FUTURREG Turku, June 7, 2006

1. Epistemological Foundations and Organisational Principles for a Futures Toolkit – A Futures Literacy Perspective Riel Miller FUTURREGTurku, June 7, 2006

2. The End of Certainty … we are now able to include probabilities in the formulation of the basic laws of physics. Once this is done, Newtonian determinism fails; the future is no longer determined by the present…. Mankind is at a turning point, the beginning of a new rationality in which science is no longer identified with certitude and probability with ignorance. … science is no longer limited to idealized and simplified situations but reflects the complexity of the real world, a science that views us and our creativity as part of a fundamental trend present at all levels of nature.Ilya Prigogine, The End of Certainty: Time, Chaos and the New Laws of Nature

3. A “non-modal” approach to thinking about the future Branching assumes that history can be envisaged as a tree with many branches, the bifurcation of which represents points where different events present agents with choices... (Booth et. al. p. 6)

4. Branching Subject (model) Time

5. A “modal” approach to thinking about the future The possible worlds thesis explores the possibilities that a number of different worlds exist, each different from our own - in so much as in these different worlds, different states of affairs have obtained.(Booth et. al. p. 7)

6. NOW Possible Worlds(constrained by the same necessity – basic assumptions) Subject (model) Time

7. What is futures literacy?

8. Definition Futures literacy is the capacity to question the assumptions used to make decisions today and to systematically explore the possibilities of the world around us through a mastery of rigorous imagining techniques.

9. Futures Literacy • Level 1 futures literacy • Temporal awareness, values, expectations • Level 2 futures literacy • Rigorous imagining • Level 3 futures literacy • Strategic scenarios

10. Possible Futures Thinking about the future: How to select which stories to tell Conceivable Futures ? ? ? ?

11. Level 1 Futures Literacy Temporal awareness, values, expectations

12. Step 1 - Value & trend scenarios • Method: Experiential - expectational • Strengths: Rich detail, normative-trend scenarios, accessible narratives, builds temporal awareness • Weaknesses: Incommensurate variables, incoherent models, usually ineffective for policy • Outcome: Leadership & dialogue • Products: Report explicit values & expectations, familiar stories

13. Papa Mamma Baby Baby Bear, Mamma Bear, Papa Bear Scenarios Population Time

14. The Good, The Bad & The Ugly Adopt Kyoto Agreement(good) No agreements(bad) Muddle through(ugly) Human impact on climate change reduced Moderate human induced disruption of climate Massive climate disruption Build composite scenarios combining trends & preferences

16. Level 2 Futures Literacy Rigorous imagining – a model sets parameters for the frame Telling good stories narrative rules – assumptions for the frame Form/function scenarios within the Frame

17. Step 2 - Rigorous imagining • Method: Construct possibility space, descriptive model of the subject • Strengths: Expands range of possible futures, tailored to task, analytical • Weaknesses: Non-obvious outcomes, no probability assessment, reduced number of variables • Outcome: Imagining futures that operate under different assumptions in an analytically clear fashion • Products: Builds up metrics (parameters) for a frame for mapping policy relevant scenarios that can be connected to probabilities & preferences

18. What is a possibility map? Select: • Specific topic • Theory (social science) underlying attributes • Variables (metrics) underlying attributes An example: • Specific topic: electricity • Dimension of change: pervasiveness • Possibility space of pervasiveness: a) ease-of-use b) range-of-uses

19. Technology possibility space Simple Ease of use Electricity Difficult Limited & homogeneous Unlimited & heterogeneous Range of uses How to select scenarios?

20. Step 3. Telling good stories – five narrative criteria for framing scenarios • Purpose/genre • Point-of-view • Temporal-chronological frame • Protagonists • Causal rules – the “physics of the situation”

21. 1. What is the type or purpose of the story? Not tragedy or comedy, thriller or romance; but basic types: • contingency planning/simulation training • optimisation testing • discovery - exploration -imagining

22. 2. What is the point-of-view? Not first or third person, stream-of-consciousness or dialogue; but is the story told in terms of: • the choices people make in their everyday lives (micro) or • aggregate outcomes (macro) – or • both explicit relationship between micro & macro

23. 3. What is the temporal or chronological frame? Not beginning, middle and end; but • comparative static (two or more cross-sections) or • dynamic/path (time-series) or • backcasting (reverse engineered)

24. 4. Who are the main protagonists? Not hero and villain; but who makes the decisions • a specific institution (sub-unit) or • a social/economic system (nation, sector, etc.) or • institutions nested within a dynamic socio/economic context - interaction

25. 5. What rules apply to the action? Not is time travel allowed or Matrix like suspension of the rules of physics; but what arethe assumptions that provide the analytical definitions and causal relationships that make for robust social science.

26. Example: the narrative assumptions for my “Learning Intensive Society” narrative: • Purpose : Goal discovery – what is the potential of the present? • Point-of-view: Change in daily life (metric: agriculture to industry) • Temporal frame: Comparative static cross-section in 2030 • Protagonist: socio-economic system (wealthy countries) • Rules: universal declaration of human rights, representative democracy, mixed economies (markets not planning)

27. Framing the scenarios

30. Stories within the frame

31. Step 4 - Form and Function Scenarios • Method: Uses hypotheses regarding “role” & organisation to select scenarios within the “frame” • Strengths: Clear selection criteria based on possibility space descriptive model as a way to specify systemic outcomes under different assumptions • Weaknesses: Perceived as disconnected from probability & desirability (but consistent with end of certainty) • Outcome: Decision compatible scenarios • Products: Scenarios that clarify current assumptions & highlights strategic choices (that then need to be considered in light of expectations & preferences)

32. Six Electrification Scenarios Organisation Centralised Decentralised Functions Only as a Weapon Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Industrial Power Scenario 3 Scenario 4 Consumer Power Scenario 5 Scenario 6 Map on to possibility space

33. History S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6

34. Level 3 Futures Literacy Strategic scenarios Having distinguished possible, probable and desirable: Reintroduce values and probability Focus on the assumptions and how choices might make a difference (defensive, neutral, transformative)

35. Strategic Desirable Scenarios Futures Possibility Space Futures GBU & Bear Futures Probable Futures Possible Futures Possible, probable, desirable Conceivable Futures

36. Step 5 - Strategic Scenarios • Method: Use possibility space descriptive model (Step 2) within a frame (Step 3) to map form/function scenarios (Step 4) using, in part, values & expectations revealed in (Step 1) to select strategic (systemic assumption altering – or not) policy choices (Step 5) • Strengths: High degree of imagination & policy compatibility of scenarios • Weaknesses: Not predictive • Outcome: Focuses decision making on changes today that might lead to a different future, capacity building for using/coping with spontaneity • Product: stories of alternative presents

37. Hybrid Strategic Scenario Method • Level 1 FL • Values • Expectations • Preliminary dimensions of the subject • Level 2 FL • Define subject using a descriptive model (variables) • Construct possibility spaces using variables • Frame the narrative • Develop function and form scenarios • Map the scenarios in the possibility space • Level 3 FL • Assess scenarios in terms of values • Analyse scenario assumptions and pre-conditions compared with today (the potential of the present) • Compare current choices with the choices implied by the scenarios • Make decisions now with a greater awareness of the possibilities of the world around you

38. A Perilous Transition? Certainly, if we do it this way Futures Literacy as an alternative Image: Sempe – crowd on a tight rope going from A to B

39. Motivating questions How can we: • reconcile greater freedom with collective choices? • embrace greater diversity without inviting fragmentation & chaos? • foster greater creativity without increasing burn-out & stress? • inspire responsibility? • motivate change without resorting to fear? • manage risk without hierarchy? • combine respect for complexity while still gaining depth of understanding?

40. Why futures literacy matters • Hope matters for motivation – what makes change worth the candle • Capacity to understand and manage risk – making freedom and heterogeneity liveable • Grasping the potential of a non-ergodic conjuncture: change in the conditions of change

41. A time for method and methods for our time Why futures literacy now? Because a futures literate society can use: • diversification, imagination and inter-dependency to • embrace spontaneity, experimentation & complexity • without being overwhelmed by • fear of the risks (perception) • failure (reality of risk) • in order to inspire aspirations consistent with a world where means are ends (values in practice)

42. Build a bridge to nowhere, instead of planninguse complexity, heterogeneity, network density and the capacity for spontaneity

43. “Virtually every step in the history of human innovation and invention has come about in the wake of someone asking about imaginary possibilities, speculating about what would happen if and reflecting on yet-unrealised and perhaps unrealisable possibilities." Nicholas Rescher, Imagining Irreality Thank youRiel Miller