Facing the Future: Scanning, Synthesizing and Sense-Making in Horizon Scanning Ahti Salo1, Totti Könnölä2, Cristiano Cagnin3, Vicente Carabias3, and Eeva Vilkkumaa1 1Aalto University School of Science, Espoo (Finland) 2Impetu Solutions, Madrid (Spain) 3JRC-IPTS, Seville (Spain)

Homepage http://sal.aalto.fi/ahti

“By Portfolio Decision Analysis (PDA) we mean a body of theory, methods, and practice which seeks to help decision makers make informed multiple selections from a discrete set of alternatives through mathematical modeling that accounts for relevant constraints, preferences, and uncertainties.”

What is Horizon Scanning? Facing the Future What is Horizon Scanning? Horizon Scanning … … is regarded here as a creative process of collective sense-making by way of collecting and synthesizing observations that hold potential for the formulation of pertinent future developments and the derivation of actionable implications on decision-making Sense-making builds on the actor’s ability to perceive, interpret and construct meaning of the emerging landscape Key Questions in Horizon Scanning Activities How to facilitate the recognition of signals? How to facilitate the elaboration of corresponding policy issues? How to synthesize such signals and issues into meaningful theme clusters? How to facilitate collective sense-making in the analysis of theme clusters? How to clarify the “big picture” of societal change? How to develop well-founded policy recommendations?

Outline Sense-making in Horizon Scanning Case: Facing the Future Scoping the Scanning Exercise Sense-making: Inseparable from Scanning Stakeholders: Crucial for Scanning and Synthesizing Building Ground for Cross-Cutting Policy Coordination Case: Facing the Future Identification of Issues Assessment of Issues Synthesizing Issues Reflecions on the Exercise Discussion Conclusions

Sense-making in Horizon Scanning Facing the Future Sense-making in Horizon Scanning Scoping the Scanning Exercise Involves decisions about what signals are worth scanning  Across a comprehensive spectrum  Focused on specific fields such as energy, health and cognitive enhancement Sense-making: Inseparable from Scanning Drivers of change, emerging issues, trends, weak signals, wild cards/shocks Presence of scattered or no historical evidence Defining units of analysis that facilitate the collection of individual observations and, moreover, the creative combination thereof to permit the creation of new entities and meanings Whatever the methods, sense-making lies at the heart of well-founded support for policy making.

Sense-making in Horizon Scanning Facing the Future Sense-making in Horizon Scanning Stakeholders: Crucial for Scanning and Synthesizing Horizon scanning should engage diverse stakeholders Diversity of  coverage of different fields of expertise,  types of affiliations,  cultural backgrounds,  organizational functions or  personal values Resulting in a richer set of interesting observations to be synthesized through shared development of cross-cutting challenges Building Ground for Cross-Cutting Policy Coordination Participatory workshop activities offer policy makers an inspiring environment Exposing them to concrete issues, synthesized into meaningful clusters that exhibit some logical structure and link to existing decision-making structures Collaborative development of cross-cutting challenges may help reframe the Bigger Picture the exploration of which paves way for policy coordination and the attainment of systemic policy objectives

Case: Facing the Future (Boden et al., 2010)

Case: Facing the Future (Boden et al., 2010) Identification of 381 Issues in 6 areas (i) 73 demography, migration and health issues (ii) 44 economy, trade and financial flows issues (iii) 90 environment, energy, climate change and agriculture issues (iv) 80 research, innovation and (e)-education issues (v) 52 (e)-governance and (e)-social cohesion issues (vi) 42 defence and security issues Generated by analyzing in each area 25 recent forward-looking reports and policy documents,  published by international organisations or the business sector,  covered more than one of six areas being analysed,  exhibited global scope, and  had been developed using a participatory approach Assessment of 381 issues on a seven-point Likert-scale Relevance to EU policy making Novelty in comparison with earlier policy debates Probability of occurrence by 2025

Case: Facing the Future (Boden et al., 2010) Analysis of Issues Expert assessments were synthesized with Robust Portfolio Modelling (RPM). Mean-oriented analysis helped identify issues that were considered relevant, novel and probable by the majority respondents Variance-oriented analysis was conducted in order to recognize issues on which the respondents had different viewpoints Rare event-oriented analysis was carried out to identify those issues that the respondents considered improbable but still novel and relevant The three complementary RPM analyses helped highlight issues which were seen to merit attention from different perspectives and thus paved way for the formulation of cross-cutting challenges.

Expert evaluations Evaluations for Issue 1 Expert Nov. Rel. 1 4 5 2 7 3 6 8 Mean 4.5 4.9 Std dev 2.3 1.2 Expert opinions in tabular form and visualized with a scatter plot. The opinions differ more in novelty than relevance regarding this issue (can be seen in the higher standard deviation in the tabular and greater variation between points in the x- and y-directions in the graph). In other words, the expert agree more in one dimension and disagree in the other.

Evaluations of multiple issues Typically there are multiple issues with different means and standard deviations. The decision problem is to select two of the best issues from this set of issues.

Mean-oriented analysis Mean oriented analysis takes the average opinion as the performance measures for the issues. Every alternative can be described as a point in a two dimensional graph. Issues

Combining issues into portfolios The measures of relevance and novelty of the combination of two issues are taken as the (vector) sum of the constituting issues. These combinations are called portfolios. Issues

Portfolios of issues All portfolios of two issues Issues It is assumed that portfolio selection is restricted to only those portfolios that contain two issues. Issues

Portfolio dominance Every portfolio in the shaded area yields more of both relevance and novelty Similar analysis for all portfolios yields…. Portfolios that are not dominated No –1 & 3 yields more of both relevance and novelty Is 3&4 a good portfolio? The dominance relation can be used to discard portfolios that are inefficient in that there exist a portfolio that has as much in both relevance and novelty, and that has more in either/or relevance and novelty. Issues

Non-dominated portfolios (ND portfolios) The selected portfolio should be non-dominated Non-dominated porfolios Issues Non-dominated portfolios The selected portfolio should be non-dominated because for every dominated portfolio exist a non-dominated portfolio that yields more in at least one criterion without having to reduce the other criterion Dominated portfolios (inferior to some ND portfolios)

Comparing issues If issue 4 is selected the resulting portfolio will be dominated Therefore it is recommended that issue 1 should be selected into the portfolio If issue 1 is not selected the resulting portfolio is dominated Therefore, no definitive recommendation can be given regarding issue 2 Therefore it is recommended that issue 4 should not be selected to the portfolio All issues can be categorized with these three cases If issue 2 is selected, there remain both dominated and non-dominated portfolios, depending on which other issues are in the portfolio Issue 2 is in some ND portfolios Issue 4 is in no ND portfolio Which issues to pursue further? Issue 1 is in all ND portfolios Non-dominated porfolios In all ND portfolios (Core) In some ND portfolios (Borderline) In no ND portfolios (Exterior) Decision recommendations: Core – a certain recommendations to select into the portfolio Exterior – a certain recomendation to exclude from the portfolio Borderline – no recommendation of either excluding or including into the portfolio Issues

Comparing issues with stated preference information Knowing that novelty is more important than relevance changes the dominance region… Dominated portfolios remain dominated but some ND portfolios become dominated The set of ND portfolios changes which also effects the decision recommendations …from this… …to this. Non-dominated porfolios 45° In all ND portfolios (Core) In some ND portfolios (Borderline) In no ND portfolios (Exterior) Information regarding the criterion weights (may) reduce the set of non-dominated portfolios. This makes borderline issues to shift into Core and Exterior issues. The reverse cannot happen, that is Core and Exterior issues will remain Core and Exterior issues, respectively. Issues

Case: Facing the Future Analysis of Issues Mean-oriented analysis Relevance > Novelty > Probability (means) Rare event oriented analysis Inverse probability > Novelty > Relevance (means) Variance-oriented analysis Novelty > Relevance > Probability (variance) 100% issues score best independent of the used criteria preferences 50% issues that score well, but are sensitive to criteria preferences

Case: Facing the Future Synthesizing Issues Experts and policy-makers grouped in a workshop the identified issues into cross-cutting challenges and examined their policy implications for the EU. Save natural resources (water, food) to prevent conflicts over their scarcity and other impacts such as migration Area No. Issue code Key words from the issue description (optional) 1 DI04 Massive migration due to climate change 3 ENV03 Global under-pricing and overconsumption of water ENV68 Global decline of freshwater availability leading to an increase in water scarcity ENV70 Global decline in biodiversity and loss of ecosystems services 6 DS13 Attacks on infrastructure facilities DS15 A major war by 2020 DS81 Pervasive sensors for real-time surveillance widely diffused Table 2 Example of a cross-cutting challenge consisting of issues from all three analyses and from different thematic areas (Demography, Environment, and Defence & Security); font styles of issue codes refer to the results obtained in the different RPM analyses (http://foresight.jrc.ec.europa.eu/survey_issues.pdf, visited 01/04/2011).

Case: Facing the Future Synthesizing Issues Participants generated collectively 22 cross-cutting challenges, which were prioritized by discussing in the light of three solution-oriented criteria related to their importance at the EU level: - Urgency: Is the challenge likely to provoke impacts that require urgent actions at EU level? - Tractability: Can solutions to the challenge be identified and implemented? Does the EU have the institutional capacity to act upon this challenge? Impact: Are the actions to be taken by the EU expected to have a major global positive impact? By the end of the workshop, a workable agreement was reached on the definition of the following three overarching challenges: (i) The need to change ways in which essential natural resources are used. (ii) The need to anticipate and adapt to societal changes. (iii) The need for more effective and transparent governance for the EU and the world.

Case: Facing the Future Synthesizing Issues These challenges were the basis for the three broad recommendations which, according to the workshop participants, had so far not received sufficient attention in policy and decision processes (Boden et al., 2010): (i) The need to change uses of essential natural resources by aligning all policy realms towards sustainability, extending from policy design through implementation to evaluation; (ii) The need to anticipate and adapt to societal challenges by building on social diversity and ICTs to enable citizens' empowerment; (iii) The need for more effective and transparent governance that allows institutions to anticipate future challenges and to turn these into opportunities by embedding FTA in their decision making processes Reflections on the Exercise Collective sense-making process where emerging issues were first identified and then synthesized into challenges to be dealt with at EU level Traceability of cross-cutting challenges and recommendations was supported by the appropriate coding of issues and challenges

Case: Facing the Future Policy recommendations (i) Policy alignment towards sustainability: Reform in the agri-system Reduction in the EU's dependency on resources Increase in levels of education and social awareness Appropriate and effective management of migration flows caused by from climate change, improving the quality of life, and recognition of labour market needs in ageing societies Change in the policy paradigm based on GDP to an updated system which also considers ecological flows and stocksfs

Case: Facing the Future Policy recommendations (ii) Social diversity and ICTs for citizen empowerment: Build new incentives to facilitate and strengthen relationships between different social systems Develop the necessary means to enhance education on the use of ICTs in conjunction with other technologies Improve the quality of education by fostering, for example, competition within and between EU national education systems Regulate the healthcare system, harnessing new technologies to provide equal access for all Develop radically new and far more efficient forms of social protection Enhance regional specialisation through the formation of regional RTDI clusters

Case: Facing the Future Policy recommendations (iii) Anticipating future challenges and turning these into opportunities: Embed forward looking techniques in EU policy making Foster mutual understanding through ongoing/inclusive dialogue both within the EU and worldwide to build shared values, common visions, actions, and smart regulations Enable effective and adaptive international organisations to become a reality Establish partnerships between industry-government-society Clarify the role and status of the EU in global fora and balance its representation in international organisations Foster (e)participation and (e)democracy through the use of web 2.0 and advanced technologies

Case: Facing the Future Reflections on the Exercise Recommendations used in discussions within the European Commission, the report was referenced in the Communication on the Innovation Union…

Discussion Horizon Scanning … Facing the Future Discussion A distinctive and defining feature of horizon scanning is that there are no strong a priori constraints on what signals could count as relevant Horizon Scanning … Is inherently a bottom-up process where results from individual sense-making activities are followed by collective processes where the scanners take stock of and learn from each others’ signals Activities contribute to the design of systemic policies which – far from being monolithic and inflexible – contribute to the attainment of systemic policy objectives by supporting the timely recognition of the interconnectedness of actions

Facing the Future Conclusions Horizon scanning need not be limited to the collection of future-oriented observations; rather, the scope of these activities can be extended to include creative and collective sense-making processes for synthesizing observations into cross-cutting challenges and also for exploring the policy implications of these challenges in collaborative workshops. This methodological approach – which had well-defined phases for the systematic ‘bottom-up’ scanning of issues and for the prioritization and clustering thereof – is viable even in other contexts where there is a need to build shared understandings about the prospects of cross-cutting coordination in support of systemic policy objectives.

Action portfolio analysis 7 Shocks Finland Action portfolio analysis Decision & Action 13.4.2017

Process Dates Task Result Jun Selecting the 7 most interesting shocks from 14 candidates 7 shock environments (scenarios). For additional depth, 3 opposite environments were also described. Early Oct Web-questionnaire create ideas for actions that would help to build success in each environment Late Web-questionnaire to assess utility of the 25 actions in each of the 7 environments Decision & Action 13.4.2017

7 Environments, 3 opposite environments Most interresting Internet crashes EMU dissolves (Opposite environment: European federalism gains strength) Storms of the century Nokia leaves Finland China is in trouble Forest industry leaves Finland (Opposite environment: Booming modern biorefineries) Price of energy drops 90% (Opposite environment: Price of energy goes up 300%) Decision & Action 13.4.2017

Process Dates Task Result Jun Selecting the 7 most interesting shocks from 14 candidates 7 shock environments (scenarios) Early Oct Web interview to create ideas for actions that would help to build success in each environment Visited 128 times, median time spent on site 18 minutes 245 ideas, from which the 25 final actions were chosen Late Web-questionnaire to assess utility of the 25 actions in each of the 7 environments Decision & Action 13.4.2017

Actions for each environment Decision & Action 13.4.2017

25 Actions 1. Invest in maintaining trust in the society 2. Security and resilience requirements for information networks 3. Take care of small networked production 4. Prepare to increase self-sufficiency in food production 5. Increase respect for every type of work 6. Promote innovation for a rainy-day 7. Tax incentives for energy self-sufficient housing 8. Tax incentives for urban local food 9. Create an ICT-ecosystem 10. Develop services that require little energy 11. Invest in sustainable well-being know-how 12. Finland a global IT-service center for public authorities 13. Invest in new rapidly exploitable knowledge combinations Decision & Action 13.4.2017

25 Actions 14. Let the forest industry disappear 15. Build more nuclear power to hedge against price shocks 16. Commercialize forest into an investment product 17. Manage a single global service 18. Train workforce as the reserve for global companies 19. Switch to exchange economy with no currency 20. Establish a Nordic monetary union 21. Make Finland the center for Asian and Russian connections 22. Specialize in fast piloting 23. Exploit Finland's neutral and apolitical reputation 24. Create Finnish Mittelstand to replace Nokia 25. Invest in trade outside the EU Decision & Action 13.4.2017

25 Actions 1. Invest in maintaining trust in the society. Even internet failure does not cause as much problems in Finland as it does elsewhere. We can mutually agree that suppliers dispatch goods to stores, trusting that they will eventually be paid. Likewise, stores will advance store credit to consumers. 2. Security and resilience requirements for information networks. Let's build systems that consist of several smaller systems - local networks and separated cloud services which are connected by an integrating layer in order to keep the whole system from crashing in case one part of it goes down. All routing is implemented in such a way that these networks can be connected to alternate cloud services if some part collapses, 3. Take care of small networked production. The bigger the systems, the more far-reaching the consequences of failures. Cell-like production of goods and services is also dependent on global networks, but its resilience is better. The first player to restore services gets an advantage over slower competitors. 4. Prepare to increase self-sufficiency in food production. As the crisis lengthens, local food production would become increasingly vital. Seasonal radio shows, that give tips for fishing and gathering berries and mushrooms. Small, currently worthless fish should be caught and turned into fish-fingers. 5. Increase respect for every type of work. Start a major PR campaign to promote the idea that any form of self-employment is beneficial, and unemployment is damaging. Decision & Action 13.4.2017

25 Actions 6. Promote innovation for a rainy days. National "Google time", in which every (employed) citizen can use maybe a fifth of their time to work on resilience-improving ideas for extreme environments. 7. Tax incentives for energy self-sufficient housing. Direct support or tax deductions for micro production equipment. For example, miniature wind generators on all yards and balconies. 8. Tax incentives for urban local food. Local food production should be encouraged with taxation. For example, using your balcony as a greenhouse should be tax deductible according to its production. 9. Create an ICT-ecosystem. In an ecosystem individual knowledge workers can network globally and sell their expertise to anywhere in the world. 10. Develop services that require little energy. Investment in companies offering expert services. These are not as dependent on energy prices, and are able to continue their business more or less as usual, even when faced with higher energy prices. Decision & Action 13.4.2017

25 Actions 11. Invest in sustainable well-being know-how. The whole world badly needs a new vision and societal model based on sustainable well-being. Finland could be the forerunner of this trend, based on our strong social model. 12. Finland a global IT-service center for public authorities. Finland has the world's most efficient tax collection system, medical administrative systems and other public sector IT systems. These could be sold as cloud services to the whole world, producing cashflow without having to shift large amounts of physical matter. 13. Invest in new rapidly exploitable knowledge combinations. Let's combine old and new, but already existing, knowledge, and cut back on developing longer-term development with higher expertise requirements. 14. Let the forest industry disappear. We should allow forest industry to wither away in Finland, and develop service-based and other timber-sector jobs. These are less cyclical. 15. Build more nuclear power to hedge against price shocks. Building additional nuclear capacity offers protection from price shocks. Price of uranium fuel is a small fraction of the cost of electricity generation. Decision & Action 13.4.2017

25 Actions 16. Commercialize forest into an investment product. Land area does not grow, forest area is declining, and forest are good carbon sinks. Based on this, Finnish forests are productized as an investment opportunity and sold by the hectare to international investors. 17. Manage a single global service. Finland could control any market or a globally used service that is not currency-dependent, but in which other countries would be connected to our systems. For example tax collection. 18. Train workforce as the reserve for global companies. We should make sure that our global companies have the necessary employee resources when market growth picks up. If they are the only operating companies, their demand goes up and they need more people. Let's train reserves in advance. 19. Switch to exchange economy with no currency. Golden era for small producers. Back to barter economy. 20. Establish a Nordic monetary union. Nordic countries start collaborating on the same export markets, in order to compete with other countries more effectively. The possibilities for a Nordic free trade area and currency union are investigated. Decision & Action 13.4.2017

25 Actions 21. Make Finland the center for Asian and Russian connections. Creating a new kind of hotspot for growing start-ups together with Russian entrepreneurs could turn Finland into an European innovation hub. 22. Specialize in fast piloting. We'll specialize in piloting. When market conditions change, new pilot projects take off. They are started with those companies and countries that are most advanced in their development work at that point. 23. Exploit Finland's neutral and apolitical reputation. Finland's image as an apolitical and neutral country needs to be utilized. For Chinese (as well as others) it is safe to trade with Finns, to work for a Finnish company, or to buy Finnish products. 24. Create Finnish Mittelstand to replace Nokia. Building a sufficient network of globally operating slightly smaller companies that get a boost to their activities if Nokia leaves Finland. 25. Invest in trade outside the EU. Government encourages strongly companies to diversify their exports to countries outside the EU, such as Russia, Asia and Africa. Decision & Action 13.4.2017

Process Dates Task Result Jun Selecting the 7 most interesting shocks from 14 candidates 7 shock environments (scenarios) Early Oct Web-questionnaire create ideas for actions that would help to build success in each environment Visited 128 times, median time spent on site 19 minutes 245 ideas, from which the 25 final actions were chosen Late Web-questionnaire to assess utility of the 25 actions in each of the 7 environments Visited 59 times, median time 18 minutes Identification of action combinations (=portfolios) that maximize utility Decision & Action 13.4.2017

Action evaluations / scenario (average, indicates interest) Decision & Action 13.4.2017

Forest industry leaves Finland Internet crashes Forest industry leaves Finland Price of Energy drops 90% EMU collapse Nokia leaves Finland China is in trouble Storms of the century 1. Invest in maintaining trust in the society 87 63 80 71 67 68 2. Security and resilience requirements for information networks 86 48 46 56 76 3. Take care of small networked production 72 49 70 4. Prepare to increase self-sufficiency in food production 65 37 57 32 74 5. Increase respect for every type of work 59 62 58 53 6. Promote innovation for a rainy-day 64 81 77 84 69 7. Tax incentives for energy self-sufficient housing 55 43 35 50 30 8. Tax incentives for urban local food 38 29 47 21 60 9. Create an ICT-ecosystem 52 79 45 10. Develop services that require little energy 61 41 11. Invest in sustainable well-being know-how 73 75 83 78 12. Finland a global IT-service center for public authorities 51 42 13. Invest in new rapidly exploitable knowledge combinations 54 85 14. Let the forest industry disappear 31 25 15. Build more nuclear power to hedge against price shocks 28 34 44 39 16. Commercialize forest into an investment product 33 66 17. Manage a single global service 18. Train workforce as the reserve for global companies 19. Switch to exchange economy with no currency 20 36 16 22 20. Establish a Nordic monetary union 23 26 21. Make Finland the center for Asian and Russian connections 22. Specialize in fast piloting 82 23. Exploit Finland's neutral and apolitical reputation 24. Create Finnish Mittelstand to replace Nokia 25. Invest in trade outside the EU Utilities

Process Dates Task Result Jun Selecting the 7 most interesting shocks from 14 candidates 7 shock environments (scenarios) Early Oct Web-questionnaire create ideas for actions that would help to build success in each environment Visited 128 times, median time spent on site 19 minutes 245 ideas, from which the 25 final actions were chosen Late Web-questionnaire to assess utility of the 25 actions in each of the 7 environments Visited 59 times, median time 18 minutes Identification of action combinations (=portfolios) that maximize utility Decision & Action 13.4.2017

Efficient portfolios of 8 actions

All efficient portfolios Action #11 is in all eff. portfolios that include more than 8 actions Action #15 is not in any efficient portfolio that includes less than 20 actions Decision & Action 13.4.2017

Conclusions There are many ways to facilitate the shaping of policy agendas Yet it is important to have a clear process structure Not all details can be modelled (time, effort, data, validity…)  Informal discussions remain crucial It is assumed that portfolio selection is restricted to only those portfolios that contain two issues.