Schooling for Tomorrow

1
Epistemological Foundations and Organisational
Principles for a Futures Toolkit A Futures
Literacy Perspective
Riel Miller
FUTURREGTurku, June 7, 2006
2
The End of Certainty
Mankind is at a turning point, the beginning of a
new rationality in which science is no longer
identified with certitude and probability with
ignorance. science is no longer limited to
idealized and simplified situations but reflects
the complexity of the real world, a science that
views us and our creativity as part of a
fundamental trend present at all levels of
nature.Ilya Prigogine, The End of Certainty
Time, Chaos and the New Laws of Nature

• we are now able to include probabilities in the
  formulation of the basic laws of physics. Once
  this is done, Newtonian determinism fails the
  future is no longer determined by the present.

3
A non-modal approach to thinking about the
future

• Branching assumes that history can be envisaged
  as a tree with many branches, the bifurcation of
  which represents points where different events
  present agents with choices... (Booth et. al. p.
  6)

4
Branching
Subject (model)
Time
5
A modal approach to thinking about the future

• The possible worlds thesis explores the
  possibilities that a number of different worlds
  exist, each different from our own - in so much
  as in these different worlds, different states of
  affairs have obtained. (Booth et. al. p. 7)

6
Possible Worlds(constrained by the same
necessity basic assumptions)
Subject (model)
Time
7
What is futures literacy?
8
Definition

• Futures literacy is the capacity to question the
  assumptions used to make decisions today and to
  systematically explore the possibilities of the
  world around us through a mastery of rigorous
  imagining techniques.

9
Futures Literacy

• Level 1 futures literacy
• Temporal awareness, values, expectations
• Level 2 futures literacy
• Rigorous imagining
• Level 3 futures literacy
• Strategic scenarios

10
Thinking about the future How to select which
stories to tell

Conceivable

Futures
?



?
?



?


11
Level 1 Futures Literacy

• Temporal awareness, values, expectations

12
Step 1 - Value trend scenarios

• Method Experiential - expectational
• Strengths Rich detail, normative-trend
  scenarios, accessible narratives, builds temporal
  awareness
• Weaknesses Incommensurate variables, incoherent
  models, usually ineffective for policy
• Outcome Leadership dialogue
• Products Report explicit values expectations,
  familiar stories

13
Baby Bear, Mamma Bear, Papa Bear Scenarios
Population
Time
14
The Good, The Bad The Ugly
Adopt Kyoto Agreement(good)
No agreements(bad)
Muddle through(ugly)
Human impact on climate change reduced
Moderate human induced disruption of climate
Massive climate disruption
Build composite scenarios combining trends
preferences
15
(No Transcript)
16
Level 2 Futures Literacy

• Rigorous imagining a model sets parameters for
  the frame
• Telling good stories narrative rules
  assumptions for the frame
• Form/function scenarios within the Frame

17
Step 2 - Rigorous imagining

• Method Construct possibility space, descriptive
  model of the subject
• Strengths Expands range of possible futures,
  tailored to task, analytical
• Weaknesses Non-obvious outcomes, no probability
  assessment, reduced number of variables
• Outcome Imagining futures that operate under
  different assumptions in an analytically clear
  fashion
• Products Builds up metrics (parameters) for a
  frame for mapping policy relevant scenarios that
  can be connected to probabilities preferences

18
What is a possibility map?

• Select
• Specific topic
• Theory (social science) underlying attributes
• Variables (metrics) underlying attributes
• An example
• Specific topic electricity
• Dimension of change pervasiveness
• Possibility space of pervasiveness
• a) ease-of-use
• b) range-of-uses

19
Technology possibility space
Simple
Ease of use
Electricity
Difficult
Limited homogeneous
Unlimited heterogeneous
Range of uses
How to select scenarios?
20
Step 3. Telling good stories five narrative
criteria for framing scenarios

• Purpose/genre
• Point-of-view
• Temporal-chronological frame
• Protagonists
• Causal rules the physics of the situation

21
1. What is the type or purpose of the story?

• Not tragedy or comedy, thriller or romance but
  basic types
• contingency planning/simulation training
• optimisation testing
• discovery - exploration -imagining

22
2. What is the point-of-view?

• Not first or third person, stream-of-consciousnes
  s or dialogue but is the story told in terms of
• the choices people make in their everyday lives
  (micro) or
• aggregate outcomes (macro) or
• both explicit relationship between micro macro

23
3. What is the temporal or chronological frame?

• Not beginning, middle and end but
• comparative static (two or more cross-sections)
  or
• dynamic/path (time-series) or
• backcasting (reverse engineered)

24
4. Who are the main protagonists?

• Not hero and villain but who makes the
  decisions
• a specific institution (sub-unit) or
• a social/economic system (nation, sector, etc.)
  or
• institutions nested within a dynamic
  socio/economic context - interaction

25
5. What rules apply to the action?

• Not is time travel allowed or Matrix like
  suspension of the rules of physics but what
  arethe assumptions that provide the analytical
  definitions and causal relationships that make
  for robust social science.

26
Example the narrative assumptions for my
Learning Intensive Society narrative

• Purpose Goal discovery what is the potential
  of the present?
• Point-of-view Change in daily life (metric
  agriculture to industry)
• Temporal frame Comparative static cross-section
  in 2030
• Protagonist socio-economic system (wealthy
  countries)
• Rules universal declaration of human rights,
  representative democracy, mixed economies
  (markets not planning)

27
Framing the scenarios
28
(No Transcript)
29
(No Transcript)
30
Stories within the frame
31
Step 4 - Form and Function Scenarios

• Method Uses hypotheses regarding role
  organisation to select scenarios within the
  frame
• Strengths Clear selection criteria based on
  possibility space descriptive model as a way to
  specify systemic outcomes under different
  assumptions
• Weaknesses Perceived as disconnected from
  probability desirability (but consistent with
  end of certainty)
• Outcome Decision compatible scenarios
• Products Scenarios that clarify current
  assumptions highlights strategic choices (that
  then need to be considered in light of
  expectations preferences)

32
Six Electrification Scenarios
Organisation
Centralised
Decentralised
Functions
Only as a Weapon
Scenario 1
Scenario 2
Industrial Power
Scenario 3
Scenario 4
Consumer Power
Scenario 5
Scenario 6
Map on to possibility space
33
(No Transcript)
34
Level 3 Futures Literacy

• Strategic scenarios
• Having distinguished possible, probable and
  desirable
• Reintroduce values and probability
• Focus on the assumptions and how choices might
  make a difference (defensive, neutral,
  transformative)

35
Possible, probable, desirable

Conceivable

Futures








36
Step 5 - Strategic Scenarios

• Method Use possibility space descriptive model
  (Step 2) within a frame (Step 3) to map
  form/function scenarios (Step 4) using, in part,
  values expectations revealed in (Step 1) to
  select strategic (systemic assumption altering
  or not) policy choices (Step 5)
• Strengths High degree of imagination policy
  compatibility of scenarios
• Weaknesses Not predictive
• Outcome Focuses decision making on changes today
  that might lead to a different future, capacity
  building for using/coping with spontaneity
• Product stories of alternative presents

37
Hybrid Strategic Scenario Method

• Level 1 FL
• Values
• Expectations
• Preliminary dimensions of the subject
• Level 2 FL
• Define subject using a descriptive model
  (variables)
• Construct possibility spaces using variables
• Frame the narrative
• Develop function and form scenarios
• Map the scenarios in the possibility space
• Level 3 FL
• Assess scenarios in terms of values
• Analyse scenario assumptions and pre-conditions
  compared with today (the potential of the
  present)
• Compare current choices with the choices implied
  by the scenarios
• Make decisions now with a greater awareness of
  the possibilities of the world around you

38
A Perilous Transition?
Image Sempe crowd on a tight rope going from A
to B

• Certainly, if we do it this way
• Futures Literacy as an alternative

39
Motivating questions How can we

• reconcile greater freedom with collective
  choices?
• embrace greater diversity without inviting
  fragmentation chaos?
• foster greater creativity without increasing
  burn-out stress?
• inspire responsibility?
• motivate change without resorting to fear?
• manage risk without hierarchy?
• combine respect for complexity while still
  gaining depth of understanding?

40
Why futures literacy matters

• Hope matters for motivation what makes change
  worth the candle
• Capacity to understand and manage risk making
  freedom and heterogeneity liveable
• Grasping the potential of a non-ergodic
  conjuncture change in the conditions of change

41
A time for method and methods for our time

• Why futures literacy now? Because a futures
  literate society can use
• diversification, imagination and inter-dependency
  
• to
• embrace spontaneity, experimentation complexity
  
• without being overwhelmed by
• fear of the risks (perception)
• failure (reality of risk)
• in order to inspire aspirations consistent with a
  world where means are ends (values in practice)

42
Build a bridge to nowhere, instead of
planninguse complexity, heterogeneity, network
density and the capacity for spontaneity
43
Virtually every step in the history of human
innovation and invention has come about in the
wake of someone asking about imaginary
possibilities, speculating about what would
happen if and reflecting on yet-unrealised and
perhaps unrealisable possibilities." Nicholas
Rescher, Imagining Irreality
Thank youRiel Miller