The Impact of Foresight on policy-making - Drawing the landscape Philine Warnke, Olivier DaCosta, Fabiana Scapolo Institute for Prospective Technological Studies (IPTS)
Outline Review of the issue Insights from previous workshop The background statements Synthesis of online discussion
Why revisiting impact on policy-making? Interviews and literature review revealed a need to reconsider this topic due to: Increasing emphasis on Foresight process Debate on new policy support tools Long-standing experience in Foresight allows for review of lessons learned More attempts on impact assessment
Point of departure WS I Contributions of Foresight to policy-making 1. Policy informing 2. Policy facilitating 3. Policy process improving Guiding question: How to deal with tensions between these functions in order to improve policy impact?
Foresight Functions Policy Policy Informing Forward looking intelligence actor Distributed Intelligence Links, Interfaces Joint Learning Platform Joint Vision actor actor Policy Facilitating
1 Policy informing Provide forward-looking intelligence Provide guiding visions Improve knowledge base of policy conceptualisation and design
2 Policy Facilitating distributed strategic intelligence links, interfaces, knowledge flows platforms for joint learning common ground and shared visions future oriented attitudes enabling change soft coordination
3 Policy process improving Increase transparency and legitimacy Foster long-term orientation Introduce reflexivity Improved mode of governance in multi layered and multi actor arenas
Outcomes of previous workshop Foresight should and can attempt to achieve all three functions Tensions are relevant but can be dealt with by diligent design To actively support policy decisions (if this is the aim!) we need to move one step further integrate a normative element move to user/client-oriented forward-looking strategies (Matthias)
Foresight in the policy process (Maurits) Initiation Vision development Policy development Implementation Feedback
Adaptive Foresight Tailored approaches with distinctive phases with different levels of: Stakeholder participation Policy involvement Methods
Diversity and level of Participation Food for thought: Adaptive Foresight Large societal debate Phase IV: Making choices Citizen participation Stakeholder expert groups Phase II: Exploration Phase V: Implementation and coordination A few decisionmakers Phase I: Diagnosis Phase III: Strategic orientation From vision to action Diagnosis Vision How to get there + recommendations Measures, actions
Starting point for this workshop: online discussion 1 3
Core Issue Theme 1 Informing vs. normative function of foresight How should the normative dimension be integrated? Aspects Normative does not necessarily mean tying Foresight to nowadays policy objectives. Foresight can have the function to question existing objectives therefore whether exploratory or normative aspect is dominant is depending on Foresight type (problem oriented vs. S&T oriented) Objective of exercise (e.g. for participatory priority setting not so relevant)
Core issue 1 Theme 2 - Stakeholder participation Should there be participation of lay persons? How? Aspects Different rationales for lay person inclusion: knowledge is often highly relevant (e.g. as users) ordinary citizen need to participate in a decision that has an impact on them (e.g. consensus conference) Danger of parallel democracy What about the costs?
Theme 2 - Stakeholder participation Core issue 2 (related to theme 4) Do we need windows of seclusion where Foresight works exclusively with policy makers? Dependent on political culture protected spaces to target hidden agendas Why not wide participation in all phases? deliberative democracy?
Core Issue Theme 3 Political involvement/engagement To what degree should policy makers themselves be involved? Involvement necessary but difficult Involvement increases use of results
Theme 4 Implementation How can Foresight contribute to policy strategy building? Should their be distinctive elements dedicated to strategy building? How far should Foresight move into planning? What happens to the creativity? Foresight practitioners unwilling to enter into strategy building? How to support the actual choice policy makers have to make in the end? Should Foresight be complemented by other instruments (transition management, participatory/ constructive TA, impact assessment)? How?
Tensions between both functions Trade off between broadness of participation and analytical depth (intensiveness vs. extensiveness) Policy support needs to target hidden agendas which policy makers do not always like to disclose publicly Policy makers need to link anticipatory intelligence to normative objectives Strategic intelligence calls for sound knowledge of policy process which the stakeholders do not necessarily have
Approaches to address tension between policy informing and facilitating Separation Translation
Separation Two types of exercise Professional-analytic Foresight Policy R&D community Industry Societal Foresight Civil Society
Translation Outcome of participatory Foresight is translated to policy-makers makers Policy Interface Anticipatory intelligence Recommendations Distributed Intelligence Joint Vision links