice with FCDO staff during 2021 and 2022. The guide offers a common language and shared framing of systems thinking for FCDO and its partners. It explores what this implies for working practices, business processes and leadership. It also offers links to additional resources and tools on systems thinking. We hope it can support systems thinking to become more commonplace within the culture and practices of FCDO and working relations with partner organisations.
For organizations embarking on a foresight initiative, the most important aspect to determine is the intended outcome. Are you looking for insight, or action? Do you want to focus on concepts that have some degree of certainty, or more nascent and emerging concepts? Depending on your answer, Future Today Institute can determine the kind of engagement that would suit you best.
Today, more than ever, decision-making needs well-founded information on how the world changes in the coming times. The future behaviour of trends, the emergence of weak signals and the disruptive unfolding of wild cards all need to be taken into consideration in strategising, risk analysis, planning and innovation to future-proof these processes.
A. M. Rojas, A. Smajgl, A. Voinov, B. A. Bryan, E. A. Moallemi, E. G. Ritchie, E. Nicholson, F. J. de Haan, K. K. Miller, K. Szetey, M. A. Shaikh, M. Hadjikakou, M. Stafford Smith, P. Lamichhane, R. Bandari, S. Khatami, S. Malekpour, W. Novalia
Abstract
Abstract The achievement of global sustainability agendas, such as the Sustainable Development Goals, relies on transformational change across society, economy, and environment that are co-created in a transdisciplinary exercise by all stakeholders. Within this context, environmental and societal change is increasingly understood and represented via participatory modeling for genuine engagement with multiple collaborators in the modeling process. Despite the diversity of participatory modeling methods to promote engagement and co-creation, it remains uncertain what the extent and modes of participation are in different contexts, and how to select the suitable methods to use in a given situation. Based on a review of available methods and specification of potential contextual requirements, we propose a unifying framework to guide how collaborators of different backgrounds can work together and evaluate the suitability of participatory modeling methods for co-creating sustainability pathways. The evaluation of method suitability promises the integration of concepts and approaches necessary to address the complexities of problems at hand while ensuring robust methodologies based on well-tested evidence and negotiated among participants. Using two illustrative case studies, we demonstrate how to explore and evaluate the choice of methods for participatory modeling in varying contexts. The insights gained can inform creative participatory approaches to pathway development through tailored combinations of methods that best serve the specific sustainability context of particular case studies.
We hope the practical tools set out in this toolkit will now help people to imagine and to take steps to achieve the better futures they want to see. This toolkit has been developed through a pilot community foresight exercise with voluntary and community groups across three different communities in Wales.
Citizens rightly expect government policy that creates long-term benefits for society. To deliver this aim we need more than policy proposals which work well in the present context. We also need to understand what is changing beyond a policy area, how those changes might affect its impact, and how we might adapt policy proposals in response. Futures thinking and foresight tools provide government with a structured approach that is robust and responds to long-term change. The future is inherently uncertain and complex. To deliver long-term benefits we need to monitor and make sense of possible future change, explore the dynamics and uncertainties of that change, describe what the future might be like and understand potential implications. This guide will introduce you to resources for all these areas.
United Nations Committee of Experts on Public Administration
Abstract
The United Nations Committee of Experts on Public Administration (CEPA) has developed
a set of principles of effective governance for sustainable development. The essential
purpose of these voluntary principles is to provide interested countries with practical,
expert guidance on a broad range of governance challenges associated with the
implementation of the 2030 Agenda. CEPA has identified 62 commonly used strategies to
assist with the operationalization of these principles. This guidance note addresses
strategic planning and foresight, which is associated with the principle of sound
policymaking and can contribute to strengthening the effectiveness of institutions. It is
part of a series of such notes prepared by renowned experts under the overall direction
of the CEPA Secretariat in the Division for Public Institutions and Digital Government of
the United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs.
This note explains the value of strategic foresight and provides implementation advice based on the IMF’s experience with scenario planning and policy gaming. Section II provides an overview of strategic foresight and some of its tools. Scenario planning and policy gaming have been the Fund’s main foresight techniques so far, though other tools have been complementary. Accordingly, section III focuses on the scenario planning by illustrating applications before detailing the methods we have been using, while section IV describes policy gaming including the matrix policy gaming approach with which we have experimented so far. Section V summarizes the key points. In so doing, the note extends an invitation to those in the economics and finance fields (e.g., researchers, policymakers) to incorporate strategic foresight in their analysis and decision making.
In times of rapid change, growing complexity, and critical uncertainty, responsible governance requires preparing for the unexpected. The purpose of this document is to provide senior officials from centres of government with a brief guide to strengthening the foresight capacity of their governments through a better use of strategic foresight in policymaking. The piece begins with an introduction to foresight and examples of its use by governments and other organisations. This is followed by a description of key components for building a more comprehensive strategic foresight system in government and designing successful foresight interventions, drawing on best practices from around the world.1 The piece concludes with ways that governments may wish to collaborate with the OECD to advance strategic foresight and preparedness for the future both within their own countries and through global collaboration.
Adam Loch, Gnel Gabrielyan, Henk Westhoek, Jessica Libertini, Joost Vervoort, Keith Wiebe, Monika Zurek, Natalia Brzezina, Resham Thapa-Parajuli, Steven Lord
Abstract
In an increasingly globalized and interconnected world, where social and environmental change occur ever more rapidly, careful futures-oriented thinking becomes crucial for effective decision making. Foresight activities, including scenario development, quantitative modeling, and scenario-guided design of policies and programs, play a key role in exploring options to address socioeconomic and environmental challenges across many sectors and decision-making levels. We take stock of recent methodological developments in scenario and foresight exercises, seek to provide greater clarity on the many diverse approaches employed, and examine their use by decision makers in different fields and at different geographic, administrative, and temporal scales. Experience shows the importance of clearly formulated questions, structured dialog, carefully designed scenarios, sophisticated biophysical and socioeconomic analysis, and iteration as needed to more effectively link the growing scenarios and foresight community with today's decision makers and to better address the social, economic, and environmental challenges of tomorrow.
Our hope with this paper is to clarify what it means to shift conditions that are holding a social or environmental problem in place. Many others have researched and written thoughtfully about systems change in great depth, and social activists at grassroots and national levels have been doing and using such analyses for decades. The framework we offer here is intended to create an actionable model for funders and other social sector institutions interested in creating systems change, particularly those who are working in pursuit of a more just and equitable future. In offering this contribution, we acknowledge that, as white males who are in the process of unpacking our own areas of privilege, our viewpoints inevitably come with blind spots.
The Foresight Manual Empowered Futures for the 2030 Agenda provides a crisp and concise overview of the use of foresight for SDGs implementation. The Manual puts foresight firmly in a development context, emphasizing the importance of foresight capacity in developing countries. It gives concrete suggestions where and how to employ foresight at different levels of the policy cycle, as well as tips on how to effectively use foresight. The Manual ends with a review of the most widely used foresight techniques currently available.
Adam Loch, Gnel Gabrielyan, Henk Westhoek, Jessica Libertini, Joost Vervoort, Keith Wiebe, Monika Zurek, Natalia Brzezina, Resham Thapa-Parajuli, Steven Lord
Abstract
In an increasingly globalized and interconnected world, where social and environmental change occur ever more rapidly, careful futures-oriented thinking becomes crucial for effective decision making. Foresight activities, including scenario development, quantitative modeling, and scenario-guided design of policies and programs, play a key role in exploring options to address socioeconomic and environmental challenges across many sectors and decision-making levels. We take stock of recent methodological developments in scenario and foresight exercises, seek to provide greater clarity on the many diverse approaches employed, and examine their use by decision makers in different fields and at different geographic, administrative, and temporal scales. Experience shows the importance of clearly formulated questions, structured dialog, carefully designed scenarios, sophisticated biophysical and socioeconomic analysis, and iteration as needed to more effectively link the growing scenarios and foresight community with today's decision makers and to better address the social, economic, and environmental challenges of tomorrow.
This brief guide can be used as a first port of call for those navigating today’s ‘TUNA’ conditions – Turbulence, unpredictable Uncertainty, Novelty and Ambiguity. It is also a contribution to make strategic foresight more accessible to a larger community of policy-makers and to make anticipation a new literacy so that everyone – from public institutions to citizens – can be better prepared for the future.
RAND, Andrew Parker, David H. Krantz, Howard Kunreuther, Jordan Fischbach, Lauren A. Mayer, Matthew Sisco, Min Gong, Robert Lempert, Zhimin Mao
Abstract
Decision support tools are known to influence and facilitate decisionmaking through the thoughtful construction of the decision environment. However, little research has empirically evaluated the effects of using scenarios and forecasts. In this research, we asked participants to recommend a fisheries management strategy that achieved multiple objectives in the face of significant uncertainty. A decision support tool with one of two conditions—Scenario or Forecast—encouraged participants to explore a large set of diversified decision options. We found that participants in the two conditions explored the options similarly, but chose differently. Participants in the Scenario Condition chose the strategies that performed well over the full range of uncertainties (robust strategies) significantly more frequently than did those in the Forecast Condition. This difference seems largely to be because participants in the Scenario Condition paid increased attention to worst-case futures. The results offer lessons for designing decision support tools.
Céline Guivarch, Evelina Trutnevyte, Robert Lempert
Abstract
Scenario techniques are a teeming field in energy and environmental research and decision making. This Thematic Issue (TI) highlights quantitative (computational) methods that improve the development and use of scenarios for dealing with the dual challenge of complexity and (deep) uncertainty. The TI gathers 13 articles that describe methodological innovations or extensions and refinements of existing methods, as well as applications that demonstrate the potential of these methodological developments. The TI proposes two methodological foci for dealing with the challenges of (deep) uncertainty and complexity: diversity and vulnerability approaches help tackle uncertainty; multiple-objective and multiple-scale approaches help address complexity; whereas some combinations of those foci can also be applied. This overview article to the TI presents the contributions gathered in the TI, and shows how they individually and collectively bring new capacity to scenarios techniques to deal with complexity and (deep) uncertainty.
Andrew Lyon, Anthony Hodgson, Bill Sharpe, Graham Leicester, Ioan Fazey
Abstract
Global environmental change requires responses that involve marked or qualitative changes in individuals, institutions, societies, and cultures. Yet, while there has been considerable effort to develop theory about such processes, there has been limited research on practices for facilitating transformative change. We present a novel pathways approach called Three Horizons that helps participants work with complex and intractable problems and uncertain futures. The approach is important for helping groups work with uncertainty while also generating agency in ways not always addressed by existing futures approaches. We explain how the approach uses a simple framework for structured and guided dialogue around different patterns of change by using examples. We then discuss some of the key characteristics of the practice that facilitators and participants have found to be useful. This includes (1) providing a simple structure for working with complexity, (2) helping develop future consciousness (an awareness of the future potential in the present moment), (3) helping distinguish between incremental and transformative change, (4) making explicit the processes of power and patterns of renewal, (5) enabling the exploration of how to manage transitions, and (6) providing a framework for dialogue among actors with different mindsets. The complementarity of Three Horizons to other approaches (e.g., scenario planning, dilemma thinking) is then discussed. Overall, we highlight that there is a need for much greater attention to researching practices of transformation in ways that bridge different kinds of knowledge, including episteme and phronesis. Achieving this will itself require changes to contemporary systems of knowledge production. The practice of Three Horizons could be a useful way to explore how such transformations in knowledge production and use could be achieved.
The World Economic Forum’s report “Building Partnerships for Sustainable Agriculture and Food Security: A Guide to Country-Led Action” has been developed in response to the growing demand for new models of multistakeholder collaboration to achieve food security, sustainable development and other global goals outlined in the UN Sustainable Development Goals. It is based on the experience of the Forum’s New Vision for Agriculture (NVA) initiative, which has worked since 2010 to catalyse and support multistakeholder partnerships that drive improvements in food security, environmental sustainability and economic opportunity at the national level.
A primary goal of systemic intervention is the improvement of the ‘system in question’. The definition of the system in question is often itself a function of multiple stakeholders and is not a fixed object. Boundary critique can be helpful in clarifying the ambiguity, assumptions and the power dynamics around agreeing what the system is that is to be improved and for whose interests.
This glossary was produced by volunteer members of the Forward Thinking Platform, a network of foresight practitioners from different sectors and disciplines, supported by the Global Forum on Agricultural Research (GFAR). It is the product of a collective venture which included two rounds of peer-review and a user pretest to improve its relevance, usefulness and user-friendliness. The definitions proposed make most people comfortable with them. However, they do not intend to prevail over others. A shorter version with definitions only can also be downloaded at http://bit.ly/FTPGlossaryShort. The glossary contains concise, easily understandable definitions of the most common terms used in Futures Studies. For each term it provides a definition and some Notes and Examples of use/References allowing you to get additional knowledge if you wish so. The glossary intends to help readers and writers to better understand
the meaning of these terms and how to use them when applied to food, agriculture and rural development.
Brian C. O’Neill, Detlef P. van Vuuren, Elmar Kriegler, Keywan Riahi, Kristie L. Ebi, Ritu Mathur, Stephane Hallegatte, Timothy R. Carter
Abstract
The new scenario framework for climate change research envisions combining pathways of future radiative forcing and their associated climate changes with alternative pathways of socioeconomic development in order to carry out research on climate change impacts, adaptation, and mitigation. Here we propose a conceptual framework for how to define and develop a set of Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSPs) for use within the scenario framework. We define SSPs as reference pathways describing plausible alternative trends in the evolution of society and ecosystems over a century timescale, in the absence of climate change or climate policies. We introduce the concept of a space of challenges to adaptation and to mitigation that should be spanned by the SSPs, and discuss how particular trends in social, economic, and environmental development could be combined to produce such outcomes. A comparison to the narratives from the scenarios developed in the Special Report on Emissions Scenarios (SRES) illustrates how a starting point for developing SSPs can be defined. We suggest initial development of a set of basic SSPs that could then be extended to meet more specific purposes, and envision a process of application of basic and extended SSPs that would be iterative and potentially lead to modification of the original SSPs themselves.
The multi-level perspective (MLP) has emerged as a fruitful middle-range framework for analysing socio-technical transitions to sustainability. The MLP also received constructive criticisms. This paper summarises seven criticisms, formulates responses to them, and translates these into suggestions for future research. The criticisms relate to: (1) lack of agency, (2) operationalization of regimes, (3) bias towards bottom-up change models, (4) epistemology and explanatory style, (5) methodology, (6) socio-technical landscape as residual category, and (7) flat ontologies versus hierarchical levels.
United Nations Environment Programme World Conservation Monitoring Centre
Abstract
Commissioned by the United Nations Secretary General in 2000, and completed in 2005, the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA), based on the findings of 34 'sub-global' assessments carried out in a diverse set of ecosystems in sites around the world, provides a state-of-the-art appraisal of the condition and trends in the world's ecosystems and the services they provide. The MA presents compelling evidence that underlines the urgency and necessity of restoring, conserving, and sustainably managing our ecosystems. Most important, the assessment shows that, with appropriate actions, it is possible to reverse the degradation of many ecosystem services over the next 50 years. By providing invaluable information to policy makers, the MA seeks to help ensure that the required changes in current policy and practice undertaken will be evidence based and informed by the best available scientific analysis. This manual, Ecosystems and Human Well-being: A Manual for Assessment Practitioners, allows for the wider adoption of the MA conceptual framework and methods. The manual, which contains numerous case studies of best practice, offers a practical guide for undertaking ecosystem assessments and includes tools and approaches that can assess options for better managing ecosystems. This Manual makes the methods of the MA and associated sub-global (local and regional) assessments widely accessible. While the MA is the most comprehensive assessment of ecosystems carried out to date, there are other related assessment processes such as Global Environment Outlook (GEO), Global International Waters Assessment (GIWA), Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), Land Degradation Assessment in Drylands (LADA), International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technology for Development (IAASTD) and World Water Assessment. Lessons learned from these assessments supplement the best practice of ecosystem assessment identified through the MA. The publication of this Manual aims to encourage more assessments at scales which are relevant to policy and decision makers.
For readers that are already familiar with the general principles of scenario planning, and are about to embark on a process, sections 2-4 provide the main practical guidance. Sections 5 and 6 briefly summarise key points and provide links to further guidance. The Annex includes three country case studies of scenario planning work, illustrating the methodologies, explaining how scenarios were used in practice and what lessons were learnt in each case.
The development and analysis of scenarios or plausible futures has evolved to be a useful approach for dealing with uncertainty about future developments in a structured and integrated manner. Commonly, scenario exercises have focussed on processes at one specific geographic scale. Recently scenario-based approaches have also been used to address multi-scale processes or to link scenarios developed at various geographical scales with each other in order to better understand the interaction of processes across scales.
This paper outlines the strategy process in organisations, and the use of foresight methodologies in the strategic thinking stage of this process. It then provides a broad overview of the development of foresight methodologies over time, and briefly discusses different types of methodologies that can be used in organisations. The paper aims to provide a summary of foresight methodologies rather than a detailed analysis of the methodologies themselves.
A generic foresight process framework is outlined, based on prior independent work by Mintzberg, Horton and Slaughter. The framework was developed as part of work carried out by the author during the introduction of foresight into the formal strategic planning of a public‐sector university in Australia. The framework recognises several distinct phases, leading from the initial gathering of information, through to the production of outputs intended as input into the more familiar activities of strategy development and strategic planning. The framework is also useful as a diagnostic tool for examining how foresight work and strategy are undertaken, as well as a design aid for customised foresight projects and processes. Some observations and reflections are made on lessons learned from a two‐and‐a‐half year engagement as an organisationally‐based foresight practitioner.