WFRXXX10.1177/1946756717749613World Futures ReviewHines et al. 749613research-article2018 Article World Futures Review 2018, Vol. 10(2) 136 –151 Setting Up a Horizon Scanning © The Author(s) 2018 Reprints and permissions: sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav System: A U.S. Federal Agency https://doi.org/10.1177/1946756717749613DOI: 10.1177/1946756717749613 Example journals.sagepub.com/home/wfr Andy Hines1, David N. Bengston2, Michael J. Dockry2, and Adam Cowart1 Abstract Managers and policy makers are continually working toward a desired future within a context of rapid and turbulent change. To be effective in this context, they must look ahead to anticipate emerging trends, issues, opportunities, and threats. Horizon scanning is a foresight method that can help managers and policy makers develop and maintain a broad and externally focused forward view to anticipate and align decisions with both emerging (near-term) and long-term futures. This article reports on the design and early stage development and implementation of a horizon scanning system established for the U.S. Forest Service (USFS), Strategic Foresight Group, and developed cooperatively with the University of Houston Foresight Program. The goal of the project is to develop an ongoing horizon scanning system as an input to developing environmental foresight: insight into future environmental challenges and opportunities, and the ability to apply that insight to prepare for a sustainable future. In addition, the horizon scanning system is supported by volunteers from within the Forest Service. By including participants from throughout the Forest Service, the project seeks to foster a culture of foresight within the organization, and eventually to develop a more forward looking organizational structure for the USFS and other natural resource management agencies. Lessons learned from the experience to date are shared as well as future challenges for keeping the horizon scanning system in good working order—current, relevant, and consistent. Keywords foresight, horizon scanning, forestry, emerging issues, policy Introduction as “the acquisition and use of information about events, trends and relationships in an organiza- Managers and policy makers are continually tion’s external environment, the knowledge of working toward a desired future within a con- which would assist management in planning the text of rapid and turbulent change. To be effec- organization’s future course of action” (Choo tive in this context, they must look ahead to 2002, 84). anticipate emerging trends, issues, opportuni- ties, and threats. Horizon scanning (also referred to as environmental scanning) is a foresight 1University of Houston, Houston, TX, USA method that can help managers and policy mak- 2U.S. Forest Service, St. Paul, MN, USA ers develop and maintain a broad and externally Corresponding Author: focused forward view to anticipate and align Andy Hines, University of Houston, 4235 Cullen Blvd., decisions with both emerging (near-term) and Cameron Building, Houston, TX 77204, USA. long-term futures. Horizon scanning is defined Email: [email protected] Hines et al. 137 Horizon scanning has long been practiced inaccurate expectations of shoreline erosion in the military, the intelligence community, rates, and overoptimistic cost estimates of arti- and the business world. Business research has ficial beaches (Pilkey and Pilkey-Jarvis 2007; demonstrated that effective horizon scanning Sarewitz et al., 2000). improves organizational performance (Choo The inability to accurately forecast the 2002). In recent years it has been increasingly future of complex social-ecological systems used in other public sector fields, such as stems from many factors, such as the emergent human health (Douw and Vondeling 2006) and nature of these systems and their sensitive education (Munck and McConnell 2009). But dependence on initial conditions. Emergent the use of formal horizon scanning in natural properties of a system cannot be predicted from resources and environmental organizations has the parts (de Haan 2006). The prevalence of sur- been limited (Sutherland and Woodroof 2009). prise in social-ecological systems (Gunderson Among the few examples are scanning exer- and Longstaff 2010) implies that some impor- cises related to biodiversity (Sutherland et al. tant uncertainties in long-term forecasts are 2008), global conservation issues (Sutherland irreducible and that traditional scientific tools et al. 2015), and environmental issues with and models are blunt instruments for studying implications for the U.S. military (U.S. Army a future that does not exist. Environmental Policy Institute n.d.). The goal of horizon scanning, therefore, is The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment not to try to accurately predict the future, but to concluded that “over the past 50 years, identify, compile, and analyze the various sig- humans have changed ecosystems more rap- nals of change. These signals can be explored idly and extensively than in any comparable to stimulate thinking about the range of future period of time in human history, largely to possibilities. While getting “the future” pre- meet rapidly growing demands for food, fresh cisely right is futile, it is possible to use signals water, timber, fiber, and fuel” (Millennium of change identified in horizon scanning to Ecosystem Assessment 2005, p. 1). Surprises map plausible scenarios and pathways to the are increasing along with the expanding scale future (Hines 2009). Horizon scanning serves of human impacts (Gunderson and Longstaff as an early warning system to identify poten- 2010). Hibbard et al. (2007) refer to the period tial threats and opportunities. Some character- following World War II as the “Great istics of horizon scanning that distinguish it Acceleration,” a time of significant increase in from typical activities that planners use to sur- the scope, scale, and intensity of impacts on vey future conditions include (Bengston 2013): the social-ecological system. At the same time, the rapid pace of technological change has the •• It emphasizes “weak signals” or early potential for sweeping environmental effects, indicators of potential change, such as genetic engineering and nanotechnolo- •• It is comprehensive across a wide range gies, and makes the future landscape more of sectors, challenging to discern (Olson and Rejeski •• It emphasizes external trends and devel- 2005). opments, and In the face of such profound and uncertain •• It includes possible wild cards or low- change, foresight developed through horizon probability, high-impact events. scanning is not an attempt to “predict the future.” It is simply not possible to accurately This article reports on the design and early predict the future of complex social-ecological stage development and implementation of a systems for long timeframes. Efforts devoted horizon scanning system established for the to social and environmental prediction have U.S. Forest Service (USFS), Strategic been plagued by a host of shortcomings, and Foresight Group, and developed cooperatively unjustifiable faith in these predictions have with the University of Houston (UH) Foresight contributed to unmanageable nuclear waste Program. The goal of the project is to develop disposal practices, poisoned mining sites, an ongoing horizon scanning system as an 138 World Futures Review 10(2) input to developing environmental foresight: UH Foresight Program for exploring the future insight into future environmental challenges of any topic (Hines and Bishop 2013). The pri- and opportunities, and the ability to apply that mary focus for this horizon scanning project insight to prepare for a sustainable future involves the first two steps of the Framework (Bengston 2012). Broadly speaking, the objec- Foresight process: Framing the topic and its tives of the horizon scanning system are to boundaries and scanning to identify emerging find, collect, and analyze the signals of change, issues. Framing and scanning provide the and to identify emerging issues suggested by foundation for forecasting, depicted as the these signals that could affect forests and for- baseline and alternative futures in Figure 1. estry in the future. This project will also use The baseline future or “business-as-usual” this information to support the development of assumes continuity with the present without scenarios of the future of forestry that integrate major surprises: trends stay on track, plans are signals of change and emerging issues into fulfilled, and mainstream projections are on each scenario. Once the scenarios are crafted, target. Emerging issues, however, may indi- indicators based on signals of change for each cate potential alternative futures, that is, alter- scenario will be identified. Going forward, the native outcomes to the baseline. Thus, the horizon scanning system can be used to moni- identification of emerging issues provides tor these indicators and provide early warnings early warning for potential shifts or disconti- that the future seems to be moving toward a nuities from business-as-usual and helps frame particular scenario (Schwartz 1996). This alternative future scenarios. information can alert decision-makers to adjust plans accordingly and take timely action where Framing necessary. In addition, the horizon scanning system is The process begins with framing the domain or supported by volunteers from within the Forest topic to be explored. The goal is to scope the Service. By including participants from topic so that