The stages in the foresight process
A foresight project, whether a collective undertaking or a study, is designed and managed like a project (with its stages of conception, planning, execution, finalisation and assessment); a preparation and conception phase (sometimes called prefiguration) is essential. This involves scoping the subject, the objectives, etc. The main questions to ask during this phase are set out below.
From the outset, it is useful to define the subject (the questions to be addressed and those to which we plan to answer), and to provide initial answers to the following questions:
What for?
Virtually all foresight work is motivated by an initial need, an unresolved political or strategic question, a need to shed light on the future in order to support action, a need to acculturate people to change, etc. It is fundamental to understand and formulate these needs. To do this, the sponsors and the ‘clients’ or end-users (who are not always the same people) need to be able to spell out their expectations, which often need to be translated into objectives. Sometimes it is useful to bring together stakeholders from other foresight approaches, and to present a variety of foresight deliverables, to show what can be achieved [1].
[1] There is no point in asking whether stakeholders want scenarios without knowing their approach, scope and usefulness. ↑
What will the work cover? Framing the subject
In this design phase, either the subject is already specified (for example: quantum computing in 20 years’ time, consumption of dairy products in 2030, therapeutic innovations in the next decade, a region and its long-term sustainable development etc.), or it is more diffuse or broader (for example: the future of veterinary surgeons, social protection, an organisation at the heart of major transitions etc.). In all cases, it is useful to have a first overview of the work themes relating to the global environment, the players involved and the specific questions being asked. A number of techniques (interviews, workshops etc.) can be used to achieve this.
A frequent question is that of the geographical extension of the work; the answer to this is often complex. However, it is important to specify the scope of the study, even if the environment may be on a very global scale.
Formulating the questions to which the approach aims to provide answers is a highly structuring and useful exercise.
An exploratory and/or strategic approach?
Two questions need to be asked:
Is the approach essentially exploratory foresight (what could happen? what are the issues?) or strategic foresight in terms of the expected strategic or political spin-offs (such as the preparation of a plan, a vision, areas for action)?
What level of stakeholder involvement and how open are the results? The systems differ significantly according to the typology set out below.
Source: Jean-Philippe Bootz.
The different types of foresight approach
What’s the horizon?
Foresight combines long-term thinking with action in the present or near future. To support decisions with lasting consequences, foresight can be used to explore very distant horizons. Environmental issues, for example, call for thinking scales in line with the life cycles of ecosystems.
The relevant time frame depends on the pace of change in the field concerned.
The experts at the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) are working on climate scenarios for 2100; car manufacturers are thinking about the future of mobility in 10-15 years’ time; and many economic players are looking two or three years ahead to identify new markets.
In all cases, forward thinking never consists of imagining distant futures without thinking about the trajectories of change. It involves working on the relationship between timeframes, thinking about the relationships between phenomena that are highly inertial and others that evolve much more rapidly.
Which stakeholders? How is the system governed?
The question of opening up the work to stakeholders (internal or external) must be asked during the design phase, although the answers given are not definitive. It should be noted, however, that while the approach is highly participative in the exploratory work and the initial stages, reducing this participation during the more strategic phases subsequently proves tricky.
Organised in project mode, a foresight approach needs to be governed and directed. Three levels are regularly distinguished:
- Steering, which can take the form of a committee and must at least give its opinion on the design, results and key messages of the work at the main stages, the deliverables and their distribution.
- A technical team to lead the project, provide analysis and summaries, and assist the general project management (programming, resources, methods).
- One or more working and discussion groups to produce and compare analyses.
Example of the formulation of objectives for Institut Pasteur’s strategic foresight approach (2008)
“To identify and create propitious conditions (human, technical, economic, organisational, etc.) for the development of the Institut Pasteur (IP) and its missions in the medium and long term. It is not a foresight study on the scientific fields of the IP”.
The aim is to:
- To develop a shared understanding of the challenges facing the Institut Pasteur between now and 2020-2025, in the face of changes in global biology research.
- To identify the structural directions and alternatives, particularly in terms of models for producing and promoting research, attracting researchers, organisation, size, major facilities, partnerships, etc.
- To build possible long-term institutional profiles for the Institut Pasteur.
- To establish a long-term vision in preparation for a strategic project.
Governance of the process
A permanent team
- Serves the working groups by researching information, producing summaries, interviewing experts, preparing meetings and drafting minutes.
- Works with the group chairmen to coordinate the work and exchanges between groups
- Prepares the communication of the work
- Drafts reports and the general summary
Two working groups
- Group 1: Developments in biology research worldwide
- Group 2: Medium/long-term strategic resources, interactions between disciplines (including public health)
A Foresight Steering Committee
- Guides the work at each major stage
A Group of department heads
- Provides comments and additions and relays the work to the units
Institut Pasteur Management Committee
- Informed on a regular basis, meeting every six weeks
- Also examines specific issues (developments in the international network, IP identity and brand, etc.)
We also understand that the key questions are those shown in the diagram opposite:
Caution: design must remain an open-ended process and must not fix everything
The foresight approach is both constructivist (we learn as we go) and exploratory (we discover developments, issues and actions as pathfinders). The working methodology aims to gradually establish a foresighted understanding of the subject and the dynamics at work, and produces results that cannot be determined ex ante.
This means that while the process must be managed like a project, its aims and objectives are partly open-ended (to put it another way, unlike an architect’s project, we don’t know whether we’re building a bridge, a road, an electricity network, etc.). The foresight approach must even question its object and its aims.
Example in public and non-confidential fields
In a 1992 directive, the Department of Architecture and Town Planning positioned the French Basque Country as a major area for national planning (cross-border, traffic corridor, etc.). This led to the funding of a foresight study to draw up a development plan for the Basque Country using a 20-year foresight approach. The work got underway; it was a pioneering initiative for the Basque Country and for territorial foresight in France. Three years later, there is no development plan in sight (so the initial aim has not been achieved), but there is a territorial project, a development council, a council of elected representatives, and a large number of projects and actions supported at the scale of the Basque Country. And above all, a shared knowledge of the area and its future challenges. According to Aliette Delamarre, who monitored the work for the DATAR (Délégation à l’aménagement du territoire et à l’action régionale), the “Basque Country 2010” foresight initiative”produced the territory”. It wasn’t until 1997 that a development project took shape. The objectives of the project changed along the way, and it is important to be aware of this with those who commissioned the project.
In 2001, work began on locating a new airport hub for the Toulouse metropolitan area. The work was based on econometric and urban planning studies. The Regional Public Works Department undertook a foresight study to provide a framework for long-term assumptions and to help define the type of airport hub and its location, while at the same time summarising the many studies already carried out. Quite quickly, the foresight analyses summarising the various studies showed that a new hub was of little relevance. Similar work carried out in preparation for the public debate on the Notre-Dame-des-Landes hub project, or as part of the high-speed link between Marseille and Nice (known as the LGV PACA) will lead to the same results.