Futures Studies, Foresight, Futurism, Futurology, Futures Thinking…What Name???
By: Alex Fergnani
Tags: Futures Thinking, Futurism, Futures Studies, Futurology, Foresight

There are so many names to refer to the discipline that investigates alternative futures. Futures studies, foresight, futures literacy, futures thinking, anticipation, futurism, futurology, and many others. These terms are often used -and misused- interchangeably without explanation of the reasons why they are to be considered synonyms. Clearly, there is a lot of confusion on which term we should use and which term(s) we should not use. Countless times, I have been asked to elaborate on the difference between these monikers, especially by newcomers in the field, in absence of clear guidelines. So let’s try to make some clarity.

The most commonly used terms to refer the investigation of alternative futures are futures studies and foresight. Let’s look at the similarities and differences between these two terms first.

Futures Studies vs Foresight

Futures studies, sometimes also shortened as futures is, as the name says, a field of studies. It involves studies of alternative futures done by academic researchers in universities. In fact, the World Futures Studies Federation, arguably the most academic oriented association in the field, uses the term Futures Studies, and defines it as “A scientific field of research involving scholars and researchers”[1]. That is why you might have also heard of the term futures research, which is used as a synonym of futures studies and mostly by academics, but less commonly than futures studies. Beside this “ivory tower” connotation, futures studies also has a social sciences connotation. This is because many scholars and researchers active in this field received training in the social sciences, including sociology, political sciences, public policy, etc., and thus, imbue the discipline with a social scientific viewpoint.

Foresight, on the other hand, refers to the application of futures studies methods and techniques by organizations, including for-profit, not-for-profit, and governmental organizations, to be prepared for the future. Foresight is a word most often used by practicing managers, and is considered part of strategy. That’s why you might have also heard of the terms strategic foresight, or corporate foresight, and less commonly business foresight and organizational foresight[2].

In other words, although futures studies and foresight refer to the same set of methods and techniques to investigate the futures, foresight specifically designates the use of those methods and techniques as a management tool. As foresight is a set of practices or activities to make the firm prepared for the future and attain superior performance, we say “doing foresight” rather than “having foresight” as in plain English[3].

Beside this major difference between futures studies and foresight, there are 3 minor differences that ought to be mentioned:

· First, foresight has had a strong emphasis of scenario planning, particularly that of the intuitive logic school of thought. As this school is Western, foresight has also had a Western connotation. Although his has been recently changing as the word foresight has increasingly been used globally. Futures studies, on the other hand, has had a consistent tradition for taking into account Asian and non-Western perspectives, such as Causal Layered Analysis and Integral Futures[4]. That is why we call it studies, in the plural form[5]

· Second, foresight necessarily implies action in the present[6], as the investigation of the futures is conducive to changing the strategy of the organization. Futures studies, on the other hand, although one of its major tenets is studying the futures to change the present[7], might actually not imply doing so. A futures studies project could just build scenarios for third parties’ use or to increase awareness on them.

· Third, since foresight is relatively more concerned with preparing the organization for the future and increasing its bottom line, it is also relatively less concerned than futures studies with improving the future for humanity in general. Futures studies, on the other hand, has a much more pronounced emphasis on studying the futures for the betterment of our civilization. However, this has been changing as new and more participatory foresight methods are emerging, involving both organizations and wider communities[8].

So futures studies and foresight are actually the same set of methods and techniques applied in different contexts and with slightly different connotations and objectives. We can therefore represent them graphically as two largely overlapping but not completely coinciding circles, like this:

The recent trend has been that these 2 circles are getting closer and closer as the boundaries between futures studies and foresight start to blur. Indeed, an increasing number of academic professionals is involved in foresight projects in organizations outside of their universities. The Western vs non-Western connotation that once distinguished futures studies and foresight is starting to blur, and there is an increasing number of foresight methods and approaches that involve organizations along with external communities.

In view of the above, my suggestion is that we use the term futures & foresight to refer to the investigation of alternative futures, rather than either futures studies or foresight. We can say futures & foresight scholar/researcher, futures & foresight practitioner, and futures & foresight project.

But it is certainly still okay to use either futures studies or foresight, if you have a preference for one of the two terms. However, it ought to be mentioned that it is probably more correct to use the term futures studies in an academic context, and the term foresight in a practical context. It follows that futures studies scholar/researcher is probably better than foresight researcher, and that foresight practitioner is probably better than futures studies practitioner. But these guidelines are not watertight. You might be a scholar researching foresight in organizations, and that will make you a foresight researcher, rather than a futures studies researcher. And finally, referring to the methods, both acceptions are okay: you can say you are using futures (studies) methods/tools, as well as foresight methods/tools. The same goes for futures workshop and foresight workshop.

So now that we have made some clarity on the differences and similarities between futures studies and foresight, let’s examine other commonly used terms.

Futurism

Futurism refers to a wide variety of approaches to explore the future, including predictions, pop-science opinions about the future, and layman speculations. For instance, the last article you have read online about how robots will take over can be labelled as futurism. This term refers to a much broader domain than futures and foresight, so we can represent the relation between futures & foresight and futurism graphically like this:

It goes without saying that a large majority of futurism work is different from futures & foresight. Futures & foresight doesn’t predict nor speculates about the future. It investigates alternative futures systematically. It requires methods. It requires training. It requires knowledge on how to use methods, or a methodology. It should be carried out with rigor.

Anyone, one the other hand, can write an educated guess about the future without futures & foresight training. This is something to take note of. It follows that we should not refer to futures & foresight using the term futurism. It also goes without saying that we should not use the word futurist to refer to the professions of researcher and practitioner of futures & foresight. This is because the term futurist refers to a wider range of professions, including those who engage in speculations, which include but is not limited to the practice of futures & foresight. Futures & foresight researcher/practitioner, or futures studies researcher and foresight practitioner, seem to be better and more appropriate candidates.

Futurist painting (Claudio Marcon)

We should also avoid using the terms futurism and futurist because they are closely related to the eponymous Italian artistic movement of the early 1900s. This movement was a value-laden ideology to destroy the past, speed up the future, and blend man and machines. This is anathema to futures & foresight, which downplays single ideologies and aims at deconstructing them in favor of a pluralistic viewpoint towards a range of different futures[9].

Futurology

Futurology is a name used by non-experts to refer to futures & foresight. Usually found in encyclopedias or curated volumes, its aim is to sound explanatory to readers who have never heard of the words futures studies and foresight. It goes without saying that if we are researching or practicing futures & foresight in our profession, we should avoid using the term futurology, let alone the term futurologist, as these words will sound odd and encyclopedic to anyone having an inkling of what futures & foresight is. This is self-explanatory as it occurs in our daily life: when we refer to animals, for instance, we don’t use their encyclopedic names, which might be an obscure Latin word. We use their more common, plain English name

Future studies

It appears that some practitioners are using the term future studies, in the singular form, to refer to the investigation of alternative futures. In my experience as reviewer of several academic journals in the field including Futures, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Futures & Foresight Science, and On the Horizon, I have consistently noticed that researchers and practitioners using this term seem to be not aware of the growing literature using the term futures studies, in the plural form. This is righteously so as the plural, futures, is to signal that we ought to investigate many of them, not at single future. Alternatively, the use of future studies might be used to refer to an approach to the future that emphasizes trend watching and prediction (e.g. that of Singularity University). Although intriguing, this approach exhibits a salient disconnect from the growing community of futures & foresight researchers and practitioners. I would therefore discourage the use of this term as it might signal a lack of professionalism to other researchers and practitioners in the field.

Futures literacy

Futures literacy refers to the competency of being able to consciously understand the role that thinking about the future has in the present [10]. Given that this competency is found wanting in many individuals, this term is often used to refer to early stages pedagogical settings, when we use tools of futures & foresight to enhance the anticipatory capacity of individuals who have likely never heard about futures & foresight before. UNESCO uses this term when it enable communities to think about the futures and use this imagination fruitfully in the present, or to become “futures literate” [10]. However, it is wrong to use this term to refer to the discipline of futures & foresight.

Futures Thinking

Futures thinking is a very controversial term because it is erroneously used by futures & foresight researchers and practitioners as a synonym of futures studies. If futures and foresight has developed a tradition of practices, futures thinking refers to the cognitive processes enabled by those practices. The former is at the practical level; the latter is at the psychological level. The two terms refer to processes at two different levels of understanding and analysis. Therefore, although it is not wrong to say that futures & foresight enables individuals to have futures thinking, it is wrong to use the term futures thinking to refer to the discipline of futures & foresight, or to say that futures & foresight is part of futures thinking. The confusion over this distinction has been unfortunately fueled by practitioners who have been using futures thinking to market themselves as this term is undeniably cool, especially in view of the buzzword design thinking. For instance, the Institute for the Future has launched a series of online courses on Coursera called futures thinking[11]. These courses include imagination techniques that are not part of the futures & foresight tradition, along with established futures & foresight methods. In this series of courses, foresight is also considered part of futures thinking. This is a good example of practitioners actively fueling the confusion because although the quality of the material provided in the courses in high, the naming is not correct.

Forecasting

Forecasting refers to predictions in the short-term future. This is different from futures & foresight for several reasons:

· While forecasting is carried out with quantitative extrapolation techniques, futures & foresight consists, by and large, of qualitative approaches.

·Forecasting involves predictions, which futures & foresight avoids in favor of alternative futures.

· Forecasting involves single point estimates in the future, e.g. GDP growth 5 years from now, while futures & foresight anticipates a variety of elements to build comprehensive scenarios.

· Forecasting looks at the short-term future (1 to 5 years), whilst futures & foresight looks at the long-term futures (5 to 50 years).

Finally, there is a variety of other less commonly used terms including anticipation, perspective thinking, futuristcs, and more. These terms are used by single practitioners or small groups of practitioners to refer to their own approach to or viewpoint of the study of the futures, and do not speak of the growing tradition of futures & foresight. For instance, Poli sees anticipation as a set of forward-looking attitudes and activities in a wide range of scientific fields, including the natural sciences and humanities[12]. This name does not designate futures & foresight, which is just a component, according to this view, of anticipation. Another example is perspective thinking. Originating from the French La Prospective, this term indicates a circumscribed group of futures & foresight practitioners [13], which does not stand for the whole field of futures & foresight. I would therefore also recommend against using these terms unless you are part of these smaller schools of thought.

References & Notes

[1] What is Futures Studies, WFSF Website. Retrieved from: https://wfsf.org/about-us/futures-studies

[2] Rohrbeck, R., & Bade, M. (2012). Environmental scanning, futures research, strategic foresight and organizational future orientation: a review, integration, and future research directions. XXIII ISPIM Annual Conference, Barcelona, Spain.

Rohrbeck, R., Battistella, C., & Huizingh, E. (2015). Corporate foresight: An emerging field with a rich tradition. Technological Forecasting and Social Change,101: 1–9.

[3] UNDP (2018). Foresight, The Manual. Retrieved from: https://www.undp.org/content/undp/en/home/librarypage/capacity-building/global-centre-for-public-service-excellence/ForesightManual2018.html

[4] Whether Integral Futures is truly a non-western approach is still under debate.

[5] Sardar, Z. (2010). The Namesake: Futures; futures studies; futurology; futuristic; foresight — What’s in a name? Futures, 42(3): 177–184.

[6] ibid.

[7] Bell, W. 1997. Foundations of Futures Studies. New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers, Volume 1.

[8] See Ramos, J., Sweeney, J. A., Peach, K., & Smith, L. 2019. Our futures: by the people, for the people. Nesta. Retrieved from: https://www.nesta.org.uk/report/our-futures-people-people/

Popp, R. 2013. Participatory futures research. Research or practice consulting? European Journal of Futures Research, 1:16.

[9] See 5,7.

[10] UNESCO (n.d.). What is Futures Literacy? Retrieved from: https://en.unesco.org/themes/futures-literacy

[11] Futures Thinking specialization on Coursera: https://www.coursera.org/specializations/futures-thinking

[12] Poli, R. (2017). Introduction to Anticipation Studies. Springer.

[13]La Prospective: http://en.laprospective.fr/

CREDITS FOR ICONS (The Noun Project): Chanaky, David