Steering the future. The emergence of “Western” futures research and its production of expertise, 1950s to early 1970s

Seefried, Elke

doi:10.1007/s40309-013-0029-y

Cited by 18 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This epistemology was akin to positivism, at that time the current dominant epistemology in the sciences. However, since the 1970s, futures studies has moved away from prediction and control of the future, and started to embrace a pluralist viewpoint taking into account multiple potential futures, worldviews, and dissent, more akin to the broader, concurrent movement of the social sciences into post‐positivism (Andersson, 2018; Gidley, 2016; Seefried, 2014; Voros, 2007). Futures studies morphed into a social movement aimed at emancipating the futures of humanity from planners, meant to bring the future back to the people, and to internationalize and decolonize it from prediction, which was considered belligerent and imperialist (Andersson, 2012, 2018).…”

Section: The Resistance To Scientific Theory In Futures and Foresightmentioning

confidence: 99%

The resistance to scientific theory in futures and foresight, and what to do about it

Fergnani

Chermack²

2020

Futures & Foresight Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We offer an argumentative explanation of the reasons why the field of futures and foresight has not been successful at becoming part of the social scientific establishment. We contend that the very set of norms, beliefs, and epistemological foundations of futures and foresight are essentially self‐sabotaging as they resist the creation of scientific theory on futures and foresight practices and processes in organizations. Drawing from the tradition of management and organization sciences, we describe what scientific theory in the context of organizations is and is not, and how theory development contributes to the incremental progress of scientific fields. We then unpack the crux of the problem, deconstructing the resistance to scientific theory within our field into nine, closely related reasons. We offer solutions to the problem in the form of three sets of recommendations: for authors, journal editors, and practitioners. We conclude by responding to likely misunderstandings in advance.

show abstract

Section: The Resistance To Scientific Theory In Futures and Foresightmentioning

confidence: 99%

The resistance to scientific theory in futures and foresight, and what to do about it

Fergnani

Chermack²

2020

Futures & Foresight Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The proximity to the future studies field is evident: If all systems behave according to a set of specific rules and information transmission patterns, this would allow the simulation and modelling, and ultimately also the predicting and forecasting, of natural and social actors' behaviour and even of complex systemic processes. Unsurprisingly, these convictions fed into an outright and arguably quite paternalistic euphoria for steering, planning and social engineering that culminated in the 1950s and 1960s (Seefried 2013(Seefried , 2015Van Laak 2008).…”

Section: The Golden Age Of Future Studies: Big Science and The Dark Side Of Modernitymentioning

confidence: 99%

The Politics and Science of Prevision

Wenger¹,

Jasper²,

Cavelty³

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This book inquires into the use of prediction at the intersection of politics and academia, and reflects upon the implications of future-oriented policy-making across different fields.The volume focuses on the key intricacies and fallacies of prevision in a time of complexity, uncertainty, and unpredictability. The first part of the book discusses different academic perspectives and contributions to future-oriented policy-making. The second part discusses the role of future knowledge in decision-making across different empirical issues such as climate, health, finance, bio-and nuclear weapons, civil war, and crime. It analyses how prediction is integrated into public policy and governance, and how in return governance structures influence the making of knowledge about the future. Contributors integrate two analytical dimensions in their chapters: the epistemology of prevision and the political and ethical implications of prevision. In this way, the volume contributes to a better understanding of the complex interaction and feedback loops between the processes of creating knowledge about the future and the application of this future knowledge in public policy and governance. This book will be of much interest to students of security studies, political science, sociology, technology studies, and International Relations.

show abstract

“…Linking futures studies and peace studies, the critical approach was specifically epitomized by the West European organisation Mankind 2000. The group initiated by Robert Jungk and supported by the Norwegian Johan Galtung focused particularly on coming peace, understanding peace as a wished‐for future to avert the threat of nuclear war, thus negotiating the dominating Cold‐War driven mental map (Jungk and Galtung, ; Seefried, , and , pp. 179–198).…”

Section: Out Of Cold War Science: Emergence Of the Futures Field In Tmentioning

confidence: 99%

Globalized Science. The 1970s Futures Field

Seefried

2017

Centaurus

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. In the 1970s, the futures field became globalized. This paper shows how perceptions of globality shaped interdisciplinary approaches towards forecasting, planning and thinking about the future. Futures studies were reconceptualized, shifting its perspective from a West-East, technology-driven slant towards a global and human-centred one around 1970. The perceptions and conceptions of globality came out of notions of global interdependence, which emerged from three root sources. The first was the epistemic context of cybernetics and systems analysis, which had shaped the 1950s and 1960s futures studies and had led researchers to aspirations of being able to model the world system. The second, affecting significant sections of the field, was the web of new ecological ideas and their focus on interrelations within the global ecosystem. Third, futures studies took up dependency theories, responding to the rising voice of the global South and new ideas of a New International Economic Order. The futures field was not only influenced by 1970s events, it itself contributed to cultural and social change by enhancing the crisis perceptions and environmentalism of the early years of the decade and by stimulating notions of 'One World' solidarity. Through their insistence on the interdependence of environment and development, 'futurists' then laid the basis for conceptions of sustainable development. Keywords. Club of Rome, development, future(s) studies, global interdependence, humankind, World Future Studies FederationIn 1973, the World Future Research Conference postulated, in a memorandum, that 'we must strive towards a new general understanding of our global interdependence and limitations if we are to have a society that does not destroy itself and us' (IRADES and WFRC, 1973, 1, p. 10). The Rome Conference committee, which represented the newly established World Future Studies Federation and the affiliated Italian Istituto Ricerche Applicate Documentazione e Studi, proclaimed global interdependence and the need to give thought to coming global problems. It highlighted the danger of humankind destroying itself and was alert to the implications of present and future globality.There was a shift in the futures field around 1970. Futures studies' mental maps changed from having a simple West-East axis towards acquiring a global perspective, and many 'futurists' got engaged in propagating a global future. Related to this, technology-driven approaches lost influence whereas a human-centred perspective gained new ground. In forming the perceptions and scenarios of globality, notions of global interdependence played a decisive role. They came from three root sources. The first was the epistemic

show abstract

Steering the future. The emergence of “Western” futures research and its production of expertise, 1950s to early 1970s

Abstract: This article deals with the emergence of Futures Research after 1945 and its production of future expertise.

Cited by 18 publications

References 23 publications

The resistance to scientific theory in futures and foresight, and what to do about it

The resistance to scientific theory in futures and foresight, and what to do about it

The Politics and Science of Prevision

Globalized Science. The 1970s Futures Field

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About