By Lane Jennings
Sharing Foresight Knowledge and Experience:
A Report on the 2016 Meeting of the Public Sector Foresight Network and the Federal Foresight Community of Interest
Interest in how
government looks at the future is undergoing a renaissance in
governments around the world, and the role of networks in
facilitating the exchange of information is critical. The integration
of networks is particularly important in order to leverage knowledge.
Two government
foresight networks were formed in recent years in response to growing
interest in developing a critical mass of those working in government
on foresight in the U.S. and around the world. In 2011, futurist Dr.
Clem Bezold of the Institute for Alternative Futures (IAF) and
Nancy Donovan of the U.S. Government Accountability Office
(GAO) convened a government foresight breakfast in Vancouver, Canada,
which has since evolved into annual day-long meetings and the
creation of an international Public Sector Foresight Network (PSFN)
open to those in and working with government on foresight issues. In
2013, James-Christian Blockwood, then with the U.S. Department
of Veterans Affairs (VA), organized the Federal Foresight Community
of Interest (FFCoI), which has since conducted quarterly meetings
drawing officials from over 50 U.S. federal agencies. Both networks
decided to combine forces to organize a joint meeting in 2016 in
order to facilitate the exchange of diverse views and best practices
by U.S. and international foresight officials.
On July 22, these
two government foresight networks met for a groundbreaking joint
meeting in Washington, D.C., to share knowledge on best practices in
identifying emerging trends and to discuss issues such as how
foresight can be incorporated into decision making. With close to 100
registered, members of the international PSFN and the U.S. FFCoI
discussed issues on how emerging trends can be incorporated into
government planning and policies. Countries represented included
Canada, China, Korea, Singapore, Spain, the United Kingdom, and the
United States, including attendees from over 25 U.S. federal
agencies.
Held at the U.S.
Bureau of Prisons, the July 22 meeting opened with remarks by Bezold
and Donovan speaking for PSFN, along with Jason Stiles
of the U.S. Bureau of Prisons (BOP) and Joe Moore from VA on
behalf of the FFCoI.
The first speaker,
John Basso from the VA, outlined what turned out to be the
overriding message of the day: that, to be effective, foresight
practitioners must understand the goals and values of government and
business leaders and be prepared to couch their proposals in terms
those leaders could relate to and understand. Using examples from
government agencies whose attempts at foresight produced differing
results, Basso demonstrated how sustaining foresight is only possible
when deep scanning is not simply performed by outside “experts”
who come in, write up their report, and leave again, but when the
importance of foresight is embraced by management and its value is
demonstrated to staff throughout an entire organization so that it
becomes an integral part of ongoing operations.
Stephen Sanford
of GAO followed up by pointing out key attributes of successful
foresight programs. These included:
* convincing
stakeholders at all levels, from funders and administrators to
department staff and those they serve—the general public—that
foresight is not a fad but a fundamental element in effective policy;
* developing
persuasive narratives based on existing institutional goals and
values to indicate how foresight can enhance outcomes;
* busting silos
and engaging all levels of staff by forming hybrid teams to develop
and integrate design strategies; and
* rapidly
prototyping so as to make results visible to stakeholders within a
reasonable time.
Joe Greenblott
of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) then described how
a one-year strategic foresight pilot project conducted by his agency
built upon lessons learned from past foresight projects by directly
involving representatives from across EPA, engaging agency experts
and managers throughout the project, and focusing on emerging
challenges and opportunities for which actionable recommendations
could be developed. Noting that OMB
Curricular A-11
(Preparation, Submission, and Execution of the Budget) now encourages
agencies to integrate strategic foresight into the strategic planning
and review process, Greenblott went on to describe how his agency
first set up an 18-member “Lookout Panel” to assure broad agency
involvement in the foresight process, with panel members committing
up to 10 percent of their time to participate in the project. Over
the course of the pilot, the panel members participated in training
on strategic foresight methods, scanned media for evidence of
emerging issues likely to impact EPA operations, held strategic
discussions with thought leaders within and outside of EPA, and
communicated their findings to leadership.
Peter Padbury
of Policy Horizons Canada, a foresight center in the Canadian
government, spoke about emerging challenges in his country in the
2015-2030 time frame and the progress of foresight efforts currently
under way to assess these. Policy Horizons serves the senior
management community by identifying emerging issues and policy
challenges that could impact the country in the 10- to 15-year time
frame. Most of Policy Horizons’ studies explore Canadian issues in
a global context. He emphasized the value of surfacing and working
directly with the mental models held by the various stakeholders as a
tool to understand the system and how it could evolve under different
conditions. Where possible it is particularly useful to understand
the mental models of key decision makers as they are more likely to
pay attention to the study to see what you have done with their
model. Also, instead of merely warning of perceived dangers, Padbury
stressed the value of presenting upcoming policy challenges in terms
of the new opportunities they might present. He also emphasized that
surfacing and testing the core assumptions buried in new policy
proposals is a very useful exercise that can provide a context for
new policy development.
Padbury outlined
some of the early findings from an ongoing study on the emerging
economy. A number of new technologies (including AI, data analytics,
sensors, robotics, the Internet of Things, blockchain, synthetic
biology, etc.) are the infrastructure for a new digital global
economy that will dramatically change the nature of manufacturing,
services, and natural resources exploitation. It will likely enable
the rise of virtual corporations (platforms) that use all-digital
value chains to connect virtual workers, AI, and other resources on
an as-needed basis to deliver customized goods and services to people
anywhere in the world. There are many potential surprises. For
example, a number of goods and services will be much cheaper or
nearly free, he said. This could lead to an era where “consumer
welfare” is increasing in some desirable ways, but we confront a
long period of deflation during the transition years. The emergence
of this global digital economy, he asserted, may radically alter the
traditional roles of government institutions at every level, making
some traditional instruments (such as taxation, trade barriers, and
employment standards) largely ineffective.
The next three
speakers, Ibon Zugasti from Prospektiker, the foresight unit
of the Basque worker-owned conglomerate Mondragon, and M. Gotzone
Sagardui and Juan Ibarreche from the employment agency of
the government in the Basque region of Spain, reported on a study of
employment scenarios to 2030 adapted to the Basque region from the
Millennium Project's 2050 Work &Technology Study. For the Basque
region, forecasts were developed for 2030. These forecasts identified
disruptions but saw lower worker displacement for the region than did
the Millennium Project study, as well as a different pattern of
technologies that would displace jobs. Sagardui noted that the 2030
study reinforced Basque employment and guaranteed-income policy. She
presented the consistent successes achieved over the past 25 years by
programs tailored to the specific needs of citizens in their local
region to reduce poverty and unemployment to levels far below those
of Spain as a whole or even the average levels of the entire EU. With
some 2.1 million native inhabitants, the Basque region occupies a
mountainous area on the border between northern Spain and southern
France and includes the important port and manufacturing center of
Bilbao. Beginning with surveys and in-depth interviews, Basque
officials identified the principal desires of their citizens, and
instituted long-term programs of employment and income support that
reduced unemployment levels from 16 percent in 1984 to 5.9 percent in
2014. While overall poverty levels in Spain as a whole remain around
9 percent, in the Basque region they are only about 3 percent, having
the same Gini index of income equality as Sweden. Acknowledging the
advantages of a relatively small but culturally coherent area like
the Basque region, these speakers argued that establishing carefully
selected and widely supported goals based on research techniques and
using modified assumptions reflecting conditions specific to their
own region have been largely responsible for the successes achieved.
James-Christian
Blockwood of GAO, appearing in his role as a member of the
National Academy of Public Administration’s Panel on Strategic
Foresight, spoke about the special challenge of preparing foresight
recommendations for presidential transition teams. The panel’s
three recommendations are, first, to set up a task force on current
problems with long-range implications that will be prepared to
recommend policies appropriate for beginning to address these within
the first 100 days of the new administration; second, to better
integrate foresight into government agencies at all levels; and
third, to assure that existing foresight networks can be drawn on to
aid in decision making. These are ambitious recommendations, but ably
supported by the OMB’s regulations promoting foresight in
government decision making and management. Additional details on the
mission of NAPA and its panel on strategic foresight are available
online at
http://www.napat16.org/t16-panels/bringing-strategic-foresight-to-bear-in-program-planning-and-management.html.
Tracey Wait
of Policy Horizons Canada then reported on the role of foresight
activity in support of Canadian government at the national level.
Policy Horizons works to increase the foresight capacity of Canadian
agencies, co-creates knowledge through foresight across the public
service, and issues reports (such as the one presented by Peter
Padbury above). By focusing on emerging challenges and opportunities
in the 10- to 15-year time frame, Policy Horizons can provide a
context to help make short- and medium-term planning more robust and
strategic. In both countries, the role of foresight teams is to
gather information, engage in the policy dialogue, and offer advice
recognizing that there is no guarantee that their findings or
recommendations will be accepted and implemented.
Chris Mihm,
also from GAO but speaking personally, addressed the significance
of the recently adopted 17 Strategic Development Goals (SDGs) to
guide and inspire national and international efforts to improve
living conditions for people around the world. Unlike previous
guidelines aimed primarily at bringing developing nations closer to
the norms already common among the wealthy nations of the Northern
Hemisphere, the SDGs apply equally to nations North and South, and
challenge them to achieve measurable improvements from current levels
in all areas within the next 15 years. While no sanctions or
penalties for failure are included, Mihm sees good reason to hope
that an overwhelming majority of the world’s governments will adopt
new strategies to improve the measurement and reporting of conditions
affecting all segments of their populations and make significant
efforts to improve quality of life and opportunities for
self-betterment in every region and at every level of society.
Catarina Tully
from the School of International Futures, former strategy project
director at the UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office, and former
adviser to the prime minister, followed up by assessing the potential
impact of the UN’s SDGs to empower and inspire ordinary citizens
and promote what she termed “frugal foresight” (i.e., more
cost-effective efforts by government agencies to improve people’s
quality of life). Foresight efforts by government have often faltered
in the past because they failed to make a credible case for success
when presented to the general public. The democratic process,
involving frequent elections, makes long-term thinking difficult and
tends to discourage elected officials from making use of foresight
studies. Tully’s goal is to change how existing governments view
their function and to encourage them to legislate less and interact
more directly with people at all levels. She cited Finland, Israel,
and Costa Rica as nations that have achieved progress by moving in
this direction. While conceding that goals alone are not sufficient,
and that factors such as extremist violence and widespread corruption
pose significant roadblocks to progress, Tully expressed confidence
that the next 18 months will prove a crucial period and establish the
viability of the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals.
To round out the
meeting, Jason Stiles (BOP) invited participants to propose
topics that might be addressed at future meetings or suggest
alternative ways to meet and share opinions as a group. Among the
suggestions offered were:
* meeting more
often via the Internet;
* assessing the
results of past foresight efforts in greater detail. It was pointed
out that convincing leaders and the general public that foresight was
a useful exercise would be far easier if it were possible to cite
specific beneficial outcomes from a variety of past experiences;
* focusing on how
to address indicators far enough in advance so that potential crises
might be avoided instead of merely reacted to;
* having more
presenters at one time, perhaps by holding poster sessions;
* looking at how
experiential gaming can be utilized in foresight exercises;
* examining how
the growing crisis of legitimacy and disaffection with government and
institutions may impact foresight efforts; and
* seeking some way
to address belief issues in foresight—i.e., strengthening helpful
beliefs and uprooting or downplaying bad ones.
The meeting
highlighted the extensive and evolving foresight efforts in Spain,
Canada, U.S. federal agencies, and globally (particularly around the
Sustainable Development Goals). The meeting itself clearly left
participants with a favorable impression of the organizers, the
speakers, and the level of comments and questions offered by members
of the audience.
Lane Jennings
is former managing editor of World Future Review and currently
serves on its editorial board.
Acknowledgments:
AAI Foresight thanks Clem Bezold, Nancy Donovan, and participants in
the meeting for their contributions to, and review of, this report.
For more information, contact Bezold at cbezold@altfutures.org or
Donovan at nancyjmdonovan@gmail.com.
Copyright 2016 AAI Foresight.
