Futures Studies Serving the Development of Future Orientation in Hungary

The Innocent Childhood

Hungarian futures studies has a surprisingly long history. Its inception coincides with the foundation of the Club of Rome in September 1968, when Professor Géza Kovács, the head of the Department of National Economic Planning of the Karl Marx University of Economic Sciences, announced a research seminar on futurology.

There was hardly a warm welcome. Futures studies (or futurology and prognostics at that time) stemming from a competitive market environment was a lonely and suspicious stranger in a society governed by socialist ideology. According to the doctrine, future goals, orientation, and development paths could be appropriately handled in the framework of central planning, and there was no need for a “bourgeois” approach. High-level officials even questioned if futurology was science. This attitude and the ideological factor proved to be a longtime obstacle to the acceptance of futures studies.

The period between 1968 and 1990 was characterized by vertical and horizontal development of the discipline. The research and education of various aspects of the future was introduced in the largest universities and centers of academic research:

In the years that followed, the organization of Hungarian futures studies, as well as its credibility and international significance, had frequently been questioned. Nevertheless, in 1976, the Hungarian Academy of Sciences recognized futures studies as an autonomous field of science, and the Committee on Future Research (CFR, under the HAS Section of Economics and Law) was established. This was an important step toward recognition by the Hungarian scientific public. The Committee as the interdisciplinary forum of Hungarian futurists focused on the long-term perspectives of Hungary, investigated global world models, and supervised the scientific quality of national conferences on futures studies. It became a scientific partner of the Hungarian Planning Office (HPO), which was the center of central planning, a power on its own within the country steered by communist ideology. Through the scientific results and the personal contacts among the members of HPO and CFR, the Committee on Future Research opened and widened the view of planners, who recognized that the Hungarian economic future has to be investigated for a long-term period using the results of world models.

Under the protective wings of HPO, the CFR could initiate bi- and multilateral international cooperation both with the East and the West: participation in the Prognostics Workgroup of the Comecon and links to the World Futures Studies Federation (WFSF) proved to be important channels to access the then recent achievements of futures research. International recognition via foreign language publication of the research results could also be secured with the help of WFSF. In this specific way could futures research in Hungary develop. While, in 1972, officials of the ruling Hungarian Socialist Workers’ Party banned Professor Ossip Flechtheim, the father of futurology, from the First Hungarian Conference on Futures Research for his anticommunist views and imposed a total news blackout on the conference organized with 120 participants, Hungary was given the opportunity to organize and host an international conference ² in 1987 and the eleventh WFSF world conference ³ in 1990.

A Newborn Adolescent Grows Up

The political turn and system change of the 1990s was a watershed. All of a sudden, the international and national context created never-before-seen challenges and opportunities for futures studies. On the national level, the challenges included the unstable existential situation, the escalation of uncertainty, the expansion and reinforcement of the role of the individual in the shaping of future, and value system shifts. There was room for futures studies to experiment with innovative research theories and methodologies in practice, and beside the public sector, private demand from the corporate sector also emerged—especially for prediction and forecasting. At the time, the subject of futures studies was vividly discussed in university movie clubs, in the media, and later on the Internet.

The cooperation with WFSF deepened and intensified: between 1999 and 2005, four international summer university programs (the Budapest Futures Courses) and the nineteenth WFSF world conference titled “Futures Generation for Future Generations” were hosted and organized. ⁴ For some time, Hungary was the only country to have held WFSF world conferences on two occasions. In 2001, Hungarian futurists edited and published a book focused on the European ex-socialist countries and covering the history of futures studies, views on futures studies, and the future as seen by leading futurists of the region (Nováky et al. 2001).

Many other international research collaborations followed, of which we would mention two with strong contributions from the Hungarian participants: Strategies toward the Sustainable Household, 1998–2000 (Hungarian lead researcher: Klára Szita Tóthné), and Cost Action 22—Advancing Foresight Methodologies: Exploring New Ways to Explore the Future, 2004–2007 (Hungarian lead researcher: Éva Hideg). In 2013, Hungary officially joined the Millennium Project by establishing the Hungary Node, which also produced the State of Futures Index (SOFI) for the Visegrad 4 (V4) countries (Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, and Slovakia) with cooperation and leader of 4CF (a strategic foresight consultancy in Warsawa) team (Bartha et al. 2015).

In addition to the new openness of domestic political life and the receptive international environment, the Hungarian academic community’s increasing interest in the achievements of futures research as well as successful participation in competitive domestic and international scientific calls have greatly enhanced the vibrancy of futures research in Hungary. The “Milestones of Scientific Development” section discusses the achievements attained in cooperation with students and a younger generation of futures researchers.

Milestones of Scientific Development

The results of futures studies in Hungary are concentrated on four areas:

First, the connection between futures studies and the socialist central planning framework was established, including the sensitive topic of alternative futures (Kovács 1970) and conceptual issues (Fodor et al. 1976). We have stated that futures studies is an “outer circle” of planning. Futures studies, by exploring options, was proved to offer a wide range of alternatives for the planning activity. This way the uncertainty connecting with the future may be reduced, and our decision would be better and more reliable. The overview and systematization of methods used in futures studies (Besenyei et al. 1977) and the discussion of the cross-impact method in the local context (Nováky and Lóránt 1978) helped to further solidify the scientific building stones and showed the potential of practical applications. The process was completed with the examination of the reliability of forecasts (Besenyei et al. 1982). Identifying and linking different growth and development cycles (Hoós 1996; Sipos 1985) were also important to break the barriers imposed upon futures studies in the socialist regime. It should be noted that under Socialism, one was supposed to be thinking and speaking in terms of growth (ups), not recession (downs). Global problems occurring in Hungary as well as long-term responses had been studied (Korán 1980), and this work continues (Simai 1976, 2007a, 2014).

Second, in response to the political and societal transition of the 1990s, Hungarian futures studies started to lay emphasis on weak signals, which meant that the methodologies had to renew. The essence of the renewal lies in the simultaneous interpretation of process dynamics and changeability (including the option of breaking the stable trends and the significant societal effect of smaller changes) with the efforts of societal actors to have an impact on future. Elaboration of a single future alternative (albeit with high probability) was no longer reasonable; instead, a multitude of more or less equally probable futures needed to be targeted. The application of chaos theory (Nováky et al. 1997) and the exploration of evolutionary development paths (Hideg 1998, 2001) took place.

Using chaos theory, the behavior of several major macro indicators were investigated in 1995 and in 2014. We could come to the conclusion that the Hungarian society and economy was not and is not in a state of chaos; still several indicators show chaotic behavior:

The changes in the future can be expected from the service sector of the economy, the number of home units built, the number of participants in secondary education, the number of deaths due to cardiovascular diseases and the number of commercial places of accommodation. Thus the key to the future lies in the secondary education and the health of the population. (Nováky and Orosz 2015, 48)

Third, the definition of future orientation (Nováky et al. 1994) in function of factors defining or enhancing individuals’ positive attitude to the future was accepted internationally. Investigation into future orientation provided a bridge between the so-called consequence-futures emanating from the past and distant future images that can be interpreted in a normative way, opening the way to a series of empirical studies (Hideg and Nováky 1998a, 2010). The evolving role of lay individuals shed light on the importance of participatory futures studies closely related to the phenomenon of action orientation (Nováky 2006).

The renewed methodologies of futures studies do not only serve to understand unstable situations, but they help bring the outline and planning of future closer to the stakeholders and nonexperts, thus enabling the elaboration of future alternatives deemed acceptable by both the wider community and feasible by the scientists in a given space. This approach places more emphasis on creativity and interactivity (Hideg 2009).

Fourth, the examination of the relationship between forecasting and foresight is a recent orientation. The first foresight-type forecasts and later foresights were elaborated in the areas of education and regional development (Hideg 1995; Hideg and Nováky 1998b; Nováky 2003). Research and dissemination of findings concerning strategic foresight (Gáspár 2015) and emerging corporate foresight in the practice of V4 countries ⁵ have also become the characteristic of the newest Hungarian futures field.

Like in other fields, the pattern of detecting diverse trends had been palpable in futures as well (Hideg 2002), and characteristic paradigms such as evolutionary and critical paradigms in futures studies next to positivist futures research followed by the subsequent integral futures paradigms, indicating the potential for heterogeneous approaches and their synthesis, came into existence (Hideg 2013, 2015).

Education of Futures Studies in Hungary

Since its inception, futures studies has been integrated into higher education: many of the beginning futurists worked there. In the 1960s, futures studies were launched in four universities. At the KMUE, futures mapping, long-term futures, and forecasting courses were developed and started. At the BUT, a seminar on the philosophical issues of futures studies was launched. At the Semmelweis Medical School, the education of issues related to the theoretical, methodological, and medical aspects of futures studies was organized and launched (Gidai 1974, 1990). At the University of Pécs, a course on business prognostics commenced. The vigorous launch was mainly instigated by the presence of a significant number of beginning futurists in higher education. Maintaining a close cooperation between education and research, the research and teaching fellows and their laboratories headed the establishment and the subsequent development and propagation of futures education.

The political changes in the 1990s triggered transformation of futures education. Due to the emerging market economy, the interest in futures studies increased. In the countryside, new universities—the University of Miskolc (UM), the University of Western Hungary (UWH), and the Szent István University (SZIU)—launched courses. The curricula of the new courses relied on the practical forecasting activities of futurists. In 1990, KMUE became the Budapest University of Economics (BUE), and there was an increase in the number of futures courses (Futures Studies, Socioeconomic Forecasts, Education and Future, Societal Forecasts, Business Cycles Research, Economic Forecasting) and in the number of students coming from a larger variety of specializations. Education and Futures was made a compulsory subject for education students. For example, in 2005/2006 and 2006/2007, nearly 700 students signed up for Futures Studies because they recognized the course’s openness to the problems of the world, the diversity of solutions, and an opportunity for group work. Students also found it attractive that the majority of seminars were held by PhD students and young assistants, who found common ground with the students in a relatively short time.

A Futures Studies Department was also created, ⁶ and it became a unique education center teaching the discipline in its complexity. The first undergraduate futures textbook was compiled for the inception of the department (Nováky 1992).

The adoption of the Bologna education system required the reorganization of futures education. There was a considerable cut in the number of courses offered, and most courses offered became elective. For instance, at the Corvinus University of Budapest (CUB, a name change again from BUE), elective futures studies courses (Futures Studies, Alternative Futures Images) were offered at BSc and MSc levels, but a practice-oriented Societal and Economic Forecasting course remained obligatory for students majoring in enterprise development since 2008. Despite the setback, in addition to the already mentioned universities, a few other departments also started to offer futures studies.

The futures studies courses in universities required course material. Textbooks, lecture notes, compendia, and other materials aligned with the educational objectives of individual institutions have been developed in the Futures Case Studies and Futures Theories note series (Hideg 1996–2015, 1998–2015), which present and discuss Hungarian futures case studies as well as modern issues in the theory and methodology of futures.

The international cooperation of national futures studies became more dynamic around the turn of the millennium. The Futures Studies Department at the CUB organized the earlier mentioned Budapest Futures Course sponsored by WFSF UNESCO on four occasions in between 1999 and 2005, and it actively participated in the education of the “How can we explore the futures?” subject, ⁷ launched by the Turku School of Economics. The manifest success of the course helped the department become an internationally recognized educational workshop.

It is a great success that futures education has become part of the newly launched PhD education programs at the CUB. In the Doctoral School of Business Informatics, a subprogram of Futures Studies was launched in 2009. ⁸

Consequently, in the first decade of the 2000s, education of futures in Hungary was accomplished with its integration in the PhD and international education. Unfortunately, this process coincided with the great financial crisis in 2008, which hit higher education and resulted in a significant drop in the number of futurist educators in PhD and international programs. Even in institutions with sustained futures education, the rejuvenation of futurist educators stagnated.

In spite of the apparent development, futures studies could not become an autonomous profession, and the supply of futures professionals has not been institutionalized (no BSc or MSc specialization has been created to meet the demand for new experts). We have to see that with the regime change and Hungary’s accession to the European Union (EU), demand for forecasts has increased. However, short-term forecast calculations and forecasts are often made by macro analysts with strong skills in mathematics and quantitative modeling and not by futures researchers. With the growing need for technological changes and innovations, demand for futures studies has also transformed: the demand for foresight studies has increased and its relationship with the related sciences has also strengthened.

It has not yet become clear whether the training of futurist or the foresight specialist would be more important from the aspect of the Hungarian practice. But it is clear that more and more university students should familiarize with the genre of foresight and its methodologies.

It can be seen that the first phase of education was centered on the definition of futures field, its position in the system of sciences, and the query into conceptual–methodological aspects. The subsequent years of emergence and massive expansion witnessed the transfer of focus to the explanation of individual forecasts and foresights, aligned with the specialization of students paying attention to the needs of practice. As the “use and implement principle,” an educational objective in the Bologna process, has been gaining terrain in the futures education, students have become more active, contributing to the increasingly interactive character of the course. At present, the preparation of futures cases in team work has been strengthening in the training of futures courses. This has coincided with the emergence of participatory and interactive methodologies of futures field in the twenty-first century.

Linking Futures Studies to Practice

Out of our research conducted for practical purposes, we would highlight some complex forecasts, visions, and foresights.

Right from the inception, we have been striving to produce forecast by the rigorous implementation of the principles and methodology of scientific futures supporting sectorial and regional planning. The following topics are worth mentioning: the forecast of the development of transportation, the evolution of construction industry until the turn of the millennium, information technology at crossroads, the future of biology, the global food security crisis, the production curves—business prognoses, and the assessment of agrarian ecology. The development of urban and regional planning was largely assisted by studies such as the impact of the scientific-technological revolution on urban planning, the spatial redistribution of population, the transformation of human environment, the factors impacting socioeconomic spatial structure and their evolution, the characteristics and evolution of the framework conditions of long term, big spatial management, and the investigation of correlation between European and national urban axes.

The beginnings of futures research in Hungary were marked by practice-oriented research into the complex future of the country up to 2000 and to 2020.

The first national image of the future, based on forecasting up to 2000, was published at the end of the 1960s (Kovács 1970). It adopted a top-down approach and combined economic growth, employment, education, and research patterns. The need for a considerable increase in the capital intensity of production, the efficiency of tangible assets and capital formation, as well as a significant transformation of the economic structure were pointed to. The research looked further into the future than the long-term plan laid out by the HPO, and, therefore, it was a useful settlement with well-substantiated directions for development and recommendations for policy makers. The national image remains true even if the forecast turned out to have far overestimated the millennial population of Hungary. However, by emphasizing education-research development, it became the herald of information- and knowledge-based society.

During the socialist era, more future images were elaborated, and the last one had even advocated the need for a postindustrial society (Kovács 1979).

Notable studies on societal issues dealt with the future of human beings as bio-psycho-social creatures and the options for resolving national housing conditions. The novelty of the research on evolution of criminality in Hungary up to the turn of the millennium lay in the use of a wide societal and economic context and the application of three groups of methodologies—mathematical–statistical methods, expert methods, and modeling (Diczig and others 1982).

The study of climate change and its variability as well as the forecast of national environmental conditions were novel directions of research in the 1980 to 1990s. The relation between society, economy, and environment had been modeled in interdisciplinary research modules. These studies enabled forecasting the environmental conditions in a given microregion and later in the whole of Hungary (Nováky 1991). It was proved that the future alternative acceptable from the societal, ecological, and economic standpoint can only be accomplished by a fundamental alteration of the economy–environment relation.

A complex top-down and bottom-up approach was used in the shaping of future image in 2000 (Nováky 2001). Not optimum future alternatives, but the acceptable ones were sought. The criterion for acceptability was the availability of space for the community, the formation of diverse individual development paths, and the adoption of these paths. Eight future images were elaborated. Out of them, only one was acceptable without reservation: the one with enhanced regional integration, an economic policy securing the sustainable protection of the country’s interest, and balanced growth within the EU. The vision was radically different than the previous approaches. The study also pointed out that there is no “optimal” future for everyone, and many will have to settle for an attainable and acceptable future.

Between 1990 and 2007, prognoses and foresight case studies pertaining to the development of education and vocational training (Bartus et al. 2007) were also utilized. The education-specific foresight was among the first ones in Europe (Hideg et al. 2013).

Practice-oriented forecasts served primarily as pillars for strategic documents, such as the Hungarian urban network development, various macro concepts, and regional and urban development plans (Ligeti 2010). In the period between 2010 and 2012, an interactive foresight method was developed, involving small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and futurists, to shape the future of businesses in the region of Central Hungary ⁹ (Hideg et al. 2014).

Sustainability was also focused on. The mitigation of environmental exposure can decrease by the green and circular economy, and industrial ecological solutions and the assessment of their life cycle serves the long-term sustainability (Tóthné 2013, 2014).

The last complex future image (Nováky 2010; Nováky and Várnagy 2013) to describe Hungary in 2025 drew on expert forecasts from various fields of science and nonexpert opinions. Three theoretical principles of futures studies were applied: complexity, participativity, and alternativity. At one end of the past–present–future complex system stood expert fears and hopes, and at the other end were nonexpert expectations embodied in fears and hopes. The two constitute the space of action where the future of the country can be shaped. Not all expert hopes can be realized, only those articulated in communities and supported by individual decisions and acts. By the same token, nonexpert fears will solely come true in case communities, not recognizing dangers portrayed. Four alternative futures have been outlined, and nonexpert opinions showed that Hungary had a good chance to level social inequalities and to strengthen social cohesion. Unfortunately, the results of our latest 2015 study (Bernschütz et al. 2016) are less optimistic because the next generation is more concerned with their own future than that of society.

The forecasts, foresights, and visions presented herein show not only methodological diversity but also that the given socioeconomic conditions largely influence the way how the futures of our society and economy can be outlined.

Concluding Remarks

Futures studies in Hungary—since its inception—has been characterized as highly scientific, demonstrated by the role it plays in the national academic life (the activity of the scientific committee and the organization of scientific conferences) and its integration into higher education. In comparison with other European ex-socialist countries, Hungary joined the mainstream of international futures studies at a relatively early stage and became a reliable partner of the WFSF. It is evidenced by the two WFSF World Conferences in Budapest, the Budapest Futures Courses, the monograph on futures research in European ex-socialist countries, and the publications in international journals of futures field.

We learned a lot from leading researchers (Eleonora Barbieri Masini, Jim Dator, Richard Slaughter, Pentti Malaska, and Jerome Glenn) at international conferences and in personal meetings. The Hungarian futures field was nested in a favorable international atmosphere, partnered with futurists of other countries, and organically integrated into the global map of futures field.

Unlike in the surrounding countries, the transition of the political system did not accelerate sufficiently the development of futures in Hungary. Futures remained confined in the world of science and education. In the world of business and media, futures is considered a curiosity. While practice in Hungary slowly and gradually adopts modern ways and methods of discussing the future, there is an increasing requirement for the activity of future-oriented and innovative entrepreneurs, businessmen, managers, and citizens. National futures, while sustaining and developing its international role and recognition, must meet these discernible requirements.

The global financial crisis starting in 2008 exerted a significant effect on futures in Hungary. On one hand, research opportunities became restricted as a consequence of the limitation of research funds (such as the National Scientific and Research Funds). On the other hand, universities had different levels of access to funds, enabling futures to be studied at a small number of universities. Divestment in higher education had a similar effect, resulting in a significant decrease in the number of futurist educators and the merger of the only autonomous university department of futures with another university department.

The fundamental task of the Hungarian futures studies is to maintain the continuity of theoretical–methodological research in futures. Currently, this endeavor implicates the development of integrated and interactive futures and its dissemination in the country. We lay emphasis on foresight (especially corporate foresight) research, and we are also seeking special features of futures field in the digital world. The task of enriching the program of BSc-, MSc-, and PhD-level futures field courses is also of great importance.

Specific futures aspects are being integrated into the curriculum of some disciplines. This is currently happening in the environmental sciences, corporate strategy, marketing, and, to some extent, ethical economics. We share the view that while this is not futures, the presence and discussion of certain issues definitely help recognize the importance of discussing the future and the contribution of futures field to shaping the future.

The Futures Studies subprogram of the Doctoral School of Business Informatics focuses on conceptual and methodological issues of futures as well as the dissemination of the results. The correlation between business informatics and futures can be investigated from the aspect of (1) elaboration of business forecasts/foresights, and (2) particular research topics in futures. In the first case, business informatics signify the application of Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) in forecast/foresight methods, and the alternatives in the management of novel types of databases resulting from the extensive use of Internet, as well as forecast options. In the second case, the investigation pertained to the forecast/foresight research needs as instigated by the new and continually renewed ICT and culture. In this field, one of the research topics is the generation of a quasi-unlimited number of complex futures, the implementation of which in strategy building has not yet been resolved. Another topic is the inclusion of quasi-unlimited number of internal and external business stakeholders, and the third, theoretical question discusses how ICT in business and in other areas will impact our thinking about the future and our rational strategy formulation.

The other main task of the Hungarian futures field is to bring futures studies closer to public organizations and needs of decision makers. The Hungarian futurists shall attempt to raise the awareness for the necessity of farsighted, complex approaches and futures studies methods and tools in the process of decision making.

Last, but not least, it is very important to take part in the joint research project of the V4 countries. Especially important is the cooperation with 4CF, a strategic foresight consultancy and one of the world’s leading futures think tank. We are ready to further enhance the international relations; the two global organizations on futures studies (WFSF and World Future Society [WFS]) and the Millennium Project should specifically be mentioned.

Futures field in Hungary has seen a lot of ups and downs, but a future-oriented generation has grown up in the past decades for whom dealing with the future comes naturally; who keeps thinking about its own future and that of the world, region, country, and so on; and is also ready to act for the progress of humanity.

It is extremely important to secure the future of futures field and maintain its place in the academic sphere. At present, besides the drive to strengthen its educational role, even the conservation of the autonomous status of the discipline within the framework of the HAS remains a challenge. While future-oriented thinking has been laudably spreading in other fields as well as in practical life, we think that the reason for this is that it is theoretically easier to maintain, develop, and implement the long-term perspective of futures, synthesizing–integrating and adopting systemic thinking, in harmony with the other fields of future shaping.

Therefore, the task and responsibility of futurists is the quest for new directions, answers to new challenges, and the involvement of youth, enabling the passing on of the relay. The task formerly assigned by Simai (2007b, 1135) seems more justified today than ever:

Activate and intensify the communication between futures, politics, governments and civic organizations in order to duly assess historical analogies, enhance the quality of models and scenarios, and enable the clarification of concepts and the promotion of decision-making and action.