Action Foresight

This is an audio recording I did of Dr. Jim Ife, professor in Community Development (previously at Curtin University, now at Victoria University), back in 2009. Jim had just completed his book ”Human Rights From Below” on the intrinsic connection between human rights and community development, and was kind enough to spend time with some of my and Charles Mphande’s VU community development students. I put this talk up on another blog, but was closed, so putting it back up here. It is a very candid lecture with a good Q&A with the students.

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

I put this together this past year for colleague Dr. Gerry Roberts for the Newsletter of the Australasia-Pacific Extension Network.

In this short piece I tried to make some basic points:

First the importance of the concept of embodied foresight – that foresight is contextually situated. And as such it is ever present (tacit) and expressed differently in a variety of situations. That does not mean we don’t need formal approaches, indeed the scale shift to a planetary civilization is necessitating formal studies of futures.

Second the evolutionary notion of techno-economic shift with its particular qualitative dimensions. The development discourse is a dangerous one and I am no subscriber to the ‘industrial-development’ idea of progress, however I have a weak spot for scientific-progress as one of a number of important views.

Third the fundamentally layered nature of foresight in the “modern” world, which contains older forms.

Comments welcome

Jose

———————————-

Strategic foresight is an approach to “forward thinking” that allows groups, organisations, businesses, and people the capacity to develop a grounded understanding of the social change affecting their lives. This allows people to then make decisions and develop strategies based on that “forward knowledge”.  The end result is an adaptive capacity in the face of change, and a heightened awareness of emerging opportunities.

Since the beginning of time human beings have had to think about the future to survive. Indeed, across human history the character of this “forward thinking” has changed depending on the nature of the existences that people experienced.

In paleolithic (stone age) cultures, people’s outlook on the future was likely an expression of the ways of living those people engaged in. “Foresight” may have meant understanding the migrations of animals which were food sources, be this bovine, fowl, and fish. It may have meant understanding where wild fruit, roots and edible insects existed through the year’s cycle. It may also have been expressed through how to survive a very cold winter, a very hot summer, or a period with very little water or food. These people’s foresight allowed them to navigate many challenging environments, by looking ahead for weeks and months. While we may consider this a relatively short time frame, for these people, with their tools and in their environments, this was a formidable capacity.

Herding cultures, which followed and later domesticated animals, developed another way of life. These cultures created a symbiotic relationship with their domesticated animals: such as camel, ox, cow, goat and sheep (and in meso-America rodent, dog and turkey). This way of life offered them a continuous  form of sustenance, so long as their domesticated animals had access to food and water. This then changed the character of the “foresight” these people would express. Their “forward view” would need to be focused on finding and exploiting the the best habitats for their animals. In Eurasia, migrating longer distances would have necessitated a deeper understanding of seasonal changes in various regions.

Subsistence agricultural cultures, which began to create symbiotic relationships with plants and trees, developed another way of life and hence expressed another way of “forward thinking”. These peoples would need to think about seasonal changes, especially the coming of rains, storms, and harsh weather that could destroy crops. In the ancient agricultural societies of Egypt, Babylon, the Indus river (and others) floods had to be anticipated and managed. It is not surprising that these cultures, which could store more foods for longer periods, and which needed to have a more accurate understanding of seasonal changes, began to look at the stars, and create a more accurate understanding of seasonal changes, culminating in the development of the first calendars.

Industrialisation changed the game yet again. Water resources could be pumped using machines. Goods could be transported quickly and cheaply around the world. Fossil fuels could be used for farming, as well as synthesized into both fertilizers and pesticides. The shift from subsistence agriculture to surplus market agriculture would again shift the nature of the “forward view”. New questions emerged: is there a market for this good? will there be a glut in this good? can this good compete against market alternatives?

While these examples from history and pre-history are an obvious oversimplification, and the true nature of foresight in these types of cultures is best understood by the science of anthropology, the main point remains salient. A “forward view” or “foresight” has been integral to the survival of peoples from the beginning of time to the present. I would further argue that developing the capacity for foresight has become more important as well as more complex as time has worn on.

Today the average business is faced with a mind-numbing array of issues to grapple with in considering their business decisions.

• Economic globalization has meant that more people are competing in more markets
• Currencies ebb and flow in a turbulent global financial system
• Sustainability challenges are impacting in a number of areas: land use, climate change, waste management and many other places
• Government policy sometimes stabilizes and sometimes disrupts organisations
• Economic boom and bust cycles affect different industries and sectors
• Technologies continue to have big impacts, such as computer, biotechnology, nanotechnology and renewable energy technologies
• New values are emerging from new generations with new expectations

Faced with so much complexity a common response is to say “I’ll do what I have always done, it has worked before”. However this is a major mistake!  We know from history that human life continues to evolve and change in tandem with changes in technology, culture, etc. Engaging in forward thinking not only allows businesses to adapt to a changing environment, it opens up avenues and opportunities that were previously not visible.

The modern art and science of strategic foresight is a grounded approach to understanding this landscape of social change in ways that open up opportunities to decision makers in every walk of life. An enhanced capacity for foresight has a number of benefits. It allows decision makers to understand what the key issues impacting their sector or industry might be. It provides a strategic landscape where various options for development open up. It creates more clarity where an enterprise should devote time and energy. It provides guidance in respect to the direction an enterprise should innovate.

Strategic foresight provides a number of effective frameworks and tools for providing value to clients. It involves rigorously scanning across relevant data sources to understand the nature of change for a sector or industry. It requires sifting and sorting to come to an appreciation of the key themes and issues that are most relevant. Tools in data analysis and interpretation allow for a deepened understanding of the issues faced.  In can often entail developing a “picture” of one, two or many possible futures, often called “scenarios”. Importantly, it includes making sure that this new understanding of social change is used to ask: “now what”? It helps decision makers re-think their strategies and core assumptions, opens up awareness of emerging opportunities and helps develop more robust and exciting directions for businesses and organisations.

In this third (of four) part of my interview with Rev. Tim Mansfield, he goes into detail re: where the rubber meets the road for him in spirituality – via practice and enactment in the world. He goes on to explain what it means to engage in a post-modern exploration of spirituality at the Parliament of the World Religions. Going into the history and context of the Parliament, he discusses his experience of his ecumenist engagement in radical spiritual diversity. He goes on to discuss what the key priorities are for religion at the Parliament: care for earth, hunger and poverty, peace between people, and respect for indigenous people. He argues the real challenge in a spiritual path is to be inspired and consistent with the ethical framework set out by ones tradition, as well as to be spiritually sustained by it.

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

In this next part of my interview with Father Tim Mansfield, he talks more in depth about the consequences of a rationalist stance, and the post modern curiosity that arises from this rationalism, as a variety of discourses, worldviews and perspectives can be adopted as stances. This allows an emerging flexibility and movement between perspectives in relating through personal and social experience. This section concludes with reflections on the movement toward ‘embodiment’ (the nature of holding a stance or perspective that has an experiential ground), and Tim’s post post-modern shift. Enjoy

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

Over the next several months I’ll be posting a number of interviews and or lectures that I have conducted or attended. The interviews and lectures are essentially focused on friends or colleagues who I greatly respect and who I find fascinating, knowledgeable and worth listening to.

The following is the 1st segment of an interview I did with Tim Mansfield in Dec. 2009. I had wanted to interview Tim Mansfield for a number of reasons. First, he is by far one of the most outstanding minds and spirits I have come across in my life. He has an almost encyclopedic knowledge of religious history, and combines this with strong foundations in integral / integrative studies in psychology and philosophy, and he embodies a unique fusion between the ancient (as a Gnostic Johannite priest), the modern (as a PhD in Computer Science) and the post-modern (as you will hear in this audio). Tim has been a very positive influence in my life and a great friend. He has been incredibly supportive during some of my challenging times, and a joy to be with overall.

In this 1st segment of the interview, he describes his own religious and cultural background, and begins to explain some of the key reference points and context around his journey from Anglicanism to atheism and onto postmodern spirituality. The shift from premodernity to modernity is related across economic and cultural lines, in particular looking at some of the patterns among religious aesthetics and sensibility. I should also mention that this interview was conducted right after the parliament of the worlds religions held in Melbourne in 2009. I come to this with my own interest in global spiritual movements of social change, and a Westerners adulation of the Gandhian spiritual and political path.

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

In April 2011 I applied to become one of Berkshire Publishing Group’s “{Bao} China Futures Fellows”. I’m happy to announce that I’ve been selected, and would like to express my gratitude to Karen Christensen and the Berkshire Publishing Group for this honor and opportunity. Here is an overview of the {Bao} China Futures Fellowship that I quote from Karen Christensen:

“Berkshire Publishing is developing the {Bao} China Futures Network as a platform and gathering place for those involved in China futures research, a field in its early stages and with great potential for growth. China Futures will provide opportunities for scholars and specialists who have begun to do rigorous futures thinking, and will encourage other researchers to apply their work to the challenges of the future. Anyone is free to sign up at the site, too, which will give you access to the evolving work of the Fellows and to a considerable body of China-related content: http://www.shapingtomorrow.com/partner/china/welcome.cfm. (We’ll be very glad to stay in touch about other Berkshire China projects, too – including the China Business Center.)

Fellows will promote the study of China’s history and culture, crucial to anyone who intends to build scenarios for the future. The site will contain extensive resources on Chinese history and culture from Berkshire’s renowned China publications. By creating a China futures “community center,” we will demonstrate new approaches, new tools, and new methodologies that can help policymakers and businesses. Any visitor will come away with a more nuanced understanding of China’s role in the twenty-first century. Our efforts will enrich dialogue in Chinese studies and encourage practitioners and scholars to think ahead in new ways.

{Bao} China Futures Network is hosted by Berkshire’s partner, Shaping Tomorrow (ST), the leading, open global portal for strategic foresight, where members can explore emerging trends, patterns, opportunities (and the risks they entail) in wide-ranging fields, applications, and locations. By collaborating with trends researchers on six continents, ST and {Bao} China Futures offers online access to a community of over 12,000 people, 6,000 organizations, and a Foresight Network of more than 2,800 experts, through which early predictions and warnings of change allow for better-considered, timely decisions, directives, and innovations.

Berkshire Publishing has worked with futurists and future studies organizations for over five years in the development of its award-winning titles focus on international relations, cross-cultural communication, business and economics, and environmental sustainability. The ST / Berkshire partner site – http://www.shapingtomorrow.com/partner/china/welcome.cfm – will to help non-Chinese organizations better understand the future of the country, and will promote strategic foresight to Chinese companies. {Bao} China Futures will be recruiting up to 100 Chinese and foreign experts as China Futures Fellows, who will help to provide comprehensive information about and analysis of political, economic, social, and technological trends.”

My project

The title of the project I have proposed is ‘Sino-Global Energy Futures: collaboration or conflict?’.

The main theme of the project revolves around energy as a source of conflict, or alternatively as a source for collaboration and hence peace.

We know that the world is facing a number of energy challenges, depleting oil, gas, and coal supplies. And we know that unchecked climate change poses a great risk to (and is already impacting) humanity. In other words, the industrial world and the industrialising world need to transform the way that energy is produced, consumed and indeed even perceived.

Energy resources have been a source of conflict throughout the 20th century, however the threat of energy resource conflicts and wars becomes even greater if we as a species cannot develop the means for alterna-tive energy sources in the coming decades.

If, however, we can increase our capacity to collaborate across nationalities, ethnicities, and other affiliations, to address and solve energy (wicked) problems, we not only stand a good chance of averting catastrophic climate change, and we not only stand a good chance of building post-fossil fuel economies, but we can also lay the foundations for inter-cultural understanding and solidarity that will help foster peace between diverse peoples. In other words, collaboration is a ‘synergetic’ good, in that it helps people solve problems while weaving new communities and solidarities.

Sino-global futures focus

This project will focus on emerging examples of Sino-global collaboration. Part of this focus will be on Sino-global climate mitigation collaborations. We know that UN based negotiations have stalled, in part based on substantial differences in how the problem is conceived across civilizational lines. Yet that does not preclude a myriad of other collaborations between nations, NGOs, companies, to dramatically reduce carbon emis-sions. Nor does this preclude inter-civilizational dialogue that can create shared understanding and commit-ment between peoples.

The other aspect to this focus will be on exploring Sino-global collaborations on developing and accelerating post-fossil fuel energy solutions. Indeed, China is a major ‘pivot’ in global energy futures. As an industrialising country with almost a quarter of the world population, the future of the planet rests on leveraging China’s dynamic capabilities, learning from China, as well as assisting its people in the tasks at hand. Already China is the leading manufacturer of renewable energy technology, and has recently surpassed the US in renewable energy investments. It has wisely used much of its post global financial crisis stimulus to drive investment in renewables. This has further propelled the rapidly growing industry globally. The future energy transformations we seek will by necessity see China as a key driver and collaborator for change.

Collaboration and dialogue

Collaboration happens in many different ways. Work across many different types or organizations, from government agencies, to corporations, to NGOs, community organizations and universities and research centres is a complex affair. Collaboration can be used for knowledge sharing, networking, innovation processes, and community building. It also requires the capacity to build relatedness and trust. When a complex and wicked problem meets the need for dynamic and diverse collaboration, the challenges in creating common ground, shared meaning and shared commitment are greater.

I will document three stages of collaboration. Existing collaborations will demonstrate best practice exam-ples of collaborations within and between Chinese and trans-national actors. This will help give people an idea of what is already being done successfully. Emerging collaborations will be those that are being devel-oped and which hold promise. I will also explore needed collaborations, what needs to be developed to take Sino-global collaboration to the next level. Finally, I will also look at the area of cross sector collaborations, where emerging synergies of structural power across cultural, political and economic domains are leading to dramatic transformations.

Futures research component

In researching and envisioning alternative China futures, I intend to develop scenarios from the research data that will offer clarity in assisting Sino-global energy collaboration. As developing such scenarios is an emer-gent process, it is difficult to say with any certainty what type of scenarios or methodology would be used. As a baseline, however, it would be useful to articulate scenarios that envisage collaboration pathways (alter-native futures for Sino-global energy collaboration) as well as ‘the future as warning’ (as the famous Indian social theorists Ashis Nandy put it) which makes stark what a future without Sino-global energy collaboration might look like. Normative (preferred) futures can inspire and motivate action, while dystopian futures can act as a warning, and by extension make less likely and help to avert such futures.

Emerging worldviews of Sino-global collaboration

Fostering Sino-global collaboration will by necessity require new ways of thinking and knowing, and indeed require ‘worldviews’ of collaboration. We live in the age of great states (which many would call empires) in an increasingly multi-polar world. And… addressing the global problems we face will force us to transcend (yet include) the nationalisms born of the 18th, 19th and 20th centuries. While not denying the legitimacy and role of statehood and the nation as an entity and shared-imagined community, we also need to articulate trans-national solidarities, trans-local collaborations, global (cosmopolitan) governance, and a planetary vision of the human family.

Yet such terms should not be superimposed on the research, as this would simply re-inscribe a western-centric framing. Thus, among the myriad collaborations we may find examples that allow us to observe and appreciate how such worldviews are emerging. The use of analytic tools such as Causal Layered Analysis will give rigor to the inquiry into emerging worldviews of Sino-global energy collaboration. Articulating these emerging ways of knowing will facilitate appreciation for the mindsets, mental ‘software’, and culturally em-bedded discourses that facilitate Sino-global energy collaboration.

Innovation in the 21st century

The late sociologist Eric Trist argued that the turbulence and complexity posed by our emerging challenges cannot be addressed by single organizations alone, and as he put it: ‘The issues involved are too extensive and too many-sided to be coped with by any single organization, however large. The response capability required to clear up a mess is inter- and multi-organizational’. He argued that meta-networks emerge to ad-dress meta-problems that single organizations cannot address alone.

This project hopes that, with enough learning, inspiration and determination, we can create the meta-networks necessary to foster diverse, dynamic and effective collaboration in addressing our complex energy challenges. I have a vision for a ‘Pax Pacifica Network’ that can help super-charge global energy futures collaboration, a critical pillar of this being Sino-global collaboration.

Use of workshop based futures tools and methods

I have extensive experience using workshop facilitation methods to understand, map and vision alternative futures. When given the opportunity, I fully intend to use my repertoire of knowledge in this area to help develop this project, to assist other China futures researchers, and to promote the development of China Futures Research generally.

Initial foray into the project

I’ve begun documenting examples of sino-global energy futures collaboration using Diigo bookmarking. You can find it using the tage ‘Meta-communities‘.  I’m very open to collaborating with other business people, writers, artists and scholars on developing this research, so feel free to contact me.

The Journal of Futures Studies is running a Symposium called “Global Mega Crisis”. The initiators are two long standing stalwarts of long term thinking and futures studies, William Halal and Michael Marien.

The intention of the symposium is to create debate about the dimensions and scale of the challenges facing humanity. The symposium centers around an article they have written called “Global Mega Crisis: A Survey of Four Scenarios on a Pessimism-Optimism Axis”. We have begun to engage and invite a number of futures / foresight thinkers and writers to contribute.

Here is the overview written up for the symposium:

—————————————————————–

INTRODUCTION

A fundamental question in serious futures-thinking has to do with the idea of human progress.  All matters considered, will life be better for humanity as a whole, for countries and organizations, for communities and families, and for individuals in the decades ahead? Until the past decade or so, progress was widely assumed.  But in recent years this assumption has become problematic.  The Great Recession, still unfolding in some places, has dampened prospects for many.  The multiple threats of global climate change and more extreme weather events darken the long-range horizon.  World population continues to grow, despite a declining rate of growth, and food, water, and energy issues are emerging.  Political polarization and  gridlock appears widespread.  On the positive side, many new technologies are emerging that can potentially alleviate if not “solve” some if not many of these problems.  So, overall, should we be very negative about future prospects, largely negative, largely positive, or very positive?

The two authors of the lead essay have engaged in a public debate on this question over the past two years.  We both agree that a “Global MegaCrisis” is emerging, if not yet entirely here for all areas of the world.  We disagree as to the outlook: Halal believes that new technology will probably make things better; Marien argues that it is possible but not likely, too little too late.  After exchanging several long e-mails, we published our first version of this debate in World Future Review (1:5, Oct-Nov 2009).  A second and more popularized version appeared in The Futurist (45:3, May-June 2011).  A third version appeared in World Affairs: The Journal of International Issues, 2011.

This version refines our dispute and adds some new references. Similar to the other versions, it seeks to engage readers in discussion and debate through the device of four scenarios on a single axis of pessimism and optimism.  By quantifying the rough probabilities of the four scenarios, one can easily see where one stands in relation to others on this scale.  But then one must ask if the arguments for the assigned probabilities are persuasive.  And many arguments can and should be made for each scenario.

The value of this exercise is not only to put the idea of progress on center stage, where it rightly belongs, but to encourage reflection on the two more complex middle scenarios (the largely negative “Muddling Down” and the largely positive “Muddling Up”), rather than the extreme negative position (of widespread disaster, Armageddon, species extinction, all-out nuclear war, or collapse of capitalism in all forms) or the extreme positive position (often implicit, but made explicit by those advocating the technological Singularity and/or widespread change of consciousness).

The Journal of Futures Studies is inviting a number of distinguished futurists and other futures-oriented thinkers, as well as several students, to ponder these scenarios.

The only caveats are that each respondent must:

1) Stay within a limit of between 500 and 1,000 words;
2) Quantify (% wise) the likelihood of each of the four scenarios over
the next decade and provide some argument in support of the position
taken; or provide a short argument why you chose to not quantify, or
your argument against the approach taken in this special issue (or
possible argument for an alternative);
3) Submit your response by September 10th 2011 to give W. Halal and
M. Marien time to formulate a conclusion. Email response to:
Jose Ramos
4) Format your contribution using JFS editorial guidelines:
http://www.jfs.tku.edu.tw/invauthors.html .

Halal and Marien will attempt to briefly respond to most or all of
these comments.  And maybe, as events in our age of turmoil,
uncertainty, and multiple transformations unfold over the next few
years, we might try this exercise again.

Michael Marien edited Future Survey for the World Futures Society for 30 years, preparing some 21,000 abstracts, and is now embarking on establishing the website: GlobalForesightBooks.org,  GFB.org now has some 2500 mini-abstracts of futures-relevant books published since early 2009, and long “Book of the Month” abstracts, most of which underlie his emerging worldview.

William E. Halal is professor emeritus of management, technology, and innovation at George Washington University (GWU), Halal is president of TechCast LLC – a virtual think tank tracking the technology revolution. TechCast was cited by the National Academies as one of the best forecasting systems available, and has been featured in the Washington Post, Newsweek, and other publications. Halal also co-founded the GWU Institute for Knowledge & Innovation.

———————–

You comments and questions are most welcome. For those interested in participating, you can put forward your expression of interest HERE.

Want to know about the greatest theft in modern history? Watch “Inside Job”, a stellar documentary by Charles Ferguson.

This academy award winning documentary is a significant contribution to the debate around developing a post corporate future in the US (and the world by implication).

During Charles Ferguson’s award acceptance he asked that the criminals responsible be finally put in jail. Is this the current situation in the US? Impunity for elite crime, but zero tolerance for everyone else? I’m interested in the grassroots movement for change. Where is the movement against this criminality going to come from?

This story about a zero-waste home intrigued me. There is a social lethargy at the moment in respect to thinking about personal consumption, in particular the social construction of consumption. For example it irks me that people believe that driving a prius somehow makes their travel “green”. People who calculate ecological footprints, using tools like life cycle analysis, reveal a different and more complex story. For example see this talk by Saul Griffith (thanks Josh Floyd for this link):

The issue of personal consumption needs be linked with the social construction of waste through the industrial era, and its re-configuration in a post industrial era – for example via “closed loop” and “cradle to cradle” approaches.

Thus I was delighted to see how this family has incorporated some of this thinking, in the process creating elements of an aethetically futuristic post-industrial home that departs with the industrial “throw it away” system we have now.

I just saw this talk by Dimitry Orlov. Apart from the deadpan Russian humour (very very funny guy), this is a very thoughtful and brave soul. I love it when he says “being a superpower collapse prognosticator is not a very good career choice”.

The striking similarities between the US and USSR are well articulated. Both John Gray and Krishan Kumar pointed this out years ago.

But Orlov’s analysis of what made the USSR resilient is absolutely fascinating. (many people had their own special illegal vegi garden, etc).

But I’m not sure the comparison is truly isomorphic. Yes, the US does not have many of these things, but it has others… craigs list, ebay, and the host of peer to peer emergent platforms that proliferate of late.

This in many ways comes down to what we define as resilience and whether the US has this.

Jose