The Global Risks Forum (GRF)
Foresight changes outcomes only when it reaches a decision: a strategy, a budget, a regulation, a risk register or a law. Many governments now hold foresight units, but connecting them to the people who decide remains the hard part. This page sets out how scenario-informed policy works in practice, why foresight is not prediction, how institutions embed it and where they fail to, and which offices, ministries, regulators and parliaments hold the decisions it serves.
GRF · Established · service level R0
Foresight in government is the use of horizon scanning, scenarios and futures analysis inside the instruments that decide: strategies, budgets, regulations, risk registers and laws. Many governments hold foresight units; linking them to the people who decide, and not confusing foresight with prediction, remains the hard part.
For foresight in decisions, in GRF's situational-awareness reading, the map opens on population density and flood water with clouds now from NASA GIBS, framed on the Arctic; every other NASA layer, live feed and forecast waits in the layer list.
The interactive map needs JavaScript; the layer list and sources are below.
Layers 2
Hazards and exposure, for this page
Keyboard, with the map focused
Hold Ctrl or ⌘ and scroll to zoom
Latest available
NASA GIBS / EOSDIS · ASTER GDEM (METI, NASA) · Blue Marble (NASA) · © OpenStreetMap contributors (ODbL) · Natural Earth
Loading the latest NASA imagery.
Drag to move. Ctrl or ⌘ and scroll, pinch or the buttons to zoom; hover for the values under the pointer; reset returns to the region.
For foresight in decisions, in GRF's situational-awareness reading, the map opens on population density and flood water with clouds now from NASA GIBS, framed on the Arctic; every other NASA layer, live feed and forecast waits in the layer list.Satellite and model products as NASA publishes them, each with its own date; indicators, not assessments of any place; claim ceiling INTEGRATED.
Layers and dates
The working screen behind this subject: its structure, terms and states. Names are placeholders and values illustrative.
Foresight in decisions · Scenario set B · Policy: POL-44
0 fails to 100 robust
Higher is more robust. Placeholder scores.
Scenario-informed policy, not predictions. The dossier below sets out how the risk develops, what is measured, where the data come from, how it is modelled and who decides.
Foresight placed at the centre of government, with a senior sponsor and a link to cabinet, budget or risk processes, reaches decisions. Foresight placed in a peripheral unit tends to produce reports that are read and not used.
Insight becomes action through instruments: a policy stress test in impact assessment, a scenario in a spending review, an emerging risk in the national register, a trigger in an adaptive plan. Each needs an owner and a procedure.
Decision-makers often ask foresight for the likely future. When scenarios are treated as forecasts, or a single scenario is adopted as the plan, the purpose is lost and confidence is overstated.
Foresight depends on leaders who tolerate challenge to current policy, civil servants trained in methods, and participation that brings in perspectives from outside government. Without these, process exists without effect.
Each term as this page uses it. Where a standard-setting body defines the term, the wording follows that body.
| Term | Definition |
|---|---|
| Foresight unit | A team in government that produces and applies futures analysis for policy. |
| National risk register | A government's published assessment of the main risks facing the country. |
| Futures literacy | The capability to use the future in different ways in the present, as UNESCO describes it. |
Each indicator carries its unit, its cadence, the kind of source behind it and the evidence label a value would carry. No values are shown: a programme supplies them under its own authority.
| Indicator | Unit | Cadence | Source type | Label |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Foresight units at the centre of government | count of units | annual | Government surveys | DECLARED |
| Cabinet or ministerial foresight sessions held | count per year | annual | Cabinet and ministry records | OFFICIAL |
| Impact assessments including a scenario stress test | share of assessments | annual | Impact assessment registers | OFFICIAL |
| Parliamentary foresight hearings and reports | count per session | per session | Parliamentary records | OFFICIAL |
| Interval between national risk assessment editions | months | per edition | National risk assessment publications | OFFICIAL |
| Civil servants trained in foresight methods | persons per year | annual | Training records | REPORTED |
| After-action reviews citing prior foresight | count of reviews | per review | Inquiry and after-action reports | REPORTED |
The topic as a computational graph: named sources feed the methods, an evidence review gates the outputs, and the decisions stay with the authorities that hold them.
Fig. 02Nodes carry their type, two metric rows and a state; connectors show what feeds what; dashed frames name the owners; the timeline is the cadence. Design of the pipeline, not a record of a run.
Named public datasets and institutional records, each with its licence class. Sources by agreement are used only under their terms and never republished.
| Source | What it gives | Licence class |
|---|---|---|
| OECD Strategic Foresight Unit and Observatory of Public Sector Innovation | Guidance and case studies on anticipatory innovation governance and foresight at the centre of government | OECD terms, open access with attribution |
| European Commission Strategic Foresight Reports | Annual reports linking foresight to Commission priorities and policy | EU reuse policy, CC BY 4.0 |
| UK National Risk Register | Published national risk assessment scenarios and planning assumptions | Open Government Licence |
| Government Report on the Future (Finland) | Government foresight report each electoral term, with a parliamentary response | Public government records |
| Centre for Strategic Futures (Singapore) publications | Foresight reports and method notes from a centre-of-government unit | Singapore government terms of use |
| US Government Accountability Office foresight work | Trend and foresight reports supporting Congressional oversight | Public domain, US government work |
| UK Covid Inquiry reports on resilience and preparedness | Records of how pandemic planning and prior exercises were used | Open Government Licence |
Foresight Nexus prepares evidence. The decisions below are taken by the authorities named, under their own rules, and never by the platform.
| Who decides | The question | Evidence this page serves |
|---|---|---|
| Cabinet offices and heads of the civil service | Where foresight sits, who sponsors it and which decision processes must use it | Comparative evidence on foresight locations, mandates and the conditions under which they influenced decisions |
| Finance ministries and budget offices | Whether spending reviews and long-term investments are tested against scenarios | Stress-test practice, scenario sets and the decisions they changed elsewhere |
| Regulators and central banks | How to use scenarios in supervisory and regulatory planning without treating them as forecasts | Scenario design standards, severity reasoning and the distinction between a scenario and a projection |
| Parliaments and supreme audit institutions | How to hold governments to account for anticipation and preparedness | Records of foresight produced, its owners, and after-action reviews of its use |
Foresight influences decisions through several channels: by changing how decision-makers think, by testing specific strategies against scenarios, by identifying early warning indicators and by building networks that share signals. Its influence is greatest when a decision-maker commissions it with a clear question, when its producers and users work together, and when it has a formal place in planning or budget processes.
Misuse takes predictable forms. Scenarios are cited selectively to support a predetermined choice, a single scenario is treated as a forecast, or foresight is commissioned to show activity rather than inform choice. Clear labelling of evidence types, open methods and records of how scenarios were used help prevent this.
Assessing whether a strategy performs acceptably across scenarios, using scenario design and stress testing and decision analysis under uncertainty.
Defining signposts that tell decision-makers when conditions are changing.
Simulations and tabletop exercises let institutions rehearse responses to scenarios together.
Evaluating foresight is difficult, because its value often lies in decisions not taken or crises averted; influence depends on political will.
The current service level is R0: information and enquiries. An enquiry receives a reference and names the next step; applications, payments, compute allocations and registrations open only when their team, terms and review capacity exist.