Futures studies and public decision making in Sweden

Abstract

PurposeThis paper seeks to explore the interrelationships between futures studies and public decision making in Sweden.Design/methodology/approachBased on a series of interviews conducted in Stockholm in December 2003, this paper presents the main players involved in futures studies in Sweden. It focuses especially on the activities of the Institute for Futures Studies, and that of the Lindbeck Commission on the Future of Sweden.FindingsFutures studies are a decisive part of the public decision process in Sweden, where they appeared after the Second World War and gained momentum from the 1970s onwards. The paper gives a detailed account of the interplay between the various actors. There is a strong independence between the public decision‐making system and the producers of futures studies. Nevertheless, futures studies prove an important instrument for public policy in Sweden, as they raise awareness in the public debate, serve as a tool for consultation, and help define scientific and technological priorities.Originality/valueProvides an insight into the state of futures research in Sweden.

“Mainstreaming” foresight program development in the public sector

“…Berze (2014) estimates that around 10 per cent of the national governments have established some sort of foresight function. For example, recent scholarship has addressed public sector foresight in Singapore (Ho, 2012), Japan (Kharrazi and Kakuwa, 2017), Iran (Paya and Shoraka, 2010), Russia (Kuzminov et al, 2017), Hungary (Nemeth et al, 2018), the USA (Fuerth and Faber, 2012), Canada (Schmidt, 2015), the UK (Georghiou, 1996;King and Thomas, 2007), Sweden (Paillard, 2006;Hö jer et al, 2011), Denmark (Andersen andRasmussen, 2014), The Netherlands (van der Duin, 2009;van der Steen and van Twist, 2013) and Colombia (Popper et al, 2010). Cross-country comparative analyses include Habegger's (2010) examination of exemplary foresight programs in Singapore, the UK and The Netherlands, and Kuosa's (2011) comparison of Finland, Singapore and the European Union (EU).…”

Uit zicht : Toekomstverkennen met beleid

“…Toekomstverkenning kan tevens ingezet worden als middel om netwerk-en coalitievorming tussen verschillende belanghebbende partijen te bewerkstelligen (zie bijv. Van Vught 1985;Stuurgroep t&o 2000Stuurgroep t&o , 2001Paillard 2006).…”

Shaping future perspectives in policy advice under deep, long-term uncertainty. The case of the Dutch Delta Committee

“…Hoppe, 1999), referring to the processes of interaction that play a central role in policy making, rather than the 'speaking-truth-to-power perspective', in which policy making is a more linear process. Especially futures studies are used to broaden the mind, to change or challenge the dominant future perceptive of involved actors (see for example Wack, 1985aWack, , 1985bGaler & van der Heijden, 1992;Dammers, 2000;Paillard, 2006;Chermack, Lynham, & van der Merwe, 2006). We follow the Committee's strategic process of formulating futures perspectives and a policy advice, focusing upon (the interrelation between) the governance arrangement, the construction of long-term (un)certainty and the actual responses to long-term uncertainty while formulating futures perspectives and a policy advice.…”