Origins, Philosophy, and Practices—Anticipation for Action
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
WFRXXX10.1177/1946756718777490World Futures Reviewde Jouvenel and Radford 777490research-article2018 Article World Futures Review 1 –11 Futuribles: Origins, Philosophy, © The Author(s) 2018 Reprints and permissions: sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav and Practices—Anticipation for https://doi.org/10.1177/1946756718777490DOI: 10.1177/1946756718777490 Action journals.sagepub.com/home/wfr Hugues de Jouvenel Abstract Interest in the future blossomed on both sides of the Atlantic after World War II (WWII). Formalized methods were developed in the defense sector but swiftly spread to the corporate world. Various groups, public, private, and governmental, became enthusiastic about reflecting on the future. The American and European approaches to reflecting on the future, to applying foresight and la prospective varied; however, there was cooperation. A chronological overview, this article follows the philosophical gaze of Bertrand de Jouvenel, the French writer and futurist who coined the term futuribles and founded a center that would become Futuribles International. Its current president, his son, Hugues de Jouvenel, outlines the background of this Paris-based center for foresight thinking and studies, which aims to integrate a sense of the long term into decision making and action. To this end, Futuribles performs various scanning functions, publishes reports plus a specialized journal, and trains a diverse clientele in foresight methodology. Moreover, Futuribles International honors the tradition of public intellectual discussions (roundtable series) in the spirit of serving an informed citizenry. The author reminds readers of the necessity of foresight today when unelected multinationals play an unprecedented role yet fall through the cracks of almost all national and international regulation. Keywords foresight, philosophy, history, prospective, futuribles, Bertrand de Jouvenel, political science, strategic planning Futuribles’ Founding (1960) may be said of Jules Verne, the French writer who pioneered the futuristic novel (even sci- Since the dawn of time, Man has worried about ence fiction), or Albert Robida, who imagined the future and sought to know what lay ahead. a hundred years in advance that we could soon This led to various practices such as consulting communicate remotely using a “telephono- oracles who supposedly could interpret precur- scope,” something similar to today’s Internet sors, or signs presaging more or less happy and even Skype. More recently, other innova- events, that is, guessing one’s destiny through tors from the social sciences have attempted to various means. explore the future, like H. G. Wells did in his Some people preferred to project their own dreams or nightmares (utopias vs. dystopias) on the future. They tried to imagine what the Futuribles International, Paris, France future could hold by using their knowledge and imagination, as in the case of Leonardo da Corresponding Author: Hugues de Jouvenel, Futuribles International, 47 rue de Vinci. Some may occasionally have demon- Babylone, Paris, 75007, France. strated rather surprising clairvoyance. This Email: [email protected] 2 World Futures Review 00(0) famous lecture The Discovery of the Future according to Berger, “[a]ctions taken [relied delivered in 1902 to the Royal Institution. on] an analogy or relied on an extrapolation,” Indeed, this would become a major source of but these procedures stemmed from a retro- inspiration for several pioneers in future stud- spective attitude that could be justified only ies, a field that boomed primarily in the second during a period of continuity and stability half of the twentieth century. (Berger 1957). He went further to underscore Reflection on the future developed first in how when entering a period of change and rup- the United States as an initiative of Franklin D. tures, or breakdowns, we need to “set up, next Roosevelt, who established the President’s to the retrospective disciplines . prospective Research Committee on Social Trends (1933). studies”. Gaston Berger went on to create the However, thinking about the future really took “Centre d’études prospectives” (Center for off after the Second World War through the Foresight Studies, or CEP), which gathered Pentagon, in particular, the RAND Corporation, intellectuals, business leaders, and top civil founded in 1948 to work on defense issues. At servants. Unfortunately, this futures studies that time, its promoters were basically con- center could not survive its founder’s death in cerned with geostrategic matters and paid spe- a car accident in 1960. cial attention to the use of new technologies, The translation of the French term prospec- notably the atomic bomb, in international con- tive, in contrast with retrospective as seen ear- flicts. Within the RAND, a team made up of lier, was a problem from the start because, in Hermann Kahn (see his masterful book On French, it refers to the future both as a field to Thermonuclear War), Theodore Gordon, and explore and a field for decision and action. The Olaf Helmer played a pioneering role in devel- most relevant term in English is probably fore- oping formal methods of foresight, for exam- sight, but the rather general futures studies ple, the Delphi Method and scenario building. may also be applicable. Some have suggested These methods would later be adapted to civil- futures research as the academic research into ian life and improved over the years. the emergence of futures from the past. The At this time, the first concerns about the trouble is that neither foresight, futures studies, earth’s resources emerged. In fact, further to nor futures research encompass the two dimen- the Paley Report (Bush 1945), a foundation sions of anticipation and action inherent in named Resources for the Future was created. Berger’s prospective. It is generally accepted Not long afterward, the first Soviet satellite, that strategic foresight is the application of Sputnik 1, was launched, which led to the space academic research to situations and conditions race. In parallel, buoyed by advances in sci- in a society; hence, action is included. Nothing ence and technology and specifically by the is set in stone, however, as there are different famous report, The Endless Frontier (Bush schools of thought with their own jargon, 1945), the American Congress created the regardless of language, and an increasing num- Commission on the Year 2000 as part of the ber of practitioners may be seeking a more American Academy of Arts and Science. Its active form of foresight, too. On balance, one working papers appeared under the banner thing remains certain at least in my own opin- Toward the Year 2000 in a special issue of the ion and experience: Futurists are primarily journal Daedalus (summer, 1967). At the same concerned about what may happen and what time, the World Future Society (1966) was can be done in the long term. Obviously, much formed and quickly attracted many well- more could be written about the various known figures, mainly Americans, interested notions and underlying philosophies regarding in the future. Man’s role in building the future; however, this Meanwhile in France, la prospective article seeks simply to chart Futuribles’ start emerged as of the late 1950s, thanks to the and growth. efforts of Gaston Berger (1957), who defined Historically, another instigator of futures the term in an article titled simply “Human thinking was Bertrand de Jouvenel. In fact, he Sciences and Forecasting.”1 Until then, coined the term futuribles for his concept de Jouvenel and Radford 3 combining future and possible. Bertrand de accelerating, which means by units of time, Jouvenel taught in the United States and France there are more new problems arising. As a and published L’art de la conjecture (The Art of result, the pressure placed on authorities by Conjecture), which expounded his perspective issues requiring decisions increases with time. quite clearly. De Jouvenel may have rarely used In this case, it would seem natural and reason- the French term prospective, yet his book able that decisions be prioritized according to remains a resounding plea for long-term reflec- their urgency. However, de Jouvenel points out tion that he believed necessary to the exercise of that no problem is put on the agenda until it power, a topic on which he had written an becomes a “burning” issue, when things are at authoritative book Du Pouvoir: histoire such a pass that our hand is forced. This is naturelle de sa croissance [On Power: The known in chess as a “forced move.” Natural History of Its Growth] (1945). What Paraphrased in more modern parlance, there is follows herein are the reasons that led Bertrand no longer any possible choice among the dif- de Jouvenel to forge his concept of futuribles ferent actions designed to model a situation and lay the foundations for an independent insti- that is still flexible (determining actions). tute, the International Futuribles committee, There is no response prepared in advance for a later the Futuribles International association. pressing problem that presents only one way out. Administrators respond to necessity or put Why Futuribles? out fires and justify themselves later by saying they had no option to decide differently. De Jouvenel’s Art of Conjecture contains a Bertrand de Jouvenel concludes by telling chapter titled “On the Nature of the Future,” readers that, indeed, leaders or administrators which highlights the fundamental difference no longer had the choice.