A Review of Strategic Governance Foresight Policies

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسنده

Geography and Rural Planning, University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran. A.hajarian@ltr.ui.ac.ir

چکیده

Purpose: Human activity is necessarily limited to time and the future. This includes all levels of policy and policy-making, regardless of the level or type of governance. In principle, policymakers do not pay enough attention to the long-term consequences of their policy choices or lack the ability to reflect on the various possible future states of the world and how to achieve or avoid them. Government decisions with poor foresight will cause harm to society. On the other hand, it should be noted that strategic foresight has nothing to do with predicting the future. The growing need to deal with the pressures of short-term policy on long-term decisions and issues related to long-term decision-making and wide-ranging intergovernmental justice has necessitated such futuristic research. The aim of this study is to design and institutionalize foresight in governance systems to provide the logic of intervention and the basic hypotheses of the risks associated with it and possible solutions.
Method: This research is practical from the point of view of the goal and is considered as mixed research and it uses the methods of library studies, expert panel.
Findings: Research has shown that while strategic foresight provides a useful tool for navigating unexpected realms, it alone cannot guarantee wise decision-making for policies and other human skills and characteristics.
Conclusion: This study argues that futurism activities face three important, interconnected, and enduring challenges, including paying attention to the value of futurism, ensuring that policy-making processes are properly integrated with futurism activities, and maintaining They are attracting the attention of policymakers and their senior advisers.

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

A Review of Strategic Governance Foresight Policies

نویسنده [English]

  • ahmad hajarian
Geography and Rural Planning, University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran. A.hajarian@ltr.ui.ac.ir
چکیده [English]

In principle, policymakers do not pay enough attention to the long-term consequences of their policy choices or lack the ability to reflect on the various possible future states of the world and how to achieve or avoid them. Government decisions with poor foresight will cause harm to society. On the other hand, it should be noted that strategic foresight has nothing to do with predicting the future. The growing need to deal with the pressures of short-term policy on long-term decisions and issues related to long-term decision-making and wide-ranging intergovernmental justice has necessitated such futuristic research. The aim of this study is to design and institutionalize foresight in governance systems to provide the logic of intervention and the basic hypotheses of the risks associated with it and possible solutions. This study argues that futurism activities face three important, interconnected, and enduring challenges, including paying attention to the value of futurism, ensuring that policy-making processes are properly integrated with futurism activities, and maintaining They are attracting the attention of policymakers and their senior advisers. Horizontal scanning, trend analysis, trend impact analysis, interaction analysis, scenario analysis and Delphi method are among the widely used methods in conducting applied research. Research has shown that while strategic foresight provides a useful tool for navigating unexpected realms, it alone cannot guarantee wise decision-making for policies and other human skills and characteristics.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Institutionalization
  • Strategic Foresight
  • Governance
  • Policy Making
  • Intervention Logic

مراجع

Boston, J. (2017). Governing for the Future: Designing Democratic Institution for a Better Tomorrow, Howard House, wagon Lane, Bingley BD16 1WA, UK.
 
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative research in psychology, 3(2), 77-101.
Conway, M. (2006). Applying an integral framework to government foresight projects. Journal of Futures Studies, 11(1), 57-74.
Day, N. (2013). The Politics Of Posterity: Expertise And Long-Range Decision-Making. Future Directions For Scientific Advice In, 106.
Dryer, I., & Stang, G. (2013). Foresight in governments _ Practices and trends around the world. In Yearbook of European security 2013. Paris: EU Institute for Security Studies.
European Environment Agency. (2013). Late lessons from early warnings: Science, precaution, innovation. Copenhagen: European Environment Agency.
-Eriksson, E. A., and Weber, K. M., (2008). Adaptive Foresight: Navigating the Complex Landscape of Policy Strategies, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 75(4), 462-482.
-Fuerth, L., & Faber, E. (2012). Anticipatory governance: Practical upgrades _ Equipping the executive branch to cope with increasing speed and complexity of major challenges. Elliott School of International Affairs. Washington, DC: The George Washington University.
Goodarzi, G., Azar, A, Azizi, F., & Babaei Meybodi, H.( 2016). Presenting a Proposed Framework for Regional Futurism as an Interdisciplinary Research Field: Case Study, Yazd Plan Development Document, Interdisciplinary Studies Quarterly in Humanities, Volume VIII, (2).
House of Commons Science and Technology Committee. (2014). Government horizon scanning, ninth report of session 2013_14. London, May 4.
Havas, A. (2003). Socio-Economic and Developmental Needs: Focus of Foresight Programmes. Paper presented at the UNIDO workshop on Implementation of the Regional Programme on Technology Foresight for CEE/NIS, Ankara, Turkey .
Jones, B., & Baumgartner, F. (2005). The politics of attention; How governments prioritize problems. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Jacobs, A., & Matthews, J. (2012). Why do citizens discount the future? Public opinion and the timing of policy consequences. British Journal of Political Science, 42(3), 903_935.
Lawrence, P. (2014). Justice for future generations: Climate change and international law. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Olson, R. (2016). Missing the slow train: How gradual change undermines public policy and collective action. Washington, DC: Wilson Centre.
 
Polak, F. L. (1973). The image of the future (1st edition ed.): The Jossey- Bass/ Elsevier international series.
Popper, K. (2002). Conjectures and refutations: The growth of scientific knowledge. London: Routledge.
 
Puglisi, M., and While, A., (2004). Futureswork in Urban and Regional Governance: Rhetoric or Reality? In International Conference on Globalism and Urban Change, 8(2), 10
 
Sardar, Z. (2010). The namesake: Futures, futures studies; futurology; futuristic; foresight  What’s in a name? Futures, 42(3), 177_184.
 
Slaughter, R. A., (2002). From Forecasting and Scenarios to Social Construction: Changing
Methodological Paradigms in Futures Studies, Foresight, 4(3), 26-31.
Taleb, N. (2007). The black swan: The impact of the highly improbable. London: Penguin.
 
Truffer, B., Voss, J. P., and Konrad, K, (2006). Sustainability Foresight As a Means for Participatory Transformation Management. Participatory Approaches in Science and Technology, PATH conference, Edinburgh, Scotland.
Thompson, D. (2005). Democracy in time: Popular sovereignty and temporal representation. Constellations, 12(2), 245_261.

فایل ها

هم رسانی

ارجاع به این مقاله

آمار