Towards an Integral renewal of systems methodology for futures studies

This article considers the use of systems methodology in futures studies and foresight, in relation to Slaughter's call for Integral methodological renewal in futures studies. The diversified methodologies that have developed within the systems practice field over the past 25 years are examined for their potential to address concerns about the field's reduction of interior realities to epiphenomena of systemic processes, articulated by Habermas in the 1970s, and more recently by Wilber from the perspective of his Integral Methodological Pluralism. It is argued, though, that Integral methodology requires more than methodological pluralism: some understanding of the structures of consciousness within which methodologies are conceived and applied is needed. Drawing on the work of Dr. Susanne Cook-Greuter, capacity to understand “system” itself is explored, looking at the way that humans make sense of reality and the stages through which this sense-making develops. It is argued that systems methods and tools used with sufficient practitioner awareness of epistemological biases have an essential role to play in improving the quality of our futures perception and knowledge.     

The reflective futures practitioner: Balancing salience,credibility and legitimacy in generating foresight knowledge with stakeholders

This paper explores how foresight researchers involved in environmental, nature and planning issues attempt to balance salience, credibility and legitimacy while generating knowledge in interaction with policy-makers and other social actors. Engaging stakeholders in foresight processes can increase the robustness of foresight knowledge, broaden the spectrum of issues addressed, and create ‘ownership’ of the process. While in foresight practices stakeholder participation becomes more and more popular to resort to as enabling factor for generating salient, legitimate and credible foresight knowledge, participation can also compromise these qualities. We analysed two foresight projects conducted at the PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency, one that developed future visions for Dutch nature policy and another that focused on future pathways for Dutch urban sustainable development policy. We illustrate that the dynamics of the research setting – changes in the socio-political context and the internal dynamics of the participatory efforts – complicated the balancing process. We conclude that one of the main challenges for futures practitioners is, therefore, to work within the dynamics of the research setting, and to position themselves strategically in this setting; by acting as ‘reflective futures practitioners’.     

Environmental outlooks: How they frame futures and long term uncertainty

Futures studies intend to structure our knowledge and our judgement about the future by handling facts and values in a certain way. In other words, futures studies frame futures. These frames might be powerful, triggering social action and societal transformation, yet they risk to be criticised and provoke scepticism. The environmental field has a long tradition in futures studies: environmental outlooks. Some of these outlooks, e.g. those published by the IPCC are among the most prominent examples of outlooks that provoke scientific, social and political debate, create commotion and provoke action. Part of these discussions deal with how outlooks frame the future and how they handle the uncertainty inevitably linked to framing futures. The way these challenges are dealt with may affect the overall assessment of an environmental outlook. This article attempts to identify the way environmental outlooks frame futures. We do not strive for exhaustiveness, but deliberately restrict to an in-depth analysis of a handful of recent environmental outlooks. We conclude that environmental outlooks reflect a lack of clarity and argumentation upon how they frame futures and how they deal with uncertainty. This epistemological and methodological ambiguity risk to affect the outlooks’ credibility and impact.     

Epistemology, social technology, and expert judgement: Olaf Helmer's contribution to futures research

The article discusses Olaf Helmer's contribution to the development of futures studies by focusing on four basic theses defining his approach. (1) Quasi-laws in social sciences and futures studies can in fact be treated in the same way that the natural laws of the physical sciences. (2) In order to make predictions, one need not appeal to a strict logical derivation, as the “covering laws” doctrine of logical-empiricism suggests. (3) Prediction and explanation are not logically symmetrical as positivists believe, thus the conditions needed for explanation are not those required for prediction. (4) Local, tacit, personal and expert knowledge are crucial in developing a foresight methodology. In conjunction, these four theses open the way to a unique theory of social prediction and to variety of “unorthodox items of methodological equipment for the purposes of prediction in the inexact sciences.”     

The epistemological relevance of the arts in foresight and futures studies

In this paper, we argue that the arts in its various forms have a genuine epistemological relevance to the theory and practice of foresight. To this end, we draw on the work of Ernst Bloch to advance the ‘disclosive’ role of graffiti art in contributing to futures becoming and the understanding of peoples’ subjective experiences and shared social theories about inarticulate social currents that may bring to life possibilities and potentialities in the realisation of some modest utopian visions.     

What difference does ‘integral’ make?

Integral futures (IF) has developed over several years to a point where it has emerged as a productive way of understanding futures studies (FS) itself and re-evaluating its role in the wider world. It is not merely a new ‘take’ on FS but has brought the field to a new stage of development with many practical consequences. For example, consulting, research, publishing, the design and implementation of training programs can now draw on a broader and deeper set of intellectual, practical and methodological resources than ever before. Similarly, with its new clarity regarding the individual and collective interior domains, IF profoundly affects the way people operate and changes the way in which the advanced skills and capabilities involved in strategic and social foresight are developed and used. Some of the reasons for these developments are explored here in a review of specific effects as shown by a sample of futures methods. The paper concludes with some brief suggestions about broader implications for the field as a whole.     

The state of future in international relations

This paper elaborates the state of Future in International Relations from a comparative theoretical perspective with regard to the selected methodological tools of Futures Studies. It, first, looks into the development of International Relations and Futures Studies to point out, how their contextual, conceptual and epistemological similarities and dissimilarities emerged in due course. It, then, analyses to what extent the methodological differences between selected Futures Studies techniques (e.g. forecasting, trend analysis, Delphi, backcasting, causal layered analysis and integral futures approach) intersect with the conceptual and normative differences between contemporary theories of International Relations stemming from Realism, Liberalism, Constructivism, Post-structuralism, Normative Theory and Critical Theory. The paper characterizes the relevant futures techniques with reference to the theories of International Relations, and scrutinizes selected futuristic narratives of International Relations from a methodological perspective. It, then, elaborates how Futures Studies and International Relations can benefit from each other’s strengths in terms of their methodologies and assumptions. The article finally explores to what extent the promises of Futures Studies techniques conjure up a convergence between different theories of International Relations.     

Failures to enact the future—A social practice perspective

To be successful, organisational foresight requires a multitude of perspectives and faculties. We have adopted a social practice perspective, which we base within an interpretative world view, to better understand how organisational foresight is enacted. This offers a reading of the phenomena, of which the essential contribution is that organisational foresight is more than an organisational property; it is something that reflective people do as they engage with various inputs from the outside and as a result of the continuous interaction between activity systems and their constituting elements. A longitudinal case study illustrates the importance of understanding the construction of collective and individual meaning in working with organisational foresight. The study shows how the inherent rigidity of the existing activity system and the weak ties between these diverse subsets of the organisation may block the interaction between emerging social practices and organisational intentions resulting in ongoing failures of understanding and enactment. A model is developed to include these parameters in an augmented activity systems model. Based on this we have identified the linking of organisational levels as one of the key dimensions to be considered for which the social practice perspective holds significant explanatory strength.     

Understanding rural change—demography as a key to the future

The last decades have seen a rapidly growing interest in foresight methodology. Methods have been developed in corporate and governmental communication exercises often labelled technology foresight. In reality, these foresights have often drifted into processes of social change, since technological change is hard to foresee beyond what is already in the pipe-line. Forecasting of social change, however, must be based on solid knowledge about the mechanisms of continuity and change. Virtually nothing can be said about the future without relating to the past; foresights and futures studies are about revealing the hidden pulse of history. Hence, the answer to forecasting the future is empirical research within the social sciences.Demographic change has been recognised as a key determinant for explaining social change. Population changes are fairly predictable and the age transition can explain a wide range of socio-economic changes. For rural futures, demographic change is a key issue, since age structure in rural areas is often uneven and also unstable due to migration patterns. A number of policy related questions as well as research challenges are raised as a consequence.     

Design futures in action: Documenting experiential futures for participatory audiences

The futures field demonstrates a willing openness in embracing methodologies, approaches, and influences from a diversity of disciplines and perspectives. This plurality of practice is evidenced in a growing body of work that increasingly embodies futures thinking in the design of everyday material and networked experiences. The intersection of design and futures produces artifacts, applications and interactions created to provoke dialog in an accessible manner. As part of the Futures special issue on the Emerge: Artists and Scientists Redesign the Future event, this article describes the documentation and public representation of the creative outcomes from nine Emerge design futures workshops. These workshops provided a rich opportunity to study how designers and futurists collaboratively engage, implement and communicate alternative futures. The goal of the documentation effort described is to capture the experience of creating experiential futures and extend the capacity for developing social foresight through a participatory exhibit and online social platform.     

Quality of data, information and knowledge in regional foresight processes

A central subcategory of futures research is technology foresight. There is a concern that today's technology foresight processes do not serve technology-political decision-making and strategy processes of companies well enough. The regional level needs to be emphasized, too, and the inclusion of a wide variety of actors and organizations. There is a danger that results of foresight processes are not absorbed into regional strategy-making processes, leading to a “black hole of interpretation and implementation of foresight knowledge”. Particularly knowledge, but also data and information are crucial concepts in foresight processes. An important issue is how to transform foresight information into future-oriented innovation knowledge. Concrete tools and institutional settings to enhance data, information and knowledge quality in foresight processes and strategy work are needed. This article investigates limitations of established foresight processes and planning approaches, limitations in practical utilization of results of foresight processes, and quality of data, information and knowledge as concrete tools and as a systematic response to limitations. The article is partly based on empirical results from a technology foresight survey undertaken in Finland in 2005. The research responds to societal and academic interest by combining the fields of (i) futures research and (ii) data, information and knowledge quality. Future-oriented considerations are not routine tasks, which makes it especially challenging and important to ensure that these processes benefit from data, information and knowledge of good quality.     

Narrative foresight

Narrative foresight focuses on the stories individuals, organizations, states and civilizations tell themselves about the future. Narrative foresight moves futures thinking from a focus on new technologies and generally to the question of what’s next, to an exploration of the worldviews and myths that underlie possible, probable and preferred futures. It is focused on transforming the current story – metaphor or myth – held to one that supports the desired future. From a theoretical account of the narrative turn, case studies are presented of the practice of narrative foresight.     

What foresight! Understanding Australia's housing future

Futures analysis has been little used to inform housing policy debate, despite the fact that historical precedent is becoming increasingly limited as a guide for policy direction. This paper examines the potential utility of ‘strategic foresight’ in considering possible housing futures for Australia. It examines the particular foresight methods employed, and processes used, to develop possible housing futures in the year 2025 and their policy implications. The paper concludes that foresight analysis, although not without its problems, creates the opportunity to move beyond current thinking and ‘path dependent’ policy parameters, enabling discussion of housing futures in a way that prompts critical discussion of the institutional arrangements and policies that shape housing policy in the present.     

Incorporating futures research into regional knowledge creation and management

This article focuses on future-oriented knowledge within regional innovation networks. Concrete regional tools and institutional settings aiming to enhance knowledge creation and management in such networks are needed. To enable planning for the future, there is a need for regional visionary capability. Resource-based futures research may make an important contribution in reducing the insecurity that regions face in the turbulent environment. When foresight processes are not absorbed into the regional strategy making processes, ‘black holes of regional strategy making’ come into existence, and future scenarios are built without taking into consideration the path-dependency of a region.This article attempts to reduce the gap between futures research, on the one hand, and regional knowledge and innovation management, on the other hand. It highlights the concept of self-transcending knowledge—the ability to sense the presence of potential. It then introduces a new, systemic model for knowledge creation and management in regional innovation networks. Utilising methods from futures research in creating self-transcending knowledge in a regional knowledge management system is proposed as a fruitful way of enhancing regional visionary capability. The article thus advocates combining approaches and methodologies from futures research with those of knowledge management in a novel way.     

Evolution of futures studies

This article discusses the evolution of futures studies. The article starts with an evaluation of the different rival taxonomies and definitions for futures studies, and proceeds to discuss the very concept of paradigm. Are there paradigms in this discipline? If we think there are, what kind of arguments can we use to define those? I argue that there have been two paradigms in the evolution of futures studies so far, and there are signs of emergence of a new one. Both of the existing paradigms have had many rival macro-level methodological approaches, ontological and epistemological branches, and phases of evolution. The first paradigm is the age-old prediction tradition that combines thinking about the future into mystic explanations. This line of thinking bases its argument on the deterministic future and effects of the world of spirits. The second paradigm was basically started in the U.S. military after World War II. This modern line of thinking bases its argument on indeterministic futures, probabilities, aim to control and plan, modelling and systems thinking, and the effects of external trends. The new emerging paradigm may base its line of thinking on disconnecting from the western control based technical thinking, and accepting internal dynamic fluctuations, paradoxes and dialectic thinking.     

Developing an abduction-based method for futures research

Futures research is an established field of knowledge with a wealth of methods and techniques. However, foresight, future outlooks and scenarios are, as a rule, based on inductivist or deductivist methods, making looking into the future a form of conservative projecting of past and present probabilities onto the road of development lying ahead of us. Closed past or present outlooks give birth to open futures, but these futures usually are little more than exercises in organizational learning. In this paper we present and develop a method for futures research that is based on abductive logic. Abduction-based futures research approach proceeds from closed, imaginary future states to alternative, open theoretical frameworks or explanations. Unlike inductivists and deductivists believe, this procedure from the unknown to the known is rational, and therefore something that can be systematized and learned. There is a logic of discovery, and what could be a better place to apply and develop it than futures research.     

Towards better participatory processes in technology foresight: How to link participatory foresight research to the methodological machinery of qualitative research and phenomenology?

Technological progress does not happen in a social vacuum. Shaping of tomorrow is not possible without qualitative analyses. Therefore, the social and psychological dimensions of reality form an important part of technology foresight. Qualitative research will be needed to understand superficial and deep structures of social realities. So called push and pull factors are always linked to social behaviour. People's relationship to the use of technologies and the utilization of technologies is a complex and not a one-dimensional or monological issue. Monological methodological approaches can be harmful and confusing in the field of participatory foresight. We can conclude that the cycles of deductive and inductive logic are needed in science and in participatory foresight studies. Experts of the FTA community must have a higher level of methodological know-how in this research field and they should use qualitative methods in multi-faceted (external and internal) ways in foresight studies. Still the qualitative parts of many studies are quite monological and these studies can be quite problematic, even confusing. More critical methodological approaches should be taken into serious consideration. As a methodological approach, the principle of triangulation should be used more in the fields of participatory foresight studies and technology foresight.The key focus of this article in the use of qualitative and phenomenological approaches in the fields of FTA and foresight. The aim of this theoretically oriented discussion is to promote the professional use of qualitative methods in foresight and FTA studies. The strength of qualitative analyses is linked to deeper understanding of social change and social patterns and structures. Actually people create and constitute the markets, networks, and crowds where technologies are applied and used.Internal systemic understanding of social realities is an important part of foresight activities, especially in participatory foresight studies. Internal and external analyses can be seen as complementary approaches, like qualitative and quantitative approaches. The use of qualitative methods is a conventional part of the research process in participatory foresight projects. A typical problem may be that the use of methods is not planned carefully enough and people are unaware of the underlying key assumptions of applied methods. Experimenting with phenomenology is not a simple task in foresight research. Therefore, the views and informative platforms expressed and presented in this article may be useful for foresight practitioners.     

Futures studies and the policy sciences

Part of the current evaluation of the work of the Swedish Secretariat for Futures Studies focuses on the practicality and legitimacy of futures studies in relation to the policy sciences. Two crucial issues are focused on, first the justification and relevance of futures studies methodological approaches and their rigorous application to areas of public policy importance and second, the measures by which futures studies can be evaluated in the light of different time frames. Although there are differences between the policy sciences and futures studies approaches which require further analysis, there nevertheless is a symbiotic relationship between the two. The legitimacy of futures studies as a relevant public policy exercise should not be at issue.     

Accounting in Babel? Constructing social accounting as a multi-logical performance

All social practices reproduce certain taken-for-granteds about what exists. Constructions of existence (ontology) go together with notions of what can be known of these things (epistemology), and how such knowledge might be produced (methodology)—along with questions of value or ethics. Increasingly, reflective practitioners—whatever their practice—are exploring the assumptions they ‘put to work’ and the conventions they reproduce. Questions are being asked about how to ‘cope’ with change in a postmodern world, and ethical issues are gaining more widespread attention. If we look at these constructions then we often find social practices: (a) give central significance to the presumption of a single real world; (b) centre a knowing subject who should strive to be separate from knowable objects, i.e. people and things that make up the world; (c) a knowing subject who can produce knowledge (about the real world) that is probably true and a matter of fact rather than value (including ethics). Social practices of this sort often produce a right–wrong debate in which one individual or group imposes their ‘facts’ (and values) on others. Further they often do so using claims to greater or better knowledge (e.g. science, facts …) as their justifications.We use the term “relational constructionism” as a summary reference to certain assumptions and arguments that define our “thought style”. They are as follows: fact and value are joined (rather than separate); the knower and the known—self and other—are co-constructed; knowledge is always a social affair—a local–historical–cultural (social) co-construction made in conversation, in other kinds of action, and in the artefacts of human activities (‘frozen’ actions so to speak), and so; multiple inter-actions simultaneously (re)produce multiple local cultures and relations, this said; relations may impose one local reality (be mono-logical) or give space to multiplicity (be multi-logical). In this view, the received view of science is but one (socially constructed) way of world making, as is social constructionism, and different ways have different—and very real—consequences.In this paper, we take our relational constructionist style of thinking to examine differing constructions of foot and mouth disease (FMD)¹ in the UK. We do so in order to highlight the dominant relationship construction. We argue that this could be metaphorised as ‘accounting in Babel’—as multiple competing monologues—many of which remained very local and subordinated by a dominant logic. However, from a relational constructionist point of view, it is also possible to argue that social accounting can be done in a more multi-logical way that gives space to dialogue and multiplicity. In the present (relational constructionist) view, accounting is no longer ‘just’ a question of knowledge and methodology but also a question of value and power. To render accounting practices more ethical they must be more multi-voiced and enable ‘power to’ rather than ‘power over’.