American Behavioral Scientist

Since futures studies has been a worldwide serious academic and consulting activity for more than 30 years, why have people never heard of it—or at least why do they know so little about it? The author briefly outlines his own teaching and consulting experiences in futures studies since 1967 and then introduces each of the 25 authors whose essays follow in this special issue.

In this article, three premises about the present of the world-system are stated from which four moral and political conclusions about the future of the world-system are drawn.

Relying only on explanations based on impersonal social forces and cultural imperatives that are viewed as inevitably leading to particular human behaviors is incomplete social analysis. Any adequate theory of modern society must include people as active, purposeful, and innovative beings whose future-oriented behavior helps create not only their own future but also the social order itself. Social research directed at the investigation of such human agency contributes to our knowledge of futures thinking and accountability. Although people produce consequences for which they ought to be held accountable, they often do so only more or less competently. Their competence can be improved by teaching them the principles of futures thinking. They can become more responsible actors by learning to search more fully for possible futures, to forecast probable futures more accurately, and to make judgments of preferable futures more objectively.

Even though many futurists have been interested, or even trained, in the social sciences, the relationship between futures studies and the social sciences has been, and still is, ambivalent, especially at the institutional and academic level. In part this is because some social scientists, and in the case of this article, some sociologists, have had doubts about the rigor and use of certain futures studies. The relationship between the fields is analyzed historically as well as by reflection on the author's own experience in teaching and research in both areas. What is changing, and what can change, in the future to the benefit of both areas is briefly discussed.

A review of personal experiences in futures research and education projects provides grounded answers to questions about the theory, method, content, and application of futures in academic and practitioner realms. Case studies including the journal Cultural Futures Research, the annual CONTACT conferences, the Flagstaff Tomorrow research project, the Northern Arizona University (NAU) Solar System Simulation, and the representational device of time lines illustrate the emergence and development of a self-correcting, systematic, and replicable body of knowledge and practice in the study of the future.

Although few practicing historians consider themselves futurists, the study of the future is in effect the history of the future, a continuation of the historian's effort to reconstruct the past by projecting what may come next. Postmodernist theory, however, suggests that just as historians cannot literally reconstruct the past, so futurists cannot literally predict the future. Rather, historians engage the evidence of the past by telling stories about it; futurists, by the same token, engage whatever evidence of the past may bear upon the future by writing scenarios of times to come. The future, like the past, will consist of all people everywhere doing all the things that people do. The article concludes with examples of how the author has sought to apply these perspectives in teaching futures studies courses since 1974 in the Department of History at Binghamton University, State University of New York.

This article explores some of the reasons for the transition of Futures Studies (FS) from an insubstantial “perspective” to an applied discipline. It begins with an outline of the author's own starting points and continues with a brief account of critical futures studies. It reviews how this perspective was implemented in master's courses within three universities and describes aspects of the knowledge base of FS that emerged at the time. Finally, the article traces some of the links between the intellectual foundations of FS and emerging applications in a variety of organizations. It concludes that the kinds of knowledge and capability created will be increasingly useful throughout society in negotiating the turbulence ahead.

Through case studies of futures workshops and courses, the importance of decolonizing the future and creating authentic alternative futures is highlighted. Futures studies, it is argued, is about understanding the human condition, what it has become, and how we can participate in changing it. An ideal futures studies is multileveled, empirical, interpretive, and critical in its research focus. Offered in this article is causal layered analysis, a futures method that takes a multicultural and multidisciplinary approach to the future.

A proper understanding of both the limits and strengths of futures research requires some commitments both in the philosophy of science and in the philosophy of history. For example, those who believe that science explains by subsumption under laws hold that explanation and prediction are symmetrical. Similarly, those who believe that history is law-governed cannot find an appropriate place for contingency in history. On the view argued here, one can always explain where one could not predict. On the other hand, if it is acknowledged that action is structured, then one can say that some outcomes are very likely, ceteris paribus, and others not.

The study of society contains two branches: statics and dynamics. Social stability is the ability of a group to persist over time, even as its members come and go. Stability rests on biology, culture, and agreements (laws, contracts, etc.). Social change is the ability of a group to behave differently, even to creating brand-new elements, within the same social identity. The mechanisms of social change are more complex, involving natural selection, self-organization, and the emergent properties of organic systems. As a result, transformational change is rare, but so is natural, incremental change. The result is “sticky” change that waits too long, then lurches to catch up. Human intention, although the single most powerful force for change, is not as powerful as the many unconscious forces at work in society and the environment. These assumptions are different from those of many futurists.

This article shows how the author teaches futures research at the university level, her theoretical and philosophical orientation when undertaking futures research, and the methods she relies on (both by adopting and further developing them) in the course of her work. The presentation of the author's methodological work is highlighted through 30 years in the department of futures research, which she heads.

In Hungary, the collapse of the authoritarian society has made the author see that the future means not only what will eventually materialize but also the human consciousness and psychic content that people today have of the future, which affects their activities in the present and thus the future itself. At present, the author's main fields of interest include a redefinition of the notion of the future, further developments in methodological investigation, and elaboration of possible futures amid circumstances of instability and teaching futures research. Would-be specialists in futures research should be trained so as to be able to apply a wide variety of different methods to help people and social institutions develop their future-orientations and invent their own futures.

The eternal truth of the future cannot, of course, be the goal of futures studies. Future is full of surprises, uncertainty, trends and trend breaks, irrationality and rationality, and it is changing and escaping from our hands as time goes by. It is also the result of actions made by innumerable more or less powerful actors. In this article, the author describes the general features of futures studies, especially in its impact on societal development and decision making. The aim is also to show that the change in societal development has brought new challenges to the theoretical and methodological aspects of futures studies. Finally, the author discusses the problem of linking scenarios of the future to social and political decision making.

For teaching or consulting in the area of futures studies, the author developed an approach called the theory of evolving systems. This approach is based on the author's personal quest to understand the future in a way that avoids the arbitrary and relative nature of many futures-related activities. The evolving-systems approach is a science-based framework that enables students or clients to use their knowledge in a nested evolutionary context to discern a finite number of high-probability generic alternative futures. Furthermore, this approach enables students or clients to differentiate alternatives futures that can maximize evolvability from those that are dystopian or devolutionary.

This article describes the development and research agenda of a specific variant of futures studies known as FOCAS: future-oriented complex and adaptive studies.

This article examines how teaching in regional planning at the Department of Regional Studies and Environmental Policy of the University of Tampere in Finland provides students with views of development and modes of thinking about planning that bind together futures-oriented strategic thinking and interactive communicative policy processes. First, the ongoing change in policy-making procedures is surveyed with the help of the concepts of government of uncertainty and governance of ambiguity. Second, attention is focused on futures-seeking communicative strategy, which is one form of governance of ambiguity. Third, a course in regional planning is briefly presented as an example of both innovative teaching methods and of the combining of policy processes and futures-seeking strategic planning.

Drawing on the author's experience as a geographer, town planner, and now futurist, an eclectic mix of approaches to and theories of the future, many of which are more implicit than explicit, is developed. Among the most important are aspects of systems, chaos, and complexity theories. Two important concepts—paradox and a learning approach—provide important themes to the future. These ideas are summed up in the philosophy of the master's degree in foresight and futures studies at Leeds Metropolitan University.

For the author, the avocation of futures studies has been a personal journey, which he describes in this article. He then posits a conundrum: the possibility of humanity's role in its own destruction, on one hand, or human transcendence, on the other hand (planet eaters or star makers). The roles of driving forces and theories of social change are emphasized, especially the role of technology innovation in social change. Other “tsunamis of change” are discussed, including economic and environmental change and the status of women. The author's focus on alternative futures methodologies is covered in some detail, in particular, popular societal images of the future. His preference for either a “sane, humane, and ecological” future or a high-tech future is described. The author concludes with a discussion of the changing nature of higher education students and the challenges facing both education and the human species.

When teaching futures studies, there is a tendency to focus on methodologies because they are more in demand. This article argues that futures studies teaching should also cover the conceptual and theoretical questions (including such philosophical issues as the nature of time and its unfolding). Thus, the three elements of teaching futures studies, in order, are concepts, theories, and methods. Some detail is given about the particularities of teaching futures in Europe.

Social sciences inevitably both trigger and enforce social change. However, current sociology has become more analysis oriented than action oriented. Futures studies can improve sociological thinking by its general cross-disciplinary approach, methods that emphasize alternatives and encourage participation in public discussions and decision making. The author discusses the idea of evolutionary transition as progressive differentiation toward increasing complexity that explains social change. This theory is then used to explore images of the future that arise from different interpretations of the present (Western) transition from modernity through late modernity to postmodernity and, similarly, from industrialism through late industrialism to a new epoch. The images consist of items that reflect the simultaneous existence of different and partly contradictory interpretations of reality that reflect socioeconomic and cultural change.

This article outlines some of the ideas, insights, and strategies arising from developing and teaching for two years a multimedia, on-line, World Wide Web futures studies course designed for interactive learning. Praxis links to consulting are also outlined. The content area of futures studies at the master's level and delivery via the Web are in line with a key strategic direction in university development, namely, moving from a classroom-teaching to an “elsewhere-learning” organization. Principles of future learning experiences via consulting and course development for on-line WWW delivery are discussed.

This article reports on futures-oriented teaching and research in the United Kingdom, which derives its inspiration from the field of futures studies. The article focuses on the need for a futures dimension within the school curriculum and appropriate training and support for teachers and student teachers. Attention is drawn to related educational research on young people's hopes and fears for the future, how college students envision their preferred futures, and the sources of hope that educators draw on in troubled times.

Guided cognitive imagery is described as an appropriate technology of choice for intuition-based exploring, learning, and teaching about alternative futures—especially suitable for futures involving cultural transformation. Two methodological approaches with case examples are described: (a) a virtual time travel method for visionary futures exploration and for experiencing the needs offuture generations and (b) a set of depth-intuition methods for need finding, transforming perceived needs into opportunities, choosing between policy options, and transcendental exploration. Although these “visionary futures” methods extend well beyond the conventional paradigm of the behavioral sciences, they are consistent with the cannons of science in that they are trainable and can be replicated. Moreover, they can readily be used to help integrate the methodologies of social action research, futures research, and political activism—a task which urgently needs to be done.

There are always many different futures available, depending on social choices. These choices involve various costs and benefits, so they often have different impacts on different individuals or groups. There will be significant problems in moving from the current development trajectory, which clearly cannot be sustained, toward one that might be sustainable, as the changes will impose differential costs. Futures thinking provides a powerful way of considering our options and improving the chances that we will make rational, considered decisions. In particular, it allows consideration of the needs of those who cannot participate in the normal decision-making process, such as future generations. The use of futures thinking in a range of teaching, research, and consulting activities is described, demonstrating the benefits of the approach.

Since 1988, the author has taught futuristics at the AFL-CIO George Meany Center for Labor Studies. First, the author highlights positive historical matters of which the union co-learners have little or no prior knowledge. Second, he reviews recent successes of major unions to emphasize the long-range planning entailed and to identify such planning as a key component of futuristics. Third, he highlights the democratic dimension in futuristics, emphasizing their responsibility for becoming major players in helping to decide our futures. Fourth, he puts special emphasis on mind-boggling matters, the better to get unionists to reassess their unexamined assumptions and take an open-mind approach. Fifth, he explains the tools in futuristics for gathering data, assessing impacts of developments, evaluating forecasts, and learning from fate. Sixth, he uses readings that are engaging, clear, short, and relevant. Finally, he discusses how a 21st-century cyberunion might employ futuristics, infotech, services, and traditions.

A summary is provided of one futurist's career, noting the significance of various issues in the study of the future. A major theme running through the analysis is that futurists can be effectively understood as high-tech equivalents of the ancient prophets. Like prophets, they are usually motivated by a compelling vision of how the world is changing and how these changes can be best achieved. They frequently suffer from indifference and criticism when presenting results of their work and expressing their personal views. Because the study of the future is a somewhat marginal role, they often try to assimilate into ordinary professions and the power structure. Finally, they occasionally find great satisfaction in seeing their forecasts realized.