Roads Less Travelled: Do different futures tools produce different outcomes?

Transcription

1 Roads Less Travelled: Do different futures tools produce different outcomes? UK Node Millennium Project Futures Analysts Network Seminar Prepared by Andrew Curry and Wendy L. Schultz 22 June 2009

2 Two roads diverged in a yellow wood And sorry I could not travel both And be one traveler, long I stood And looked down one as far as I could To where it bent in the undergrowth Then took the other as just as fair And having perhaps the better claim Because it was grassy and wanted wear Though as for that, the passing there Had worn them really about the same... (Robert Frost) 2

3 The research question Do different scenario building methods generate distinctively different outputs? 3

4 the background

5 What did we do that was different? What are the degrees of difference and depth? Do these methods assist in creating a clear narrative of how the scenarios emerged? How participatory is the process - what is the quality of the engagement? Many methods reviews compare typologies But as far as we know - none apply different scenarios methods to the same underlying data set Rapid pilot research project with small group Scenarios methods we used 2 x 2 double uncertainty Causal Layered Analysis Manoa Scenarios Archetypes Ones we considered morphological analysis/far (ran out of time) la prospective (no time, not enough expertise) 5

6 The base data set Carnegie UK: What is the future of civil society in Britain and Ireland between now and 2025? The shape of civil society to come 6

7 Why use the Carnegie work? The shape of civil society to come We had both worked on it, so were familiar with the issues and had access to the source materials The client was sympathetic The output was published Civil society is a domain which is generally understood - it didn t require technical knowledge on behalf of our research volunteers It is an area in which there is layered complexity of competing meanings 7

8 Some wrinkles in civil society? Carnegie work? The shape of civil society to come Civil society as associational life Civil society as the good life Civil society as as an arena for deliberation 8

9 the scenarios

10 The 2X2 double uncertainty method 10

11 The 2X2 double uncertainty method Designed for strategic insight, focussing on a decision-making goal or challenge Critical uncertainties frame a futures landscape But almost complete dependency on getting the axes right Axes can repeat in the same domain Consistency of tone and purpose across the scenarios: - comparable futures worlds - vs - homogeneity of language and description Solving a puzzle - which creates a strong distancing effect 11

12 Causal Layered Analysis 12

13 Causal Layered Analysis Designed to integrate different futures perspectives (empirical, critical, interpretative): open to different ways of knowing (Inayatullah) Every epistemological layer explored, none privileged Privileged/silenced vs winners/losers Not necessary to get to metaphor layer to build scenarios (but it helps) Succeeded in creating transformative spaces Litany level created humour Metaphor made new connections traders and guardians seven generations the mandarin Resilient to process issues: thoughtful, open, and searching conversation 13

14 Manoa 14

15 Manoa Designed to maximise evidence-driven difference from the present, in order to challenge assumptions Focus on turbulence and the dynamics of acceleration and constraint Surfaces emerging tensions and backlash responses Needs at least three orthogonal changes to drive each scenario Does not directly address topic (incast later) Impact cascades create clear webs of events - aids drafting a network future history Cross-impact step addresses boundary spaces where innovations and threats emerge Energising: creates a playful mood supporting creativity 15

16 Scenario Archetypes 16

17 Scenario Archetypes Designed to capture common families of images of the future in order to enable incasting Pre-fab worldviews and frameworks: just add data approach Requires nuanced understanding of the archetypes Potential for not our story backlash Useful discussions generated when sorting data across the archetypes: identifies ambiguities where drivers fall across or between boundaries Tight focus on the research issue (civil society) Logical pattern identification: matching drivers and weak signals with apposite worldviews ensures internal consistency of scenario 17

18 the conclusion

19 Scenario Cross Scenario Archetypes often keeps one foot grounded in official view ; pushes detail towards symmetry around one level, eg, national, or organisational; generates policy speak by definition, one scenario BAU/PTE, and others radically different worldviews; tight focus on changed character of civil society itself; cross-comparison simple how different are the scenarios Difference from the present and from each other? problematises present to create radically different futures; scale can differ across scenarios: eg, one scenario international, one national, one local / regional - consistent cross-comparison difficult Causal Layered Analysis turbulence transforms fabric of life and social dynamics, including contradictions and tensions within the future society; rich detail across all levels within one scenario; cross-comparison complex Manoa

20 Scenario Cross Scenario Archetypes does not generate big questions re: transformations in deep structures based on different worldviews as scaffolding - ultimate depth depends on array of worldviews / archetypes on offer how deeply do the scenarios examine Depth / question underlying cultural structures? digs into / examines paradigms, worldviews, myths, metaphors - works best if participants embody many cultural perspectives resulting stories can include deep transformations, but as a serendipitous result of chaotic change acting on deep structures Causal Layered Analysis Manoa

21 Scenario Cross Scenario Archetypes live product more a snapshot - narrative arc usually added during write-up chain of events only if process describes how the base worldview emerged to prominence to what extent does the Development method help create a narrative / development arc? describes futures of different worldviews, not necessarily why or how the worldviews changed strong development arcs emerging from impact cascades; gets closest to answering the question of how the futures evolved Causal Layered Analysis Manoa

22 Scenario Cross Scenario Archetypes dry and clever; analytical, distanced, and thoughtful the feel is intellectual, like problem-solving: filling in matrix details feels a bit of a slog a logical sorting process; requires participants be well acquainted with the archetypes; schematic and rather static (but we were really tired) what does the process feel Participation like as a participatory experience / conversation? witty and well referenced, quite complex, intellectual rather than clever playful; creative; energising Causal Layered Analysis Manoa

23 Do different scenario building methods generate distinctively different output?

24 YES.

25 Our thanks to these colleagues for their participation, time, energy, creativity, insights, and critiques: Joe Ballantyne, The Futures Company Andrew Curry, The Futures Company Neil MacDonald, Gondwana Development Associates Wendy Schultz, Infinite Futures Andy Stubbings, The Futures Company Victoria Ward, Sparknow Roads Less Travelled: Different Methods, Different Futures Journal of Futures Studies, May 2009, 12(4): Online at 25

26 Thank you Andrew Curry Wendy L Schultz wendy@infinitefutures.com