By Bram Peters

The future of food systems is uncertain, yet one thing is clear—transformative change is urgently needed. Climate change, inequality, and geopolitical instability are reshaping how food is produced, distributed, and consumed. How can we navigate these complexities and create a more sustainable, resilient food system?

At the Power of Foresight Workshop held on 30-31 January 2025 at the FAO headquarters in Rome, experts and practitioners gathered to discuss how foresight can drive food systems transformation. Their insights reveal a crucial truth: the process itself— working with complexity, embracing inclusivity, diverse perspectives, and collective intelligence—is central to making real progress.

Insights from the ‘Power of Foresight’ Workshop

  • 17 different cases and the stories of 48 participants from 27 countries demonstrated that foresight approaches have much to offer to the process of food systems transformation
  • Working with complex systems is what it’s about, and effective foresight practices for food systems change to embrace this
  • Openness to new and inclusive perspectives should be central to all foresight for food systems transformation efforts
  • The process brings the answer – and foresight can bring awareness of crucial process elements such as collective intelligence, agency, time and scale
  • Embracing the ‘ifs’: how you do foresight, and what comes before and after, is just as important as the development of scenarios
  • Foresight is not one approach or one methodology – there are a diversity of ways to go about it
  • The national food systems pathways can benefit from foresight approaches

Photos: 30 January 2025, Foresight4Food workshop. FAO Headquarters, Rome. Photo credit: ©️FAO/Cristiano Minichiello

Working with complex systems: Let’s talk about the elephants in the room

When it comes to food systems transformation, there isn’t just one elephant in the room—there are many. These metaphorical elephants represent the complex, interconnected challenges we face, and ignoring them only hinders progress.

  1. First, as a whole range of interrelated challenges and assumptions we are not working on enough: whether that’s climate change, human rights, global geopolitical turbulence, growing inequality. All these challenges together form a context of global polycrisis.
  2. Second, we can see elephants in the room related to our apparent inability to take decisive transformative action in food systems: a lot of talk, limited action.
  3. Finally, we can see elephants as representing systems. An elephant can represent a dynamic, complex food system, of which we might only be able to see or understand the trunk, tusks, ears or tail.

Like the elephant and the blind men metaphor (see image to the right), food systems are deeply interconnected with global issues like climate change, inequality, and geopolitical instability. Tackling these requires a holistic approach, recognizing that transformation cannot happen in silos.

Gather new and inclusive perspectives – and change your own

What’s central to talking about complex food systems is perspective. We all have different mental images of food systems—whether local agriculture, marine ecosystems, or trade networks. Expanding our perspectives helps identify new entry points for addressing issues like malnutrition, poverty, and sustainability.

For some, like from the Pacific region, it’s about marine ecosystems in which food is central. Changing your perspective can be a helpful way of looking at a complex topic: such as to see the Pacific food system composed not of ‘small island states’ but rather ‘large ocean states’ connected with the global food system through trade, governance, and oceanic currents. Why is flipping your perspective so important? It helps to reframe entry points for discussion with other stakeholders and view the root causes of things like malnutrition, non-communicable diseases, poverty and human rights abuse in food systems differently.

If you are able to change your perspective, it helps to understand the viewpoints of those less heard. Having an inclusive process to gather different viewpoints is crucial to changing perspectives and behaviour, mobilising for collective action and creating shared visions of the future.

The process is the answer

Ever tried herding cats? Well, transforming food systems is about fostering C.A.T.S.—a process centred on:

  • Collective intelligence – Multi-stakeholder collaboration and co-creation
  • Agency – Empowering change through action
  • Time – Bridging past, present, and future
  • Scale – Recognizing interconnections between local and global systems

So, what does it mean to herd cats when talking about food systems? It means there are no magic bullets: the process is central to the outcome.

Effort on addressing the ‘ifs’

Foresight can be of great added value to support the food systems transformation process. Whether it is about co-creating alternative futures, conducting backcasting towards a more desirable scenario, highlighting the cost of delayed action, or informing anticipatory policy – foresight and scenario tools are a key toolbox in the hands of systems change champions.

In order for foresight to be effective, there are a number of conditional ‘ifs’ i.e., if foresight experts and facilitators:

  • Are able to move beyond added value, tackling pre-conditions, obstacles, and constraints affecting how stakeholders prepare for the future.
  • Not only preach to the converted – we need to involve stakeholders who think and act differently
  • Are cognizant of power differences, lock-ins and political economy
  • Build on other approaches that also provide value, such as design thinking, human-centred development and mission-oriented policy making.
  • Pay attention to what comes before and after the development of scenarios

Scenarios only developed from the perspective of single organisations or without meaningful consultation and dialogue will not be effective.

Foresight approaches and national food systems pathways

There are a broad range of foresight approaches, some expert-driven or participatory, others quantitative, experiential, creative or analytical. Each has their value – but these needs come from a clear user need and scope within a food system. However, it is essential to keep in mind that foresight is a tool, not a panacea, and cannot address all questions.

With 156 national convenors driving progress through implementing 137 national food systems transformation pathways, the upcoming UNFSS+4 Stocktaking Moment (July, Addis Ababa) presents an opportunity to share lessons and strengthen impact. What we have seen the past two days in Rome, is the incredible richness and diversity of initiatives that use foresight to support the food systems transformation process.

Sharing the lessons from these initiatives, communicating the potential of foresight, and supporting the national convenors to further realise the impact on transforming food systems outcomes will be crucial in the run-up to the Stocktaking Moment.

The Montpellier Workshop and Next Steps

Click here for the complete workshop report and materials

With the Foresight4Food Initiative’s second workshop successfully wrapped up and follow-up activities underway, this post reflects on the event as a whole. Hosted in Montpellier with the excellent support of MUSE, CIRAD, GFAR, and ACIAR, the workshop brought together individuals from a diverse range of foresight institutions, organizations, and projects from around the world.

Exploring what foresight entails formed the foundation of the workshop, exemplified by a set of presentations on past and on-going foresight initiatives by workshop participants on the first day. Participants agreed that ‘foresight’ encompasses a host of different processes and steps, and instead of being solely combined to predicting the future, it provides the opportunity space of accomplishing many things. For example, foresight identifies trends and drivers within the food system (and others), weak signals, tipping points, ‘steam trains’, ‘black swans’, and unintended consequences of actions. It reframes narratives and problems that allow decision-makers to consider broader perspectives that include factors like technological, socio-political, and governance issues linked to the problem. Foresight allows one to acknowledge and understand the existing boundaries and rules of the system, and thus create a well-defined space within which actors can create creative opportunities and solutions.

This discussion on foresight is and what it can be then benefited from an exploration of the issues impacting methodology. A panel with stakeholders from CIRAD, IIASA, and IIED sparked a discussion about choices made in developing foresight methodologies and their impact on developing models and scenarios. Questions around stakeholder expectations, decisions on the timeframe and spatial scale of analyses, and operating with the differing agendas and priorities of the collaborators and stakeholders were raised and discussed. The value of open and accessible communication of foresight models and research was emphasised, but limitations around communicating complicated language to the wider public and policy-makers were explored, along with the underlying assumptions of different models.  While the lack of data in certain contexts can be a problem in creating useful models, the trap of too much data and its role in impacting economic results was also examined. The panel in discussion with the workshop summarized the issues with an emphasis on process instead of tools and results, the inclusion of technological change, social innovation, and the geopolitical dimensions of food system issues, and the value of bridging disciplines and approaches in future foresight approaches. The questions and themes raised in this panel proved valuable in thinking through the themes around the future of the Foresight4Food Initiative on the second and third days.

In discussion with the panel, and with Jim Woodhill’s framework for foresight approaches, ‘solutions’ to the methodological issues were explored. Creating emotional incentives for change, or the increased potential of the ‘emotional economy’, in combination with the difficult questions that foresight actors need to (but might not) engage with can be a useful way of encouraging the use of foresight in decision-making. It is however, important not to keep the focus on policy-makers only, but ensure a rich diversity of stakeholders, such as the private sector and youth groups. The value of instilling ‘future literacy’ in people, to ensure that the underlying anticipatory assumptions are acknowledged and managed at participatory foresight sessions, and to more broadly have the level of future literacy to have foresight oriented decision-making at all institutional and spatial levels. A common underlying theme to the discussions throughout the workshop was the value of food systems thinking. The significance of food system drivers (such as population growth, migration, climate change, etc.), the impacts of system-level shocks in the short and long-term, and the increasing number and magnitude of food system concerns in terms of health, environment, ethics, and economics influence the process and outcome of all major foresight initiatives and projects.

After a series of foundational plenaries and panel discussions, the workshop was focused on advancing the Foresight4Food Initiative. Working from the concept note and the outcomes of the first workshop in Oxford, the workshop organizers were keen on establishing future directions for the Initiative. Going into the working groups for each thematic area, the workshop had determined the following key principles and areas of interest for the Initiative:

  • Considering foresight as a process towards achieving broader objectives
  • Synthesis is a useful way of underlining differences and alternative approaches and narratives
  • The Initiative must ensure that the right questions are being asked for the foresight process
  • Interactions in a foresight process are better served by being circular and iterative instead of linear
  • Creating ‘safe spaces’ within pathways for actors to find creative transformative opportunities and to reduce risk

The working groups then spent the major part of Day 3 at Agropolis International developing a detailed work plan and objectives for each thematic area. The outcomes from each working group can be found in the Workshop Report. In summary, the working groups concluded that there is great value in the Foresight4Food Initiative in continuing, but shifting its role towards a coordinating body with strong linkages with other convening bodies (such as CFS and GFAR), to accomplish its various stated goals. It was determined that future meetings with Foresight4Food must deliver on one of the objectives and themes and the time in between best served with determining funding sources and establishing a governance structure and advisory board for the Initiative. The workshop report, the outputs from the working groups, and the energy and momentum for the Oxford and Montpellier workshops will be taken forward with the help of the Steering Group towards transforming the Initiative to best serve the needs of the foresight community.

Blog by Saher Hasnain – Research and Community of Practice Coordinator