Abstract

Abstract

Many policy-makers are struggling to understand participatory governance in the midst of technological changes. Advances in information and communication technologies (ICTs) continue to have an impact on the ways that policy-makers and citizens engage with each other throughout the policy-making process. A set of developments in the areas of opening government data, advanced analytics, visualization, simulation, and gaming, and ubiquitous citizen access using mobile and personalized applications is shaping the interactions between policy-makers and citizens. Yet the impact of these developments on the policy-makers is unclear. The changing roles and need for new capabilities required from the government are analyzed in this paper using two case studies. Salient new roles for policy-makers are outlined focused on orchestrating the policy-making process. Research directions are identified including understand the behavior of users, aggregating and analyzing content from scattered resources, and the effective use of the new tools. Understanding new policy-makers roles will help to bridge the gap between the potential of tools and technologies and the organizational realities and political contexts. We argue that many examples are available that enable learning from others, in both directions, developed countries experiences are useful for developing countries and experiences from the latter are valuable for the former countries.

Abstract

Defra's approach to influencing people to live sustainably has evolved considerably since 2005 when the Sustainable Consumption Roundtable called for greater efforts by Government to better understand people, and how to influence changes in the way they behave. In response, Defra has developed a substantial evidence base devoted to improving understanding of the drivers for sustainable behaviours and how these can be applied to develop more effective environmental policies and programmes. A core focus of Defra's research programme has been to identify and build on existing research and evidence which has the potential to inform new and innovative policy approaches. In some cases, this has involved work which looks at particular behavioural drivers, such as habits and norms, considering how these insights can inform and improve outcomes from policies that aim to influence citizen's behaviours. Other work has focused on operationalising this knowledge through trials and demonstration projects with an aim of understanding the practical implications of applying them, and measuring the benefits they can provide. This paper reviews the key strands of Defra's behavioural research programme and some of the tools the department has used to apply this research. It considers Defra's work in building an evidence base that can be embedded into policy making and concludes with some insights drawn from this evidence. These address both why people are likely to act and why they might not, and best practice principles for delivering change.

Abstract

Better regulation seeks to extend existing policy and regulatory outcomes at less burden for the actors involved. No single intervention will deliver all environmental outcomes. There is a paucity of evidence on what works why, when and with whom. We examine how a sample (n=33) of policy makers select policy and regulatory instruments, through a case study of the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra), UK. Policy makers have a wide range of instruments at their disposal and are seeking ways to harness the influence of non-governmental resources to encourage good environmental behaviour. The relevance of each influence varies as risk and industry characteristics vary between policy areas. A recent typology of policy and regulatory instruments has been refined. Direct regulation is considered necessary in many areas, to reduce environmental risks with confidence and to tackle poor environmental performance. Co-regulatory approaches may provide important advantages to help accommodate uncertainty for emerging policy problems, providing a mechanism to develop trusted evidence and to refine objectives as problems are better understood.

Abstract

The creation and accumulation of robust bodies of knowledge, along with their dissemination, utilisation and integration in decision support are key to improving the use of evidence in decision-making. Systematic reviews (SRs), through their emphasis on transparency, replicability and rigour, offer numerous benefits throughout the policy-making cycle and for improving the use of evidence in environmental policy-making. As a result there have been numerous calls to increase the use of SRs in environmental policy-making. This commentary paper introduces the challenges of engaging policy-makers with SRs and, using experiences of producing SRs with Government Departments and Agencies within the UK and Europe, identifies possible solutions and shares our lessons learned. It highlights that co-production can help to overcome a number of challenges by ensuring that review questions are policy-relevant, that the context of the review is taken into consideration and that review’s findings are communicated so that they are recognised and used in policy decision-making processes. Additionally, a pragmatic approach to the review’s methodology may be required to respond to policy-making requirements. Here, a risk-based approach can communicate the trade-offs between the rigour and timeliness of the review. Ensuring that systematic approaches are upheld at all times can help address impartiality concerns and can develop skills in both reviewers and policy-makers to increase awareness of systematic methods, leading to changes in practice and culture within decision-making organisations and the promotion of evidence informed policy development and decisions.

Abstract

Abstract

In recent years, new regionally based strategy-building processes emerged at the interface between public policy and the social coordination of collective action. Foresight as a governance process to stimulate regional innovation and strengthen the regional economic system against global competition became a popular concept. Based on the experiences of a strategy-building process in the Italian autonomous province of Trento, it is the objective of this paper to sketch recent theoretical and political developments regarding multi-actor and multi-level governance and policy concepts at the regional level.

Abstract

The analytical connection between complexity, foresight and governance is a vital scientific issue in management sciences. The landscape of management includes elements of foresight and governance. Foresight is focused on futures and governance is focused on current and intentional decisionmaking processes. There has not been too much theoretical discussion about these three key concepts of management sciences (see Cantino 2013). The grand aim of the article is to define key elements of new pragmatic governance paradigm. The critical links between these to two key concepts require more scientific attention.

Abstract

Anticipatory governance is ?a broad-based capacity extended through society that can act on a variety of inputs to manage emerging knowledge-based technologies while such management is still possible?. It motivates activities designed to build capacities in foresight, engagement, and integration ? as well as through their production ensemble. These capacities encourage and support the reflection of scientists, engineers, policy makers, and other publics on their roles in new technologies. This article reviews the early history of the National Nanotechnology Initiative in the United States, and it further explicates anticipatory governance through exploring the genealogy of the term and addressing a set of critiques found in the literature. These critiques involve skepticism of three proximities of anticipatory governance: to its object, nanotechnology, which is a relatively indistinct one; to the public, which remains almost utterly naïve toward nanotechnology; and to technoscience itself, which allegedly renders anticipatory governance complicit in its hubris. The article concludes that the changing venues and the amplification within them of the still, small voices of folks previously excluded from offering constructive visions of futures afforded by anticipatory governance may not be complete solutions to our woes in governing technology, but they certainly can contribute to bending the long arc of technoscience more toward humane ends.

Abstract

The Paris Agreement's aspirational 1.5 degree temperature target has given further impetus to efforts to imagine (and seek to govern) transformative and uncertain climate futures. This brings to the fore multiple challenges in the search for anticipatory governance and the role herein for climate foresight. Foresight entails processes to envision challenging futures and question limiting assumptions about what futures are possible, but these processes also impact upon present-day politics. While foresight-related activities are proliferating in sustainability research and planning, critical social science scrutiny of such processes remains minimal. Two key gaps in understanding are: (a) the link between foresight, planning and policy change; and (b) the very prospects of relying on foresight in the present to steer largely unknowable futures. In addressing these gaps, we review the field of climate foresight research here, situating it within a broader interdisciplinary body of literature relating to anticipation and anticipatory governance. In doing so, we identify a conceptual lens through which to analyze the political implications of foresight processes, and apply it to the case of two ongoing foresight initiatives. We conclude with noting the urgent need for further research on the role of foresight within anticipatory climate governance in a post-Paris era.

Abstract

In this exploratory paper we propose ‘worldmaking’ as a framework for pluralistic, imaginative scenario development. Our points of departure are the need in scenario practice to embrace uncertainty, discomfort and knowledge gaps, and the connected need to capture and make productive fundamental plurality among understandings of the future. To help respond to these needs, we introduce what Nelson Goodman calls worldmaking. It holds that there is no singular, objective world (or “real reality”), and instead that worlds are multiple, constructed through creative processes instead of given, and always in the process of becoming. We then explore how worldmaking can operationalise discordant pluralism in scenario practice by allowing participants to approach not only the future but also the present in a constructivist and pluralistic fashion; and by extending pluralism to ontological domains. Building on this, we investigate how scenario worldmaking could lead to more imaginative scenarios: worldmaking is framed as a fully creative process which gives participants ontological agency, and it helps make contrasts, tensions and complementarities between worlds productive. We go on to propose questions that can be used to operationalize scenario worldmaking, and conclude with the expected potential and limitations the approach, as well as suggestions for practical experimentation.

Abstract

In recent decades, foresight has been connected to various disciplines that engage with complex societal problems, leading to specific interpretations of foresight. We offer an interdisciplinary perspective on foresight's increasing use for governance of social-ecological systems (SES). We seek to strengthen the use of foresight in this domain by bridging to insights from other disciplines that can help overcome its limitations. Participatory foresight for SES governance offers potential to elicit thinking about uncertainty and complexity, facilitate dialogue between stakeholders, and improve inclusiveness of governance processes, but often fails to be sufficiently reflexive and politically aware to be truly impactful and inclusive. It can be strengthened, we argue, by a more thorough integration with adjacent research fields: critical futures studies, critical systems theory and environmental governance. We distill key insights from these fields, including the importance of being politically reflexive about whose perspectives are considered, whom foresight processes should benefit, and the importance of co-producing methodology and outcomes. We encourage scholars and practitioners to further explore integration with these fields, highlighting the importance of inter- and transdisciplinary teams. Finally, we offer an example for how limitations of foresight as used in a particular field can be overcome through interdisciplinary integration.

Abstract

Anticipation methods and tools are increasingly used to try to imagine and govern transformations towards more sustainable futures across different policy domains and sectors. But there is a lack of research into the steering effects of anticipation on present-day governance choices, especially in the face of urgently needed sustainability transformations. This paper seeks to understand how different perspectives on anticipatory governance connect to attempts to guide policy and action toward transformative change. We analyze perspectives on anticipatory governance in a global network of food system foresight practitioners (Foresight4Food) – using a workshop, interviews, and a survey as our sources of data. We connect frameworks on anticipatory governance and on transformation to analyse different perspectives on the future and their implications for actions in the present to transform food systems and offer new insights for theory and practice. In the global Foresight4Food network, we find that most foresight practitioners use hybrid approaches to anticipatory governance that combine fundamentally different assumptions about the future. We also find that despite these diverse food futures, anticipation processes predominantly produce recommendations that follow more prediction-oriented forms of strategic planning in order to mitigate future risks. We further demonstrate that much anticipation for transformation uses the language on deep uncertainty and deliberative action without fully taking its consequences on board. Thus, opportunities for transforming future food systems are missed due to these implicit assumptions that dominate the anticipatory governance of food systems. Our combined framework helps researchers and practitioners to be more reflexive of how assumptions about key human systems such as food system futures shape what is prioritized/marginalized and included/excluded in actions to transform such systems.

Abstract

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.

Abstract

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.

Abstract

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.

Abstract

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.

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.

Abstract

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.

Abstract

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.

Abstract

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.

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.

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.

Abstract

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.

Abstract

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.

Abstract

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.

Abstract

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.

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.

Abstract

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.

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.

Abstract

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.

Abstract

The Toolkit is designed primarily as a resource for those who are new to futures thinking but should also prove useful to more experienced practitioners. It provides an introduction to futures thinking and examines some of the important design questions that policy makers need to consider when introducing it into the policy process. The tools are organised according to their primary purpose gathering intelligence about the future, exploring the dynamics of change, describing what the future might be like and developing and testing policy and strategy – and each procedure is set out in detail. The annexes provide examples of the outputs that different tools generate.

Abstract

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.

Abstract

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.

Abstract

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.

Abstract

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.

NOTE: This framework has recently (2017) been updated and re-worked in a new book chapter:
Big History and Anticipation: Using Big History as a framework for global foresight. See the Comments for the link.

Abstract

The FABLE Consortium has issued a first report. Over the coming years, members will improve data systems, analytical tools, and analyses of policy options for land-use and food systems. With other parts of the Food and Land-Use Coalition, we work with interested governments to help improve policies and to develop long-term transformation strategies, including low-emission development strategies required under the Paris Agreement. This first report by the FABLE Consortium presents preliminary pathways towards sustainable land-use and food systems prepared by 18 country teams from developed and developing countries, including the European Union. The aim of these pathways is to determine and demonstrate the feasibility of making land-use and food systems sustainable in each country to achieve the SDGs and the objectives of the Paris Agreement on Climate Change. The report represents the first coordinated effort by researchers from most G20 countries and other nations to chart long-term pathways towards sustainable land-use and food systems. Our preliminary results show that the objectives can be achieved but will require deep transformations in every country.

Abstract

Feeding and nourishing a growing global population in Bangladesh is a major challenge in a changing climate. A multi-level participatory scenario approach with corresponding modeling and decision support tools is developed and applied to support decision-makers in developing scenario-guided enabling policy for food security in the future under climate change. The results presented in this paper show how, under different scenarios, the agri-food system may transform in the next decade as a result of the interaction of intertwined institutional, technological, and market drivers in Bangladesh. For scenario building, the food and agriculture community was brought together with the climate and energy community. We also experimented with different ways to bring voices that are often less included in policymaking, such as poor rural communities and youth. The scenario quantification is performed by MAGNET, a GTAP-based multi-sector and multi-region computable general equilibrium model. The simulation results depict a comprehensive picture of corresponding and varied pressures on agricultural resources and opportunities for economic development and trade in Bangladesh. Finally, we did an ex-ante assessment of the trade-offs and synergies between zero-hunger- and zero-emission-related targets within the Bangladesh Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) under the developed scenarios.

Abstract

In 2021, those working to build food systems that are just, equitable, and operate within planetary boundaries have our work cut out for us. Climate change, biodiversity loss, and rapidly declining soil
fertility are critically damaging the health of people and the planet, dislocating societies, and threatening food systems around the world. Five years into a global commitment to eliminate hunger by 2030, we have lost significant ground. In 2019, an estimated 690 million people were hungry and upwards of 2 billion lacked regular access to safe, nutritious, and sufficient food. This was before COVID-19 added approximately 130 million people to the world’s hungry, pushed uncounted millions more to the brink of hunger, and put one third of food and farming livelihoods at risk.
At the same time, the locus of power in food systems and the broader global economy is shifting at dizzying speed. In 2008, the world’s most powerful corporations drilled oil wells and traded stocks. Twelve years later, the world’s five corporate titans all deal in intangible data and have a market valuation that exceeds the GDP of entire continents. The new biodigital giants are now primed for the next step: unleashing big data and digital DNA into the world's pharmacies, food markets, and financial systems. 'Multi-stakeholderism’ is everywhere as corporations – sensing the social and environmental tipping points ahead – seek to draw governments, scientists and a handful of civil society organizations into an artificial new multilateralism.
Against this backdrop, we consider what food systems could look like by 2045 if (agri)business-as-usual is allowed to run its course. We also imagine what could happen if, instead, the initiative is reclaimed by civil society and social movements – from grassroots organizations to international NGOs,
from farmers’ and fishers’ groups, to cooperatives and unions. We consider what this ‘Long Food Movement’ could achieve if it succeeds in thinking decades ahead, collaborating across sectors, scales, and strategic differences, working with governments and pressuring them to act, and transforming financial flows, governance structures, and food systems from the ground up.

Abstract

Abstract

Agriculture and food systems are in urgent need of transformation. Various foresight reports unpack food systems’ challenges and propose diverse pathways of change towards sustainability. We interrogate the framings and proposed pathways of eleven selected reports from a food system perspective, with a focus on environmental and climate change implications. We synthesize key drivers of food systems and their impact on food system outcomes. We distil trends and strategies identified across the reports and their scenarios and discuss the diversity of ‘sustainability pathways’ and ‘solution spaces’. There is general agreement that resource protection and adaptation balanced with significant greenhouse gas emission reductions are vital to food system transformation. There is less consensus on the choice of change options and how to address potential trade-offs. While new technologies or consumption changes are described, more attention needs to be paid to overcoming blind spots like implications for equity or changes in governance mechanisms.

Abstract

Scenario planning is increasingly recognized as a useful tool for exploring change in social-ecological systems on decadal to centennial time horizons. In environmental decision making, scenario development tends to include participatory methods for engaging stakeholders and is conducted at multiple scales. This paper presents insights from participatory scenario development in two separate multiscale environmental assessments. We find that, to engage stakeholders at multiple scales, it is important that the issues explored at each scale be relevant and credible to stakeholders at that scale. An important trade-off exists between maintaining relevance to stakeholders at different scales and maintaining consistency across scales to allow for comparison of scenarios. Where downscaling methods are used to ensure consistency, there can be important consequences for (1) the diversity of scenario outcomes, (2) temporal mismatches in the storylines at different scales, and (3) power relationships among stakeholders at different scales. We suggest that development of participatory scenarios at multiple scales has a strong potential to contribute to environmental decision making, but it requires a substantial investment of time and resources to realize its full potential.

Abstract

Construction of plausible scenarios for alternative futures of global food systems requires an understanding of how the past led to the present, and the past's likely relevance to the future. Policy actions affected the past, but are very difficult to foresee. Among those that most shaped global food systems in the last half century are measures that fostered productivity growth, expansion of trade, and the interlinkage of agricultural and environmental policies. Scenarios for global food systems, including those using the quantitative tools of the CGIAR's Global Futures and Strategic Foresight modeling approach, explore alternative assumptions in these three areas, among others. Hindsight can inform foresight by highlighting key elements of the past and forcing transparent examination of whether and how these elements will shape the future.

Abstract

Abstract

This report includes important recommendations and advice for leaders at the most senior levels in countries and international organisations. It is also of direct relevance to decision makers, professionals, actors in the private sector, experts and researchers with interests in food systems and diets. Many of these individuals will be directly concerned with the production, processing, trade, regulation, supply and safety of food. However, others may work in wider areas of policy and business, for example relating to: public health and well-being, education, economic development and investment, urbanisation, globalisation and demography.
This report and executive summary are necessarily technical due to the nature of the
subject matter. However, they set out the practical steps which are essential for food
systems transformation, and the process of change.

Abstract

Agrifood systems are undergoing a transformation with the aim to provide safer, more affordable, and healthier diets for all, produced in a sustainable manner while delivering just and equitable livelihoods: a key to achieving the UN’s 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. However, this transformation needs to be executed in the global context of major challenges facing the food and agriculture sectors, with drivers such as climate change, population growth, urbanization, and natural resources depletion compounding these challenges.

Food safety is a keystone to agrifood systems and all food safety actors need to keep pace with the ongoing transformation while preparing to navigate the potential threats, disruptions, and challenges that may arise. Foresight in food safety facilitates the proactive identification of drivers and related trends, both within and outside agrifood systems, that have implications for food safety and therefore also for consumer health, the national economy, and international trade. Early identification and evaluation of drivers and trends promote strategic planning and preparedness to take advantage of emerging opportunities and address challenges in food safety.

In this publication, the FAO Food Safety Foresight programme provides an overview of the major global drivers and trends by describing their implications for food safety in particular and for agrifood systems by extrapolation. The various drivers and trends reported include climate change, changing consumer behaviour and preferences, new food sources and production systems, technological advances, microbiome, circular economy, food fraud, among others.

The intended audience for this publication is broad – from the policymakers, academia, food business operators, private sector, to all of us, the consumers.

Help us improve your reading experience

Abstract

This report aims at inspiring strategic thinking and actions to transform agrifood systems towards a sustainable, resilient and inclusive future, by building on both previous reports in the same series as well as on a comprehensive corporate strategic foresight exercise that also nurtured FAO Strategic Framework 2022–31. It analyses major drivers of agrifood systems and explores how their trends could determine alternative futures of agrifood, socioeconomic and environmental systems. The fundamental message of this report is that it is still possible to push agrifood systems along a pattern of sustainability and resilience, if key “triggers” of transformation are properly activated. However, strategic policy options to activate them will have to “outsmart” vested interests, hidden agendas and conflicting objectives, and trade off short-term unsustainable achievements for longer-term sustainability, resilience and inclusivity.

Abstract

Dairy intensification is a widely used means of achieving food security, improving farmer incomes and enhancing overall economic growth. However, intensification is dependent upon the availability and suitability of natural resources to sustain growth in production. Here, land and water footprints of milk production in three contrasting agro-ecological zones ranging from humid to semi-arid across nine counties of Kenya are quantified. Water and land use footprints across three potential intensification pathways are also outlined and evaluated against the baseline scenario, the currently prevailing practices or the S1 Futures scenario, treated as the benchmark. Intensification pathways focusing on improving livestock breeds, feed provisioning and milk output per cow and distinguished by contrasting management practices perform differentially across the three agro-ecological zones. Total water and land footprints increase for all scenarios relative to the baseline scenario. In particular, all the breed improvement scenarios, have much larger total water footprints than the baseline scenario. Improvement in breed to pure bred cattle across all production systems has the largest total water footprint across all the production systems. Across all the scenarios, the largest reduction in water footprint of milk production (75%) occurs with improvement in breed and feeding practices from two scenarios in the lowlands. Milk production by the cross-bred cattle is most efficient in the lowlands system whereas milk production by the pure breed Ayrshire is most land use efficient in the midlands system. Across the three agroecological zones, improving breeds, feed provisioning and milk production per cow may achieve production intensification but concurrently exacerbates resource limitation. Consequently, the heterogeneity inherent in resource availability across dairy production zones should be considered when developing strategies for increasing dairy production.

Abstract

Grain legumes play a key role in smallholder farming systems in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), in relation to food and nutrition security and income generation. Moreover, because of their N2-fixation capacity, such legumes can also have a positive influence on soil fertility. Notwithstanding many decades of research on the agronomy of grain legumes, their N2-fixation capacity, and their contribution to overall system productivity, several issues remain to be resolved to realize fully the benefits of grain legumes. In this paper we highlight major lessons learnt and expose key knowledge gaps in relation to grain legumes and their contributions to farming system productivity. The symbiosis between legumes and rhizobia forms the basis for its benefits and biological N2-fixation (BNF) relies as much on the legume genotype as on the rhizobial strains. As such, breeding grain legumes for BNF deserves considerably more attention. Even promiscuous varieties usually respond to inoculation, and as African soils contain a huge pool of unexploited biodiversity with potential to contribute elite rhizobial strains, strain selection should go hand-in-hand with legume breeding for N2-fixation. Although inoculated strains can outcompete indigenous strains, our understanding of what constitutes a good competitor is rudimentary, as well as which factors affect the persistence of inoculated rhizobia, which in its turn determines whether a farmer needs to re-inoculate each and every season. Although it is commonly assumed that indigenous rhizobia are better adapted to local conditions than elite strains used in inoculants, there is little evidence that this is the case. The problems of delivering inoculants to smallholders through poorly-developed supply chains in Africa necessitates inoculants based on sterile carriers with long shelf life. Other factors critical for a well-functioning symbiosis are also central to the overall productivity of grain legumes. Good agronomic practices, including the use of phosphorus (P)-containing fertilizer, improve legume yields though responses to inputs are usually very variable. In some situations, a considerable proportion of soils show no response of legumes to applied inputs, often referred to as non-responsive soils. Understanding the causes underlying this phenomenon is limited and hinders the uptake of legume agronomy practices. Grain legumes also contribute to the productivity of farming systems, although such effects are commonly greater in rotational than in intercropping systems. While most cropping systems allow for the integration of legumes, intercropped legumes provide only marginal benefits to associated crops. Important rotational benefits have been shown for most grain legumes though those with the highest N accumulation and lowest N harvest index appear to demonstrate higher residual benefits. N balance estimates often results in contradictory observations, mostly caused by the lack of understanding of belowground contributions of legumes to the N balance. Lastly, the ultimate condition for increased uptake of grain legumes by smallholder farmers lies in the understanding of how legume technologies and management practices can be tailored to the enormous diversity of agroecologies, farming systems, and smallholder farms in SSA. In conclusion, while research on grain legumes has revealed a number of important insights that will guide realization of the full potential of such legumes to the sustainable intensification of smallholder farming systems in SSA, many research challenges remain to be addressed to realize the full potential of BNF in these systems.

Abstract

Non-technical summary
The principal policy focus for food has been to increase agricultural productivity and to liberalize markets allowing globalized trade. This focus has led to huge growth in the supply of agricultural produce, more calories becoming available, and price declining. The availability of cheaper calories increasingly underpins diets creating malnourishment through obesity, and global competition incentivizes producers who can produce the most, cheaply, typically with environmental damage. We propose re-focusing, away from yields per unit input, to the food system's overall productivity and efficiency – the number of people that can be fed healthily and sustainably per unit input.
,
Technical summary
Since the Second World War, and particularly in recent decades, the over-arching rationale of agricultural and food trade policy has been that by increasing the productivity of agriculture and efficiency of its markets, trade will drive down food prices, drive up choices and food availability: implicitly defining more available and cheaper food as the route to achieving the international public good of global food security. Here we hypothesize that a focus on increasing availability of food, and lowering food prices through focusing on agricultural productivity and trade does reduce prices and increases availability, but also encourages the externalization of costs on health and environment, and instead of providing public goods arguably represents market failure. In other words, a focus on increasing agricultural yields and efficiency decreases the efficiency of the food system through incentivizing externalization of costs. The focus should rather be on the efficiency of the food system to deliver profits, healthy diets and a healthy planet. Reframing the productivity argument towards the efficiency of the food system provides a clear route to reducing market failure, improving public health and sustainability.