His life was a testament to the seamless fusion of high-level scientific rigor and humanistic ethics. Before establishing himself as a father of futures research methodologies, Gordon was a literal rocket scientist, leading a 3,000-person engineering department at McDonnell Douglas responsible for launching early ballistic missiles and managing the third stage of the Saturn V rocket that took humanity to the Moon. Yet, despite a biography that could fill several lifetimes, he remained remarkably accessible, always ready to mentor young scholars, answer questions with a cheerful smile, and guide others with quiet wisdom.

To honor this extraordinary life, the 11th annual World Futures Day on March 1^st, 2024—an open, 24-hour global participatory discussion across time zones organized by The Millennium Project and other futures organization every year on March 1 to foster collective intelligence on alternative futures (Di Berardo, 2022; 2024)—opened with a special gathering of Gordon’s close family, collaborators, and leading futurists worldwide.

Subscribe now

The inaugural hour of WFD 2024 was structured as a memorial tribute to Ted Gordon, co-founder of The Millennium Project with Jerome Glenn and foundational architect of modern futures research, who passed away shortly before the event. Facilitated by colleagues and joined by his children (Katie Gordon, Tom Gordon, and Lisa Greenspan), the session provided a qualitative and personal reflection on Gordon’s dual legacy: his pivotal role in transforming futures research into a rigorous discipline, and his extraordinary personal character.

A central theme of the tribute was Gordon’s profound influence on the evolution of futures research. As Glenn highlighted, Gordon served as a vital bridge between the Douglas Aircraft Corporation and the RAND Corporation, later working with the Institute for the Future (IFTF) and creating The Futures Group, one of the first for-profit foresight initiatives.

Glenn emphasized that Gordon moved the field at the RAND Corporation beyond just genius sitting around the table speculating to methods that organized and integrated both data and human judgment. This legacy of foundational literature and methodology was anchored in seminal early works (e.g., Gordon, 1965), and expanded through pioneering tools such as the Delphi technique (Dalkey & Helmer, 1951; 1963; Gordon & Helmer, 1964; Gordon, 1994/2009) and its roundless version (Gordon & Pease, 2006; Gordon, 2009), Trend Impact Analysis (Gordon, 1994/2009), Cross-Impact Analysis with Olaf Helmer (Gordon & Hayward, 1968; Gordon, 1994/2009), Technology Sequence Analysis (Gordon, 1994/2009), and State of the Future Index (Gordon, 2001; 2009) to name a few: “Ted was as much of a master of [futures work] as anybody in history that I know of.”

Ted Gordon, Hans Goldschmidt, Olaf Helmer, and the creation of the "Kaiser Future Game"

Paul Saffo reflected on the personal impact of Gordon’s early publication, “The Future”, in 1965, recalling how receiving a copy at age eight from his neighbor Don Douglas (founder of Douglas Aircraft) played a central part in directing his own career toward foresight. Futurists present noted his lifelong identity as a literal “rocket scientist” who continuously pushed methodological boundaries, a relentless innovation driven by a mindset that never accepted limits when tackling uncharted areas: “I never heard him saying ‘we cannot do it’. It was just a new challenge,” said Elizabeth Florescu. Indeed, even in his final months, Gordon was actively exploring the use of AI to generate, analyze, and visualize infinite future scenarios, demonstrating an inventive drive that persisted until the very end.

Despite his monumental achievements—which earned him recognition by Time Magazine as one of the “100 red hot young Americans to watch” and the description of “genius” by many—participants universally underscored Gordon’s total absence of hubris, and reflected on his extraordinary modesty and non-judgmental nature during the tribute. Rather than imposing authority, Gordon utilized a gentle, inquisitive framing (“Is that so?”) that invited critical self-reflection.

His daughter, Lisa Greenspan, recalled how all his three siblings independently turned to him as their primary “moral compass” whenever facing complex ethical decisions. Rather than imposing authority, Gordon would offer his view with a characteristic twinkle in his eye, gently reassuring them: “You knew the right answer, didn’t you?” Both Lisa Greenspan and Elizabeth Florescu described him as an unyielding ethical anchor who maintained exceptionally high personal standards while remaining deeply forgiving and supportive of others. In his final months, his research focus had turned toward the intersection of ethics, geopolitics, governance, and global security.

The contributions of his children provided unique insight into how Gordon integrated futures thinking and ethical inquiry into daily life together with his beloved wife Ann, who had passed away a few years earlier to the great sorrow of the family. Tom Gordon shared that Sunday family dinners were routinely centered around the “what/if” game, where the family collectively constructed scenarios and analyzed their potential long-term impacts. He also recalled his father teaching him the concept of multi-variable matrices using physical index cards to organize complex comparisons long before digital spreadsheets existed. Katie Gordon emphasized her father’s unwavering commitment to equality, instilling a culture where gender was never perceived as a barrier to academic or professional achievement, even in fields like biotechnology. Both Katie and Tom noted his intellectual resilience—framing every complex challenge not as an impossibility, but as a pragmatic problem to be broken down into actionable components with a firm “Just do it” attitude.

The tribute concluded with a consensus among the global foresight community that Gordon’s imprint is permanently woven into the DNA of futures studies, with Elizabeth Florescu capturing the sentiment near the close: “Ted is timeless.” As participants noted, engaging in contemporary futures methodologies remains an ongoing engagement with Ted Gordon’s enduring intellectual vision.

The global outpouring of tributes on the dedicated memorial page and the video playlist by The Millennium Project reflect a community committed to carrying his torch forward. Whether through the continued refinement of analytical methods or the adoption of his humble, ethical, and inquisitive approach to solving human problems, Ted Gordon’s legacy ensures that those who work to build a better tomorrow do so on the shoulders of a true giant.

This web article was supported by the Prince Mohammad Bin Fahd Foundation Research Grants for Humanitarian Development 2025 under the project titled “World Futures Day as a Cross-Cultural Participatory Foresight method for Addressing Global Challenges”.

Subscribe now

The fragility of emancipation

Approaching the present through the lens of Futures Studies, one point becomes clear: the idea of a linear and constant progression of women’s emancipation remains fragile, perhaps now more than ever. History shows how, in moments of crisis or uncertainty, societies often tend to revert to models of power that push women back to the margins. It is happening again today. There are signs that show an attempt to return to patriarchy even if we are living in a time we tend to describe as advanced. Rather than a straightforward trajectory of progress, we observe a more complex pattern—if not a full reversal, then certainly a non-linear reconfiguration. Emerging cultural signals include the rise of trad-wife narratives promoted by some millennial influencers, the growth of incel communities that embody radicalized forms of male backlash, and the popularity of alpha male influencers who repropose restrictive and often toxic male roles. These trends intersect with broader political currents, including populist and right-wing movements that, in some cases, challenge established gender norms and rights.

These phenomena are not marginal; they function as cultural signals. Within futures thinking, such signals should not be dismissed, as they reveal that the future of female emancipation is not guaranteed: it is a contested space shaped by generational, cultural, and symbolic tensions—perhaps more so today than in the past, as societies grapple with redefining male role identity. That is why, when we talk about “Women’s Legacy” in Futures Studies, we are not simply acknowledging past contributions or celebrating presence, but engaging with the present to better understand what kind of futures are being shaped, by whom, and for whom. And it is precisely here that we want to begin.

These reflections highlight the ongoing importance of discussing female empowerment and challenging gendered assumptions. By engaging in dialogue, sharing knowledge, and fostering inclusive practices, we can work together to preserve hard-won achievements and help shape a more equitable future.

Honoring women’s legacy

When speaking of women who have “looked beyond” and made fundamental contributions to Futures Studies, one name cannot be overlooked: the sociologist Elise M. Boulding. Her work as a futurist is inextricably linked to her commitment to building peace, although it is far more complex and cannot be reduced to a single field of study. Elise Bjørn-Hansen (her name at birth) was born in Oslo, Norway, in 1920. She adopted the surname “Boulding” in the 1940s after marrying Kenneth Boulding, an American economist.

The Bouldings collaborated on numerous research projects. A key element in understanding Elise Boulding’s work is her family’s move to the United States when she was three years old. They left Norway due to the Nazi invasion, and the trauma of this experience convinced her that violence and war are never the solution. These events inspired her lifelong commitment to imagining—and building—a future without war for humanity. This commitment is inextricably linked to her focus on the role of women, and particularly to the caregiving role historically entrusted to women. Hence, the complexity of Elise Boulding’s vision: she cannot be simply labeled a “feminist” or a “pacifist.” She was a futurist who believed in the central role of women in building peaceful futures. Boulding believed that to truly empower women, society must not only recognize their existence, but women themselves must also become aware of their vital role in the world.

In many of her works, Boulding argues that women’s contributions are underestimated also in official statistics. Her thesis is particularly clear in the introduction she wrote for the Handbook of International Data on Women, a work that makes Boulding a pioneer in gender statistics too. She had a long-term collaboration within the United Nations University contexts, and the data used to build the Handbook were also collected all over the world.

In her long life—she died in 2010, at almost ninety years old—she was involved in many projects and conceived fundamental research initiatives. One of these projects particularly ties Elise Boulding to another leading figure in Futures Studies, Eleonora Barbieri Masini. This is the Household, Gender, and Age” project, which Boulding conceived and entrusted to Barbieri Masini for coordination. The field research took place from 1981 to 1991 and involved eight (at the time) developing countries. The final report on empirical studies focused on socio-economic development and women’s lives was published in 1994.

In an interview conducted by Facioni in 2009, Eleonora Barbieri Masini, speaking specifically about the UN project, called Boulding “a great life teacher.” Considering how significant such a definition can be when it comes from a leading figure like Barbieri Masini, it highlights that all those working in Futures Studies owe a great deal (also) to Elise Boulding.

The global status of women

Professor Eleonora Barbieri Masini exemplifies female empowerment. She served for many years as a professor at the Pontifical Gregorian University and as Secretary of the World Futures Studies Federation. In the late 1990s, she founded the Italy Node of The Millennium Project, contributing from the very beginning to the creation of this global network including over 70 nodes now. Those of us who had the privilege of knowing her personally remember her as a deeply respected and much-loved figure in the field of Futures Studies. She demonstrated remarkable intellectual strength and resilience, influencing countless individuals through her scientific work and leadership within the World Futures Studies Federation, and consistently showed a “passionate commitment” to understanding and improving the lives of women. One of her enduring goals was to ensure that diverse visions of the future, including those of women and children, were given a voice in discussions that traditionally excluded them. Her legacy continues to inspire reflection on the importance of representation and diversity in shaping the futures we aspire to.

To assess the current state of female representation, we deciedd to examine leadership roles in some of the major international Futures Studies organizations (data collected in Nov. 2025). Within The Millennium Project, women occupy approximately one-third of staff positions. Among the board of directors, half are women, while one-third of ex officio members are female. Planning committee members and Chairs across different countries show women representing about one-third of participants. These figures demonstrate advancements but also highlight the ongoing need to promote female leadership globally. In the Association of Professional Futurists, women make up almost 45% of the board, and one of the two co-chairs is a woman. Including the treasurer, the overall female representation drops slightly to almost 42%. Similarly, women in the recently elected board of the World Futures Studies Federation constitute half of the members, though this percentage is slightly lower when including the president, a man. While these numbers are not discouraging, there is room for improvement.

According to the Millennium Project (Glenn & Florescu, 2024), the status of women is one of the global challenges facing humanity. This is formalized in Global Challenge 11, which examines how improving the status of women can enhance human conditions. Over the past century, women’s empowerment has been a key driver of social evolution and remains essential for addressing all other global challenges. Currently, gender equality is guaranteed in the constitutions of 84% of nations worldwide. The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), often considered the international charter of women’s rights, has been ratified by all countries except seven. Women’s right to vote is nearly universal. However, the Global Gender Gap Index 2025 shows that only 68.8% of the gap has been closed. Health and education gaps are nearly eliminated, at 96.2% and 95.1% respectively, but economic and political disparities remain significant, at 61% and 22.9%.

Women’s representation in politics has progressed over the years but remains limited. In 2024, women comprised 27.6% of national legislative bodies. Over the past fifty years, 52 countries have had a woman as head of state, yet only six countries have achieved at least 50% female representation in parliament. Women in ministerial positions have increased as well, reaching 23.3% in 2024. Participation in the workforce shows that women aged 25–54 had a labor force participation rate of 61.4% compared to 90.6% for men. Women earn 23% less than men globally, occupy only about 15% of corporate board seats, and own less than 20% of land, despite representing nearly half of the agricultural labor force. At the current pace, full wage parity in G20 countries will take another 75 years.

Health and well-being have improved, but reproductive rights and access to family planning are not universally guaranteed. In some countries, women continue to face extreme violations, including female genital mutilation. Violence against women remains one of the most underreported global crimes, often perpetrated with impunity. The COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated existing inequalities by increasing unpaid domestic work, limiting access to support services for violence, causing job losses disproportionately among women, reducing wages, and increasing educational dropouts and child marriages. Consequently, achieving gender equality by 2030, as outlined in the Sustainable Development Goals, remains a distant target.

Creating equal opportunities for women could unleash creativity and foster entrepreneurship, particularly as educational gaps have largely closed. Women are more likely than men to be solopreneurs, running businesses independently and shaping their own professional paths. Stimulating the development of new work models, enhancing social protection systems, and supporting female leadership are essential steps toward building a more equitable future. It is also crucial to shift the narrative: women should be seen as modern drivers of change rather than victims. Recognizing their experience, wisdom, and influence allows us to value their active role in society.

Gender bias in the age of AI

Discussing the future inevitably entails addressing Artificial Intelligence (AI), a technology that is increasingly becoming a pervasive infrastructure of contemporary societies. However, AIs are not neutral systems: they are composed of data and algorithms that reflect the social, cultural, and economic structures within which they are produced. As a result, existing inequalities, including gender imbalances, are not only reproduced but often amplified.

Bias can be defined as a systematic distortion in the evaluation or interpretation of data and situations, resulting from prejudices or stereotypical frameworks. Such distortions originate within social and cultural contexts and are shaped by collective beliefs, experiences, and emotions. When these elements are embedded in the datasets used to train AI systems, bias becomes an integral part of the algorithms themselves.

Studies conducted in 2024 by international organizations such as UNESCO and UNDP highlights the presence of bias in Large Language Models (LLMs), including widely used systems such as ChatGPT, Claude, Perplexity, and Gemini. Although these models present themselves as neutral, their outputs inevitably reflect the composition of their training data. In particular, the production of digital content has historically been dominated by specific demographic groups—predominantly male, white, and from certain socio-economic backgrounds—thus influencing the perspective embedded within these models. This raises critical questions about the presumed objectivity of AI technologies.

Two key dynamics contribute to the spread and reinforcement of bias: model reuse, where earlier versions of language models already affected by distortions, are integrated into numerous open-source tools, thereby amplifying the scale of the issue; and self-learning systems, where AI systems generate new data for further training, creating a feedback loop in which initial biases are replicated and intensified.

The lack of widespread standards regarding fairness, transparency, and data monitoring represents an additional risk factor. In LLMs, systematic correlations emerge between gender and semantic domains: terms related to care, family, and the domestic sphere are frequently associated with the feminine, while concepts such as career, leadership, and economic success are linked to the masculine. AI-generated narratives tend to use more positive and valorizing language for subjects belonging to dominant groups, while minorities are often described through stereotypes. Algorithms used in the financial sector may indirectly discriminate against women by offering less favorable conditions. This derives from the analysis of historical data reflecting an economic system historically dominated by men.

Experiments conducted on digital platforms (e.g., utilizing OpenAI’s text-embedding-ada-002, GPT-2, and ChatGPT 3.5, alongside Meta’s Llama 2) reveal unequal distribution patterns: lower-skilled positions are predominantly shown to women, while higher-paying opportunities are more frequently displayed to men. In music and cinema, algorithms tend to promote male artists more frequently. Women are also more often funded for lower-budget productions, such as documentaries. Significant biases emerge in visual generation systems and facial recognition technologies: professions such as pilots are associated with men, and recognition systems perform less accurately on individuals with darker skin tones. Even seemingly neutral devices, such as automated sensors, reveal limitations linked to testing on non-representative samples, demonstrating how bias can also manifest at the hardware level. The healthcare sector is not immune to these issues. The use of non-inclusive datasets can compromise diagnostic and therapeutic accuracy for certain groups of patients, with significant implications for equity and safety.

In response to these challenges, the European Union has introduced the AI Act, a regulatory framework aimed at governing the development and deployment of AI. The regulation establishes stringent requirements regarding data quality, accuracy and robustness, obligations for transparency and traceability, and human oversight for high-risk systems. In the medium to long term, these measures may help reduce bias by fostering greater balance in data creation and supervision.

AI, far from being a neutral system, reflects and amplifies existing power structures and social inequalities. Gender bias represents one of the most evident manifestations of this dynamic. Addressing these challenges requires a multidisciplinary approach that integrates technical expertise, ethical awareness, and regulatory intervention. Only through greater attention to data quality and representativeness, combined with effective policy frameworks, will it be possible to guide AI development toward more inclusive and sustainable models.

The “Women in Futures Studies” initiative

Women’s contributions to Futures Studies date back to the distant past. While H.G. Wells was writing about the future, women like Mary Parker Follett pioneered organisational foresight, laying the groundwork for how groups imagine and build collective futures. Despite that, even those well-versed in women’s achievements in academia remain largely unaware of women in Futures Studies. Eleonora Barbieri Masini’s recognition remains niche, primarily among futurists and sociologists, while female scientists like Donella “Dana” Meadows and Rachel Carson struggle to be recognised as futurists. Also, if we look at the media and the public, the situation is doubly bad. But what are the reasons? And, why do we need to bring female futurists out of obscurity?

One key reason is that the “History of Futures Studies” has traditionally focused on male futurists, often overlooking women’s contributions. Like other fields, women’s roles have often historically vanished from records due to patriarchal record-keeping and male-dominated narratives, erasing their stories. Studies estimate that over 100 million women are missing from history because of systemic discrimination and underrepresentation in textbooks. To change the status quo, in the late 1960s–1970s, the term “Her-story” emerged to emphasise women’s suppressed stories within traditional “His-story.”

A new initiative called “Women in Futures Studies”, led by Foundation IIF—the Italian Institute for the Future, aims to integrate HERstory into HIStory by promoting a shift to a more inclusive perspective that fills gaps without replacing established timelines. Despite historical underrepresentation, women like Eleonora Barbieri Masini and Elise M. Boulding, to name a few, actively shaped the field. The project’s purpose is to elevate these hidden voices and enhance gender balance in foresight. Integrating Herstory into History aims to foster equality and inclusion, and bring greater diversity to foresight viewpoints.

In this historical moment of stagnation or reversal in gender equality, initiatives such as these could be turning points. In recent years, there has been a noticeable surge in anti-gender and anti-feminist discourses in international politics. Data show that nearly 40% of countries saw declines in progress toward gender equality between 2019 and 2022. In this contest, the work of female futurists is crucial for introducing alternative scenarios that contest traditional gender roles and patriarchal structures, enabling strategies to avoid undesirable outcomes. Like in Science, we believe that women’s inclusion fosters innovation, ethics, and equitable progress; female futurists challenge techno-centric forecasts, prioritising social emancipation, education and healthcare. Their contributions foster diversity and help build preferable futures by moving beyond purely technological or power-focused narratives. However, to achieve real change, integrating Herstory into History is just the starting point.

In some cases, women in Futures Studies still face exclusion, bias, and disparity. Yet their contributions enrich the field by adding diverse viewpoints, prospects, and ways of thinking about the future that emphasize social emancipation, cultural transformation, and a more ethic and suitable development. In this context, communication helps turn overlooked contributions into visible legacies that reshape the field. In fact, the “Women in Futures Studies” initiative aims to amplify and connect those who work in foresight to bridge gender gaps and inspire future generations of female futurists. By the end of the year, it will produce a first collective publication about some remarkable female futurists. This initiative honours past trailblazers and aims to help overcome current barriers and drive breakthroughs. The project also aims to disseminate and popularise “feminist futures” through media by improving interactions among female futurists, the media, and the public. Especially now, with the emergence of powerful Anti-Gender Movements in Europe and the crisis of democracies, bringing to light the work of the women who contest patriarchal structures and show that alternative futures are possible could be a checkmate.

Women as drivers of change

Eleonora Barbieri Masini (1982) emphasized that women perceive the seeds of societal change, emerging patterns that demand new ways of understanding, through both rational and intuitive capacities. Those who attend to these seeds help build visions that can shape the future. Such visions, when recognized and acted upon, become powerful tools for improving human prospects and ensuring survival in a world increasingly marked by stress and potential catastrophe. As Masini herself stated, “Our future must not only be foreseen and dreamed but also chosen and built”.

Acknowledging and amplifying women’s contributions is not just a matter of justice; it is a strategic imperative for creating futures that are equitable, sustainable, and resilient.

More than 800 people registered this year, with more than 300 actively joining many times along the day. The event brings together a wide range of perspectives, including voices from minorities and indigenous populations. As in previous years, WFD 2026 began as usual in New Zealand with a Māori prayer (Karakia), setting a meaningful tone for the discussions. The event function as an open, agenda-free space for exploring future-oriented questions through dialogue rather than formal presentations. However, the discussions this year revealed a noticeable evolution in both tone and substance, expanding the scope of futures thinking to more explicitly integrate technological, systemic, and geopolitical concerns with more grounded, relational, and culturally situated perspectives.

Subscribe now

As the conversation moved across regions and time zones, different priorities and perspectives emerged, yet several recurring themes remained consistent throughout the full 24-hour exchange. Among these, the growing centrality of Artificial Intelligence (AI), including its evolution into Artificial General Intelligence (AGI), and its transformative implications, stood out as one of the most prominent. Discussions ranged from rapid acceleration in AI-driven scientific discovery to more speculative reflections on AGI and its potential to reshape knowledge production. Some contributions emphasized how AI is shifting epistemological authority, moving from human-mediated knowledge toward machine-generated insights, while others focused on the urgency of proactive engagement, underscoring that the current moment requires not only understanding but strategic action. At the same time, the discussions revealed a lack of global consensus on what constitutes “beneficial” or “risky” AI, with perspectives varying significantly across regions. In some developing contexts, for instance, AI was seen primarily as an opportunity to accelerate development and close technological gaps, highlighting how priorities and applications differ across national and cultural settings.

Building on this technological acceleration, governance and regulation emerged as a major and interconnected concern. Discussions highlighted diverging global approaches to AI governance, contrasting market-driven models, state-controlled systems, and regulatory frameworks such as those being developed in Europe. These discussions raised fundamental questions about responsibility, transparency, and the future of global governance, emphasizing the lack of a shared international framework capable of addressing the pace and scale of technological change. This growing focus on governance is reflected in a range of international efforts that increasingly emphasize the need for coordinated action. These include The Millennium Project’s work on global governance of AGI, the High-Level Report on AGI Governance led by international experts, and the recent open letter by the Club of Rome calling for an urgent UN special session on the governance of advanced AI systems.

Within this broader context, a notable moment in the 24-hour conversation was the participation of Vint Cerf, Internet pioneer and a recurring guest of WFD. His contribution brought a long-term perspective on technological evolution, grounding current discussions on AI and emerging systems within the broader historical trajectory of the Internet. Reflecting on its early development, he emphasized how many of its most transformative consequences were not anticipated, underscoring the inherent unpredictability of complex technological systems. His intervention reinforced the importance of responsibility, foresight, and careful design in the development of future infrastructures. As in previous editions, his presence served as a bridge between generations of innovation, reminding participants that today’s debates on AI and advanced technologies are part of an ongoing process of socio-technical evolution.

Beyond AI, broader reflections on inequality and global asymmetries were recurrent throughout the day. Participants raised concerns about how emerging technologies, including longevity research and advanced medical innovation, risk exacerbating existing divides between regions and social groups. The possibility of a future characterized by uneven access to technological benefits was framed as a critical ethical challenge, reinforcing the need to consider inclusivity and fairness as central dimensions of futures thinking.

Environmental issues remained a key pillar of the discussion, but with a notable shift toward immediacy and lived experience. Climate change was not treated solely as a long-term scenario but as an ongoing crisis already shaping present realities. Conversations included both systemic reflections on global environmental governance and more applied perspectives, such as climate fiction, local activism, and solution-oriented narratives. This dual framing highlighted the intersection between imagination and action in addressing planetary challenges.

Another important thematic thread concerned the future of social structures and cohesion. Participants explored how technological, demographic, and cultural transformations are reshaping the foundations of social organization. The idea that increasing complexity leads to multiple, overlapping futures rather than singular trajectories was widely discussed, along with the need to develop new frameworks for understanding and navigating social change. These reflections pointed toward an emerging focus on social coherence, resilience, and the reconfiguration of collective systems.

Education and future-oriented mindsets also played a significant role in the conversation. Discussions highlighted the limitations of current educational systems, especially in fostering critical thinking, ethical awareness, and futures literacy. Concerns were raised about the replication of extractive or profit-driven models within education, and the need to empower individuals with the agency to engage with complex global challenges.

Geopolitical tensions and global instability were another recurring theme, reflecting the broader context in which the 2026 edition took place. References to ongoing conflicts and shifting international dynamics underscored the fragility of existing global systems. At the same time, participants emphasized the potential role of futures thinking in supporting dialogue, scenario-building, and anticipatory governance, particularly in a context where traditional institutions appear increasingly strained.

Throughout the 24-hour exchange, a strong emphasis on community and collective intelligence persisted across regions. Despite differences in focus and perspective, participants repeatedly returned to the importance of maintaining a sense of global community and shared responsibility. The conversation itself was often framed as an example of what is possible when diverse voices come together to explore common challenges and co-create visions of the future.

In addition, more speculative and imaginative dimensions of futures thinking were present, particularly in discussions combining science fiction, ethics, and emerging technologies. Concepts such as AI as a potential “uplift” force for humanity or as a co-evolving agent within ecological systems illustrated the continued relevance of narrative and imagination in shaping futures discourse. These contributions complemented more analytical discussions, reinforcing the interdisciplinary nature of the field.

An important development in the 2026 edition of WFD was its growing linguistic and generational reach, with the emergence of parallel initiatives that expanded the conversation beyond the main English-language dialogue. Alongside the global 24-hour exchange, a dedicated Arabic-language edition was held, coordinated by the Arab Futures Society, enriching the discussion with locally grounded perspectives on futures and transformation. Similarly, a Spanish-language version of WFD provided an additional space for reflection and dialogue within Spanish-speaking communities, further strengthening the event’s commitment to accessibility and global inclusivity. In parallel, a special side event, World Futures Day – Young Voices, co-organized by Teach the Future and other partners, ensured that younger generations were actively included in the global conversation about the future. Together, these parallel initiatives highlight an increasingly polyphonic and intergenerational WFD, reinforcing its role as a global platform for shared foresight and collective imagination.

As the conversation continues to evolve, the key challenge for the futures community will be to translate these insights into actionable strategies that can address both immediate crises and long-term transformations. The 2026 edition makes it clear that the future is not only something to be anticipated, but something that must be actively shaped through informed, inclusive, and collaborative efforts.

What emerged from World Futures Day 2026 is not only a growing awareness of complexity, but a widening gap between the speed of technological transformation and the capacity of governance, institutions, and societies to respond. In this sense, the conversation points to a critical transition phase, where anticipation, coordination, and collective intelligence become essential to navigate an increasingly misaligned world.

It is precisely within this space of tension that the Ljubljana Forum on the Future of Cities was born. For fifteen years, the Forum has operated as a meeting ground between foresight, urban practice, and technology, intentionally connecting long-term thinking with policy, planning, finance, and implementation. Rather than treating the future as an abstract horizon, it has framed anticipation as a working discipline that helps cities make sense of uncertainty while staying anchored in real decisions and investments.

The 2025 edition, marking the Forum’s fifteenth anniversary, builds on this trajectory. It reflects a maturation from asking what future cities might look like to exploring how cities can develop the capacity to shape their futures, with well-being as a guiding orientation rather than a decorative outcome. Through thematic sessions and the application of a Three Horizons exercise, participants explored current urban pressures, long-term aspirations, and the transition pathways needed to move toward cities of well-being, providing the foundation for the Ljubljana Forum Manifesto 2025 launched at the end of the event.

15th Ljubljana Forum

The 15th Ljubljana Forum (2025), held on October 2-3, 2025 at the Ljubljana Castle and dedicated to the topic “City of Well-Being: Sports and Recreation Infrastructure”, brought together mayors, planners, architects, academics, financiers, NGOs, industry leaders, and young voices to explore how cities must evolve in an era defined by climate pressure, social fragmentation, digital acceleration, and generational change. A central message emerged clearly: cities can no longer be designed solely for efficiency, growth, or attractiveness, but must consider well-being, a combination of physical and mental health, social cohesion, inclusion, resilience, and democratic participation, and shift from performance to fulfillment for all.

Sports and recreation infrastructure emerged as a significant expression of well-being during the forum. Rather than being treated as optional services, they were framed as core urban infrastructure, essential to physical and mental health, social cohesion, and resilience, on pair with mobility, housing, and education. Architect Peter Lorenz, who received the Ljubljana Forum Award 2025 for the Ilirija Sports Citadel project in Ljubljana, argued that ensuring the survival of democratic cities requires architects and planners to design them as spaces for living dialogue among citizens. He also emphasized the importance of engaging the peripheries to avoid creating “Disney parks,” and highlighted participation and transparency as essential elements of quality planning. The political dimension of well-being was further explored through the perspectives of city leaders. Mayors and representatives from Ljubljana, Dubrovnik, Sarajevo, and Nova Gorica shared how their cities are using sport, culture, digital tools, and citizen participation within their 2030 visions to respond to very different but equally demanding challenges, from tourism pressure and post-industrial regeneration to climate adaptation and post-conflict recovery.

Throughout the Forum, speakers also underlined that foresight should complement planning and technology, which alone are not enough to guide cities in an era of persistent uncertainty, and help cities connect immediate decisions with long-term direction while navigating geopolitical shifts, climate risks, technological disruption, and societal change. They demand new governance skills that enable cities to anticipate change and align short-term investments with long-term values. Cities today face structural challenges, from growing income inequality to employmentless economic growth, requiring new economic paradigms that balance competitiveness with social cohesion, as seen in models like the Basque approach.

The Forum discussed the idea of cities as negotiators rather than machines, living systems that mediate between competing interests, time horizons, and visions of progress, supported by foresight, planning, and participation. Anticipation, as framed in the ACT foresight framework, can become a civic skill, a practical way to imagine, prepare for, and act on change before it happens. It moves planning away from linear projections toward signal scanning, small-scale innovation testing, and long-term political cycles, turning learning into actionable policy.

Digitalization, mobility, and resilience are not just technical challenges but also opportunities for creativity and growth. Smart cities require social intelligence. They succeed when leadership precedes technology, pilot projects are tested before scaling, and citizen well-being drives decisions. Technology must serve people, and NGOs can help translate digital innovation into social value and community trust. Trust grows through openness, fairness, and participation, which also prevents “Potemkin Villages” where solutions exist on paper but not in people’s lives. Strong governance, integrated financing, and collaborative data practices help cities move from vision to action, enabling climate-neutral projects, risk management, and capacity building, while ensuring efficiency, equity, and confidence in transformation.

The Forum also looked beyond Europe, placing cities at the center of global cooperation with Africa, India, China, and Latin America. Cities thrive when “heartware”, the social and emotional infrastructure of trust, belonging, and solidarity, guides development alongside hardware and software. In such cities, social purpose takes priority over profit, and local communities are empowered to experiment and shape their environment, providing a buffer against global uncertainty. Digital infrastructure and mobile-first systems build inclusion and trust, while transparent, data-driven collaboration across borders helps cities pursue sustainable and equitable futures.

The voice of Generation Z added urgency to these discussions. Young participants highlighted mental health, climate anxiety, social exclusion, and lack of representation as defining urban challenges. They called for sports, leisure, and green spaces to be recognized as essential infrastructure and insisted that young people be involved as co-creators of urban policy, not passive beneficiaries.

The first day of the Forum concluded with a collective workshop imagining the City of Well-Being in 2045. Participants applied the Three Horizons framework (Curry & Hodgson. 2008; Sharpe, 2013; Sharpe et al, 2016), a method for understanding and guiding systemic change. The second half of the Forum shifted focus from vision to practice. Strategic foresight became a working tool for cities, illustrated with concrete examples of how anticipation can guide decisions on energy, climate, and long-term investment, as seen in Rotterdam and Geneva. Rather than predicting the future, cities were encouraged to align with change through adaptive governance, following a four-stage framework: Explore, Understand, Frame, and Build.

Subscribe now

Reading Future Cities through Three Horizons

The Three Horizons (3H) framework draws on existing systems and structures. It considers different speeds of change, and uses tools and processes designed to support strategic thinking. It views the world in terms of patterns and connects the present with desired (or espoused) futures, identifying divergent futures that may emerge from tensions between the embedded present and imagined future patterns through a systems-thinking approach. 3H divides time into the present, the mid-term, and the long-term, and explores the interactions among the three horizons. It is not a linear roadmap, however: all three horizons are always present and express different ways of acting, each associated with a specific mindset—managerial, visionary and aspirational, and entrepreneurial. Together, they help us become aware of three potentials for action that relate the present to the future, offering a three-dimensional perspective through which to step into a future consciousness.

The first horizon represents the dominant system as it operates today—the current ways of doing things and how they may evolve if we continue acting as we are used to. It includes systems that are “locked-in” and fully integrated: well-established patterns that we intentionally maintain, although they show signs of strain or decline over time.

The third horizon represents the future system, expressing new imaginative ways that may emerge from changing conditions, knowledge, and societal priorities and values. These pathways may better serve emerging needs and opportunities. Transformative change can bring entirely new paths into existence or shift marginal paths into dominance. These paths may be competing, pioneering, or even unrealistic at times, as we build our maps combining our own visions with those of others.

The second horizon is the space where the first and third collide. It is the zone of transition and transformation, where emerging innovations respond to the limits of the first horizon. This horizon challenges assumptions, anticipates future possibilities, and creates pathways that combine action with adaptation. It defines the resources needed to establish ideas in a new world through innovations that are forward-looking rather than constrained by existing systems.

The method unfolds through five interconnected steps that guide exploration of present and future conditions: examining current concerns, envisioning future aspirations, identifying inspirational practices and pockets of the future in the present, considering transitional innovations in play, and preserving essential features of the current system.

The format of the exercise conducted during the 15^th Ljubljana Forum was adjusted to be simplified for the audience and the space of a one hour live-on-stage co-creation session. Underlying was the basic idea that we needed to distill the learnings from a day of insights through identifying what change we actually foresee in our cities by extrapolating from H1. Coupling that with where we want to go, our H3, and exploring how to get there through H2, we tried to make a more actionable output from the day than simply interested discussions. Around 40 participants joined the session, moving from today’s urban pressures to long-term aspirations, and then to the bold shifts that could bridge the gap. The session really wasn’t necessarily about finding polished answers, but rather about surfacing the collective sentiment of the room, hence getting a sense of the mix of optimism and unease, the desire for more respect and resilience, and the recognition that civic capacity, empathy, and foresight could be crucial if we are to create the futures cities of wellbeing we hope to build.

Horizon 1 – Today’s pressures and patterns captured a city system that still “works” in many places, yet feels increasingly overstretched. Participants returned again and again to housing affordability and a cost-of-living squeeze (“skyscraping real-estate prices that never pops”), alongside mobility systems that keep cities car-centric and congested, with infrastructure and energy demands struggling to keep pace. Beneath the physical pressures sat a more emotional diagnosis: mental health strain, loneliness, and a weakening social fabric where people interact less face-to-face and more through “superficial connections”. Governance showed up as a recurring tension too: short election cycles and slow decision-making meeting demands for inclusion, participation, and long-term direction. The overall picture was of more than one single crisis, but more a fragile social contract, where inequality, cultural erosion, and environmental stress accumulate, and where “global cities becoming indistinguishable” signals a loss of local identity even as cities compete on the same template.

Horizon 3 — The ideal city in 2045 shifted the room from critique to desire, and the strongest through-line was respect: for nature, for one another, and for future generations. Many visions described “green and respectful” cities that act as stewards rather than extractors, pairing regeneration with humility and care. A second cluster leaned into inclusive, human-centered living: safe, peaceful, walkable “15-minute” urban life with affordability, greenspace, and social cohesion as non-negotiables. At the same time, the futures were not uniform. Some participants imagined a countercurrent of tradition and slower rhythms, like cities as guardians of belonging, values, and identity in response to perceived cultural erosion. Others deliberately went playful or surreal with it (“free beer”, “plugged into the Matrix”), using provocation (perhaps subconsciously) to question what we normalize today and what we might need to reimagine. Across the utopian and the strange, a practical baseline still surfaced around breathable air, clean water, food security, and safety under climate stress, suggesting that the “ideal city” may be defined in equal measure by resilient basics and visionary form.

Horizon 2 — Leverage points for transition became the bridge: where the room translated pressure and yearning into moves that could plausibly shift the system. What stood out was the dual nature of transition work. Some of the most supported ideas were structural like nature-connected urban living, reforms that redirect education toward care, empathy, and values, and embedding foresight as a civic capability so cities can act proactively rather than reactively. Others were cultural, even behavioral: “more conversations, less screen time” as a direct response to loneliness and frayed trust. A few proposals were more radical and perhaps a sign of the times, like obligatory civic or military service to rebuild solidarity across generations, less as a ready-made policy and more as a signal of how strongly participants felt the need for shared responsibility and lived empathy. Beyond the top-voted items, people named “honest conversations about trade-offs”, modern agoras, risk readiness, “hard empathy”, and open hearts, pointing to a transition agenda that is as much about renewing civic culture as redesigning institutions and infrastructure.

These insights provided raw material for continuing the Forum’s work on a Manifesto, grounding bold visions in the lived concerns and hopes of practitioners. Moreover, the exercise shows the value of foresight methods in urban futures, even one as simple as this: they create a space where imagination and strategy meet, where participants move beyond reacting to today’s crises and start rehearsing tomorrow’s choices. That mindset is exactly what cities will need if they are to anticipate and adapt for the coming decades of change. And, even more importantly, we ended up having a wonderful discussion about the nature of foresight and collective imagination, and between what’s ideal for some, might not be for others. But at the end of the day, we need spaces and places like this to deliberate about these topics instead of being suppressed in the face of what’s generally perceived more urgent, i.e. present day challenges.

Subscribe now

A manifesto for Futures Cities

The Ljubljana Forum 2025 concluded with a strong, forward-looking message that brought together 15 years of experience, innovation, and collaboration among city leaders, urban planners, futurists, businesses, NGOs, governments, and EU institutions. The Forum reaffirmed the priority of moving from vision to action, integrating foresight and planning into concrete projects that position cities as platforms for multidimensional well-being, encompassing physical, social, economic, and environmental health. It underlined the need to strengthen collaboration across stakeholders, involve youth and new generations in decision-making, and support sustainable urban projects through innovative financing that combine different funds. Conclusions also emphasized the role of local identity in building resilience and highlighted the importance of global cooperation and solidarity.

The conclusions of the Ljubljana Forum 2025 were further articulated through the Ljubljana Forum Manifesto 2025, built around three guiding principles:

• Act Together emphasizes multi-stakeholder cooperation among city leaders, experts, businesses, and citizens, promoting inclusive, transparent, and participatory urban governance based on shared responsibility to define common interest on specific challenge;

• Plan Ahead focuses on strategic foresight and long-term planning to anticipate challenges such as climate change, economic uncertainty, and demographic change, calling for data-driven and anticipatory governance to become proactive;

• Deliver Well-Being highlights the translation of vision into tangible outcomes, stressing that technology must serve humanity by supporting social inclusion, health, sustainability, and equity.

Together, these principles form a call to action inviting cities to implement the Manifesto through pilot projects, foresight labs, and inter-city cooperation networks, and defining a forward-looking European model of the City of Well-Being guided by strategic foresight and centered on people, communities, and nature.

With approximately 960 cities of more than 50,000 inhabitants across Europe—representing 75% of the population and spanning 39 countries, including the Western Balkans, Ukraine, and Turkey—the Ljubljana Forum Manifesto 2025 sends a clear call to action to all European cities. It invites them to bridge planning and anticipation, co-create a European Model of the City of Well-Being, and build urban systems that are coherent, inclusive, and forward-looking. Its three guiding principles define a new urban ethics: cities must think holistically, ensure that no one is left behind, and prepare for the future before crises emerge.

The Manifesto is more than a declaration; it is a roadmap for action. Through city foresight labs, collaborative pilot projects, and EU-wide cooperation networks, it aims to turn vision into tangible projects, foresight into policy, and ideals into lived experience. By 2045, cities can become not only sustainable but deeply humane places where technology, nature, and people coexist in coherence, inclusion, and anticipation. This, the Forum argues, is Europe’s unique contribution to the world: cities that care, connect, and shape the future together for people and nature.

Save the date for October 2-3, 2026 at Ljubljana Castle and discover what challenges, ideas, and innovations will shape this year’s Forum!

The Ljubljana Forum on the Futures of Cities, at its 15^th edition in 2025, knows this well and has emerged as one such arena, bringing together urban planners, futurists, policymakers, businesses, and civil society to explore how cities can anticipate change and respond to complex challenges. Over its fifteen editions, the Forum has explored strategies for building sustainable, inclusive, and resilient cities, providing a space to connect foresight with planning and project development.

Launched in 2011 by Blaž Golob, Director of the GoForeSight Institute and of the Slovenia Node of The Millennium Project and co-founder of the Foresight Europe Network, and by Miran Gajšek, Chief Urban Planner of the City of Ljubljana, the Ljubljana Forum has established itself as a unique international platform for urban debate and long-term thinking. “Fifteen years ago,” says Golob (2025), “the Ljubljana Forum began as a bold experiment, a meeting of minds envisioning how cities could become smarter, greener, and more humane. Today, it stands as a mature European platform that connects vision with action.”

During the event, I had the opportunity to interview Blaž Golob, who shared his reflections on the 15 editions. He explained that the original inspiration for launching the Forum came from his long-standing involvement in the foresight community. While cities have always planned their futures through urban design and master plans, they rarely engaged in a structured dialogue with the foresight community. This gap became the main trigger for the creation of the first Ljubljana Forum on the Future of Cities in 2011, at a time when the concept of smart city was only beginning to take shape. The idea was to create a space where urban planners and foresight experts could work together on long-term urban development. At the core of the forum lies the belief that even when national politics struggle, cities remain on the front line: delivering essential services, safeguarding quality of life, and creating opportunities for work, innovation, and entrepreneurship.

Subscribe now

The Forum serves as a platform to help cities anticipate the future, combining foresight methodologies with practical planning processes. Golob highlights Ljubljana’s strategic location at the crossroads of three EU macro-regions—the Alpine, Adriatic-Ionian, and Danube areas—making it a hub of European connectivity. Named European Green Capital in 2016 under Mayor Zoran Janković, the city demonstrated that environmental vision and urban transformation can go hand in hand. “As a proud citizen of Ljubljana, I witnessed this change firsthand,” Golob reflects. “Today, Ljubljana is not only admired for its beauty but also stands as a living example of how thoughtful planning and local action can create a City of Well-Being.”

Reflecting on the impact of the event over the years, Golob emphasizes its purpose-driven nature. The Ljubljana Forum was conceived not only as a place for discussion, but also as a platform that moves from vision to planning, from strategy to projects. The Forum’s format carefully selects participants from different sectors, disciplines, and generations to foster genuine exchange. “It inspired related initiatives in Zagreb, Samos, Bangalore, Istanbul, and Dubai,” Golob says, “proving that the Ljubljana model can travel globally while keeping its human dimension.” This multi-stakeholder approach has led directly to the development of projects with a total value exceeding 350 million euros, demonstrating a tangible link between foresight, policy, and implementation. In addition to futurists, urban planners, mayors, and city administrations, the Forum consistently involves companies from sectors such as information technology, sustainable development, water management, sports facilities, and energy efficiency. Financial institutions also play a key role, with the European Investment Bank participating as a partner in all fifteen editions, alongside other banks and investment bodies in specific years. The presence of non-governmental organizations, which bring the perspective of civil society into the discussion, is equally important. As Golob points out, businesses and public authorities must take citizens’ views into account when they design smart city solutions. Contributions from NGOs working on e-participation and civic engagement help highlight how smart cities function in reality, from the standpoint of those who live in them. This interaction challenges purely technology-driven approaches and reinforces the need for inclusive urban development.

Over its 15-year history, the Ljubljana Forum has contributed to shaping how the future of cities is discussed and addressed through collaboration, knowledge-sharing, and innovative project development (Ljubljana Forum, 2024). Since its inaugural edition (2011), which focused on global challenges, European city identities, and smart industry solutions, the Forum has fostered regional cooperation and foresight strategies, aligned with initiatives such as the EU Danube Strategy. Subsequent editions built on this foundation by addressing critical urban challenges and showcasing innovative practices. For instance, the 2012 Forum on energy efficiency and “being always on-line” emphasized smart green technologies, while the 2013 edition focused on managing water and transport in the Danube region and introduced an award for visionary infrastructural projects. In 2014, leadership lessons from cities such as Bilbao, Ljubljana, and San Sebastian highlighted transformative urban practices, while 2015 focused on empowering cities and people, launching a Smart City Platform to support city leaders and communities. The 2016 edition celebrated Ljubljana’s European Green Capital achievements, emphasizing green growth and digital democracy, while 2017 expanded the Forum’s global reach through Silk Road collaborations. In 2018, Europe–Asia cooperation took center stage with discussions on blockchain and digital technologies for smart cities, followed by a focus on industry solutions and public–private partnerships in 2019.

The 2020 anniversary edition of the Forum reflected on a decade of fostering sustainable urban development, setting the stage for foresight-driven discussions in 2021, which explored long-term city planning toward 2030. In 2022, the Forum addressed urban fragility and resilience in the face of multiple challenges, with a particular focus on digital transformation and sustainability. By 2023, attention shifted to achieving climate-neutral and smart cities by 2030, emphasizing integrative urban models and financial strategies. Most recently, the 2024 edition explored the transformative potential of Artificial Intelligence (AI), highlighting data-driven innovation, cross-sector collaboration, and citizen-centric growth as key enablers of resilient and future-ready cities. The latest edition (2025) focused on shaping cities of well-being for the future, discussing cities as negotiators thriving in Europe and globally by 2040, municipalities’ visions, and Gen Z perspectives, leading to the definition of a Manifesto for future cities. Through this evolving agenda, reflecting the progression of the most urgent topics related to future cities, the Ljubljana Forum continues to promote sustainable, inclusive, and smart urban development at international level.

Cities face a complex decade ahead, in which resilience must be balanced with inclusion and technological advancement with humanity. Managing energy transitions, digital ethics, and housing affordability while keeping well-being as the ultimate measure of success is a defining challenge for urban futures. Golob explains that AI, clean energy, and data ecosystems can become powerful enablers of equity if governed wisely. He emphasizes that Europe has a responsibility to lead by example by treating technology as a public good. “Our guiding belief is that innovation must accelerate without erasing the human dimension,” he says, and describes a City of Well-Being as one that “nurtures health, safety, learning, participation, and belonging, embedding sustainability, design, and cultural identity while grounding foresight in good planning today.” Cooperative models, he adds, demonstrate how creativity, innovation, and solidarity can thrive together. This holistic approach underpins the Forum’s decision, in its 15th edition, to focus on well-being after years of exploring smart and green city paradigms. Every urban transformation should improve quality of life by integrating health, inclusion, sustainability, and culture into a shared vision of the city of the future.

Well-being can be assessed through global benchmarks such as the OECD Better Life Index, the UN-Habitat City Prosperity Index, and European Green Capital metrics—the same framework that guided Ljubljana’s transformation and its designation as European Green Capital in 2016. Golob highlights that well-being also becomes tangible through recreation, mobility, and public space: parks, sports facilities, and inclusive urban design make cities healthier, more connected, and more alive. The newly opened Ilirija Citadel in Ljubljana, designed by architect Peter Lorenz and recipient of the Ljubljana Forum 2025 Award, exemplifies this balance between function, beauty, and inclusion, showing how architecture can serve the public good. At the same time, reducing inequality remains essential. European cities must work toward zero poverty, zero hunger, and zero exclusion, recognizing that innovation and equality are mutually reinforcing. The City of Well-Being advances high-speed performance and social justice together, ensuring that progress is shared across generations. Finally, Golob calls on young leaders to be active, curious, and collaborative, combining technological skills with civic empathy to design cities that are not only smart but also kind.

Golob sees the future of cities as a progression through different stages. At the foundation lies safety: a city must provide peace and security as a basic condition. Only then can it ensure good living and working environments, followed by sustainability supported by smart technologies. At a higher level lies the city of well-being, one that fosters culture, sports, recreation, and strong social ties. However, these aspirations must be grounded in reality. Cities face very different challenges depending on their geopolitical and social contexts. The discussion at Forum 2025, including the participation of the Mayor of Sarajevo, reminded participants of these differences. As Golob notes, Sarajevo itself was only thirty years ago in a situation comparable to today’s conflict zones, illustrating both the fragility of urban futures and the possibility of recovery and transformation.

Looking further ahead, Golob imagines the ideal city of 2045 as a fully realized city of well-being, where human, natural, and digital systems coexist harmoniously. This city is balanced through coherent governance that integrates planning, policy, and foresight; inclusive design that ensures equal access to housing, mobility, culture, and health; and an anticipatory vision that uses data and foresight to guide long-term resilience. By 2045, cities will move from being smart to being wise, becoming sustainable, empathetic, and foresight-driven. Technology will serve citizens, not dominate them, and every person will have access to basic needs—no poverty, no hunger, and full dignity—while innovation and high-speed performance drive entrepreneurs and strengthen Europe’s competitiveness. This balance between excellence and empathy, between the speed of progress and the depth of care, defines the European city of the future.

After fifteen years, the Ljubljana Forum on the Future of Cities functions as an annual platform that connects knowledge and experience in city governance with foresight and practical cooperation. Alongside discussions on infrastructure and technology, it emphasizes social ties, shared spaces, and inclusive governance as key elements of urban development. As the Ljubljana Forum has evolved, its focus has gradually shifted from discussing urban challenges to actively structuring how cities can anticipate and navigate change. This evolution became particularly visible in the 2025 edition, where well-being, foresight, and implementation were brought together through concrete methodologies and collective reflection. However, its mission remains clear: “to build cities that anticipate change, act coherently, and place human well-being at their core.”

To better understand how these ideas translate into shared visions and actionable pathways, the next post will examine the 2025 Forum’s key outputs and the results of its Three Horizons foresight exercise that informed the Ljubljana Forum Manifesto for Future Cities launched at the end. Don’t miss it!

Science fiction has long explored visions of future cities, imagining how urban life might evolve under the influence of technology, population growth, and social change, and not always in positive terms. Asimov (1954), for instance, depicts a future city set before the later discovery of hyperspace travel and the colonization of the first Spacer worlds—a city completely covered and overpopulated, where humans live in enormous enclosed complexes, the so-called “caves of steel.” The novel explores extreme urbanization, alienation, and the conflict between technology, robotics, and human nature, themes that reappear later in the Robot series. Philip K. Dick (1968) portrays post-apocalyptic cities after a nuclear war, combining advanced technology with decaying urban landscapes, and showing urban alienation, societal deterioration, and tensions between humans and androids. William Gibson (1984) presents sprawling cyberpunk megacities marked by technological saturation, social inequality, and dense, chaotic urban environments, exploring how digital networks, cyberspace, and corporate power shape human experience within these urban contexts. These few examples from the vast body of science fiction exploring future cities offer a glimpse into challenges and possibilities that urban life may face in the decades ahead.

When people think about future cities, a variety of visions related to sustainability, technological innovation, and social equity emerge. Some envision smart cities where advanced technologies like IoT, AI, and data analytics seamlessly integrate with urban life, optimizing everything, from traffic management to energy use​. Others imagine cities where buildings and infrastructure are flexible enough to evolve over time, and respond dynamically to shifting populations and climate conditions. However, while these visions of smart and adaptive cities are compelling, they don’t always address the social dimensions, such as employment, security, equity, and the maintenance of infrastructure. How can a city with millions of jobless or vulnerable citizens remain safe and equitable? Without considering these human and social factors, even the most innovative city concepts risk remaining utopian.

Optimistic visions of future cities are important, of course, especially given the pressing challenges of today’s world, but if they ignore the social, economic, and institutional realities that underlie urban life, they may fail to engage a rational audience and could even alienate it. Effective foresight should balance inspiration with grounded analysis, showing not only what is desirable but also what is plausible and actionable. Moreover, many perspectives on futures cities are often shaped by the widespread assumption that most of the world’s population will live in cities by 2050; however, recent experiences with pandemics and the rapid advancement of digital technologies suggest that alternative trajectories may emerge (Di Berardo, 2023). Increased remote work and digital connectivity could support a shift toward smaller, more self-sustaining communities, reducing dependence on large urban infrastructures, while virtual/augmented environments may allow physical cities to extend their cultural presence beyond their geographic boundaries.

Whatever our optimism or pessimism about future cities, they remain at the heart of humanity’s greatest opportunities and challenges. These large, permanent human settlements, characterized by dense populations, diverse functions, and organized infrastructures, serve as hubs of economic, social, and cultural activity. As urban areas grow and evolve, cities must navigate a complex interplay of global challenges, including climate change, pollution, urban sprawl, sustainability, and inequality, while simultaneously integrating emerging technologies, fostering social inclusivity, ensuring long-term resilience, and harmonizing development with the natural environment.

Cities are both victims of and major contributors to climate change, as highlighted in the 2024 UN-Habitat World Cities Report, with marginalized communities such as low-income groups, women, children, and minorities disproportionately affected. Without adequate action, cities are likely to face severe impacts from extreme weather events linked to climate change. However, these outcomes are not inevitable, the report says. The choices made today, particularly in reducing emissions through decarbonization and in strengthening adaptation by improving urban resilience, will largely determine the scale and severity of future impacts. With over 2 billion people living in cities at risk from rising temperatures, the report emphasizes the urgent need for climate resilience, recommending a comprehensive approach that considers both environmental symptoms and underlying social drivers of vulnerability.

While European cities may face population decline in the future, all of the world’s twenty largest megacities may be located in the developing world by 2100, facing the immense challenge of scaling up infrastructure and services, especially in Africa. Much of the world’s future urban growth is expected in megacities in the Global South, where regulatory frameworks and planning capacity are often limited. In these contexts, achieving sustainability, equity, and resilience presents profound challenges, highlighting the need for practical, enforceable policies alongside visionary frameworks. Futures Platform suggests four possible scenarios for megacities from an analysis of the main pivotal trajectories that could shape the future of urbanization in the decades ahead. One is that highly developed megacities evolve into global economic hubs, driven by technological, educational, and social progress, and attracting migrants and businesses. These cities lead in sustainable innovation, such as self-driving cars and circular economies, while narrowing the gap between the developed and developing worlds. In contrast, another scenario sees unchecked urban growth in developing countries leading to the rise of mega-slums. Rapid population growth exacerbates poverty, pollution, and crime around megacities, with public authorities struggling to cope, resulting in economic decline and worsening living conditions. A third scenario involves excessive political push for urbanization, creating artificial and dysfunctional megacities. With inadequate services, skyrocketing housing costs, and rising unemployment, these cities face a real estate bubble and eventual collapse, triggering a global financial crisis. Finally, in the fourth scenario, advancements in high-speed transport and digital connectivity shift the focus away from overcrowded urban centers. Rural areas experience a revival as people seek more sustainable lifestyles, aided by remote work and improved infrastructure, leading to a more equitable distribution of economic growth and reducing urban inequality.

The World Urbanization Prospect 2025 shows that the world is increasingly urban. However, while the number of megacities continues to rise, especially in Asia, more people live in small and medium-sized cities, many of which are growing rapidly but lack adequate planning capacity and resources. Urban growth is uneven, with some cities expanding and others shrinking, requiring differentiated policies. Towns and rural areas remain crucial for sustainable development but face challenges such as ageing populations and youth out-migration. Strengthening urban–rural linkages and adopting integrated planning across cities, towns, and rural areas are essential for sustainable development.

Future cities will be significantly shaped by key agreements and regulations that focus on sustainability, digitalization, inclusivity, and resilience, at global and regional levels . Among these, the UN SDG 11 focuses on making cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient, and sustainable, while the Paris Agreement on climate change encourages cities to reduce greenhouse gas emissions through initiatives like renewable energy, efficient urban transport, and green infrastructure. The UN New Urban Agenda aims at pursuing sustainable urbanization, improved housing, access to public services, and participatory urban governance, while the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction provides guidance to reduce disaster risks and build resilience globally. Many other regulations and initiatives have been released at different levels. For example, the European Green Deal sets ambitious goals for reducing carbon emissions and promoting a circular economy and the New European Bauhaus encourages cities to integrate sustainability, inclusion, and high‑quality design by combining environmental goals with social accessibility and aesthetic experience. In addition, the Doughnut Model (Raworth, 2012; 2017) offers a visual framework that defines a safe and just space between a social foundation and ecological ceilings, offering a holistic approach to sustainable development that integrates social and environmental dimensions. Coalitions of cities such as the C40 Cities Climate Leadership Group and the Global Covenant of Mayors for Climate and Energy are actively working to share best practices and drive collective action in the face of climate challenges. In addition, smart city frameworks and standards provide indicators and guidance for sustainable, resilient, and technologically advanced urban development. These initiatives guide cities in confronting climate change, rapid urbanization, and sustainability, helping shape a future that is more resilient, inclusive, and environmentally responsible.

As cities evolve, their future trajectories are shaped by various factors, including emerging technologies and shifting global trends. A future city is a vision of urban development that prioritizes sustainability, advanced technology, and the well-being of its residents, and it is defined by a set of key characteristics essential to its development and functionality (Kahachi et al, 2024). These include environmental sustainability through green technologies, renewable energy, and sustainable waste management practices, and the use of advanced technologies such as IoT, AI, and big data to improve urban management and quality of life. Innovative architectural, urban, and engineering design supports livability, and attractive spaces through human-centered planning that preserve local identity through foresight approaches. The well-being of residents, including health, safety, accessibility, and social inclusion, remain a core priority. Future cities are also engines of economic innovation, supported by fair and sustainable economic policies. Social equity and community engagement ensure that urban benefits are widely shared, while resilience to shocks such as climate impacts, natural disasters, and pandemics remains critical. Although opinions differ on how to balance these elements and implement them effectively, a common vision to achieve these goals integrates cutting-edge technologies, innovative design, and sustainable practices to create a more efficient, liveable, inclusive, and environmentally friendly urban environment, providing comprehensive solutions for a sustainable and prosperous urban future.

As technology grows increasingly central to these discussions, it also becomes clear that future cities cannot be defined by it alone but must also consider social, environmental, and human dimensions. Urban regeneration is a central process in shaping future cities, as it allows them to adapt, revitalize, and evolve in response to social, economic, and environmental challenges. By transforming underused or degraded areas, improving infrastructure, and fostering sustainable practices, regeneration contributes to creating urban environments that are more liveable, inclusive, and resilient. However, urban regeneration and planning should be understood as a multidimensional process: they should include social, economic, and environmental aspects but also ensure a forward-looking perspective that anticipate and address future trends, risks, and opportunities through strategic foresight. This perspective should also include the well-being of future generations (e.g. Weiss, 1989; Bell, 1993; Slaughter, 1994), as reflected in Pact for the Future adopted by the United Nations General Assembly. The approach recognizes the needs of future generations, ensures that they have fair access to natural, social, economic, and cultural resources, and accepts custodial responsibilities toward these resources to preserve them for those yet to come.

Although future cities are shaped by global trends, technologies, and policy frameworks, their trajectories are ultimately influenced by how these forces are interpreted and translated into action at the local level. This raises a key question: where do cities collectively reflect on these futures, test ideas, and connect long-term visions with concrete urban practice? One such space is the Ljubljana Forum on the Future of Cities, which offers a grounded setting in which many of these abstract scenarios are discussed, challenged, and operationalized. We will explore these ideas further in the next post of Futures Digest, focusing on how fifteen years of the Ljubljana Forum connected vision with practice.

Subscribe now

LUMEN aims to demonstrate how the ecosystem approach—originally developed for biodiversity protection—can become the foundation for a global, transcultural, and transnational eco-legal system, drawing on a shared cultural heritage that transcends the presumed divide between humans and nature, which lies at the heart of the Anthropocene crisis. The roots of the ecosystem approach—an interpretative and management paradigm for natural and social systems that views ecosystems as wholes, integrating humans, non-human components (flora, fauna, soil, water, atmosphere), and their interactions—lie in systems ecology developed in the 1960s and 1970s. Ecologists such as Eugene and Howard T. Odum highlighted its complexity, showing how ecosystems are dynamic systems of interactions between biotic and abiotic components.

The LUMEN project, coordinated by the Department of Political and Social Sciences of the University of Bologna in partnership with the Department of Legal Sciences of the University of Florence and the Department of Political and Social Sciences of the University of Trieste, is built on a strong premise: although current environmental law is insufficient to address the complexity of the ecological crisis, law remains a strategic lever for guiding social, cultural, and economic transformations. By fostering dialogue among Europe, Latin America, and Africa, the project reconstructs the common ground shared by different ecological cultures, and translates it into innovative legal instruments designed to support public policies and future legislation.

The Model Law Laboratory lies within this vision, and compiles a set of open-access templates developed throughout the project to transform the ecosystem approach into regulatory tools that can be directly used by public bodies, local administrations, and territorial communities.

The Model declaration of the Rights of the River introduces an innovative legal framework that recognizes rivers as living beings endowed with rights. Designed to be attached to river contracts—participatory governance instruments aimed at protecting and enhancing rivers and their watersheds—the document consists of a preamble summarizing the values that emerged through participatory processes, a section dedicated to river rights in line with the Universal Declaration of the Rights of Rivers, and a final part outlining the commitments of all actors involved in the protection of the river ecosystem. It thus serves as both a legal and educational tool to foster an empathetic and responsible relationship with water bodies, promoting their long-term protection.

The Model for the recognition of the Rights of Nature provides a regulatory framework intended for adoption by municipal administrations. It recognizes Nature as a subject holding rights, and safeguards the ecological integrity of local ecosystems, while also valuing traditional knowledge and community-based forms of territorial management. It defines guiding principles, the fundamental rights of Nature, and the duties of public authorities, proposing practical instruments and legal responsibilities that encourage cultural and institutional change oriented toward sustainability and civic participation.

The Model law for peasant agriculture, agroecology, and agrobiodiversity introduces a legal framework that promotes peasant agriculture as a form of production that is sustainable, equitable, and capable of preserving agro-ecosystems. It recognizes peasant agriculture as intangible cultural heritage to be protected and transmitted, regards local varieties as commons freely accessible to all, safeguards farmers’ rights to select and share seeds, and assigns institutions the responsibility of ensuring the conservation of plant genetic resources and traditional knowledge. The resulting proposal centers food sovereignty, biodiversity, and the resilience of agricultural systems.

The Declaration of the Rights of the Venetian Lagoon and the responsibilities of its inhabitants and users recognizes the Venetian Lagoon as an ecosystem endowed with intrinsic value and a unique biocultural history. The text protects its ecological integrity, biodiversity, life cycles, and cultural heritage, granting the Lagoon the rights to exist and evolve according to its natural rhythms, to be free from pollution and waste, and to transmit to future generations the historical and environmental heritage accumulated over the centuries. It also defines the responsibilities of inhabitants and users in caring for the ecosystem and establishes the body of the Lagoon Guardians, tasked with monitoring its health and representing its interests.

Alongside the development of the Model Laws, LUMEN also carried out a rich range of outreach activities and public engagement initiatives. Among the project’s most significant outputs are its “video pills”: short interviews and dialogues with scholars, researchers, and community representatives, designed to present experiences, places, and perspectives in an accessible format. The project’s video pills offer a series of conversations and interviews addressing issues related to the Rights of Nature, the ecological crisis, and the ecosystem approach. The first episodes explore the role of institutions and law in environmental protection, the connection between legal principles and sustainability, and strategies for adapting to climate change. Other episodes delve into the management of marine ecosystems, the legal personhood of natural environments, and the protection of complex ecosystems, while later videos highlight the importance of local and Indigenous community participation, consultation protocols, and the value of traditional knowledge. The final episodes show how these perspectives can inspire resilient and sustainable models of ecosystem-based management.

In addition to the interviews, the project promoted permanent tools for dialogue and dissemination, such as social media campaigns on LinkedIn, Facebook, and YouTube, and its blog, which collects news, reports, and reflections. Other outputs include the agenda, documenting events organized by LUMEN and related initiatives, and the project publications, showcasing the results of its analytical work. Over the two years, LUMEN also fostered collaborations with other organizations and projects, generating seminars, workshops, and co-design spaces.

Among these activities, the final conference “You Need a Seed to Make a Table: Ecosystem Approach and Rights of Nature for Resilient Territories and Communities,” held on October 10-11, 2025 at the Forlì campus of the University of Bologna, brought together students, researchers, and local communities to reflect on ecosystem approach, territorial resilience, and ecological justice. It opened with the session “The Energy at the Basis of Life,” in which expert researchers illustrated concepts of energy and emergy, as well as scientific models for understanding and protecting ecosystems as complex systems. In the session “Voices from the World,” international activists shared experiences and practices for defending environmental, ecological, and cultural rights in Ecuador and Senegal, underscoring the role of local communities and women in sustainable development. The conference then featured a participatory presentation of the project’s results, with contributions from the research units, associations, and civil society representatives involved over the two years. The session began with an ecological walk guided by citizens through the areas of the Romiti district in Forlì most affected by the 2023 floods, aimed at observing and reflecting on the sites of the environmental disaster. The following presentations shared tools and practices for protecting river basins, conserving lagoons, and promoting the Rights of Nature, highlighting the potential of the ecosystem approach to build resilient territories. The project’s final output will be published in 2026: a series of training podcasts for judges, parliamentary groups, and other institutional actors, designed to make the ecosystem approach applicable through legal and comparative tools useful for environmental governance.

The outputs produced by LUMEN aim to demonstrate how the ecosystem approach can serve as the foundation for a legal system capable of integrating scientific, cultural, and community dimensions, overcoming the limits of traditional environmental law. Through a comparative and interdisciplinary methodology and a transcontinental dialogue, the project provides concrete tools to innovate environmental policies, inspire national and local legislation, and strengthen the connection between human beings, ecosystems, and cultural heritage. In this sense, LUMEN aligns with a broader global framework consistent with the objectives of the Pact for the Future by the United Nations and other international instruments for biodiversity protection, the Rights of Nature, and socio-environmental sustainability, contributing to the translation of global commitments into concrete practices at local and transnational levels.

At a historical moment in which the ecological crisis demands systemic responses, the project’s outputs represent a pioneering contribution to imagining and building a more just, sustainable, and shared legal future, one capable of combining research, community participation, and international governance.

Subscribe now

LUMEN is a PRIN 2022 PNRR project funded by the European Union – NextGenerationEU under the National Recovery and Resilience Plan (PNRR) – Mission 4 Education and Research – Component 2 From Research to Enterprise – Investment 1.1, PRIN 2022 PNRR Call DD no. 1409 of 14 September 2022, proposal code P20222H49L – CUP J53D23018680001.

The conference, organized by the Finland Futures Research Centre (FFRC) and the Finland Futures Academy at the University of Turku, in partnership with VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland Ltd, provided a lively space for innovative thinking and exchange in the field of futures studies. Themed “Mutual Shaping of Socio-Technical Transformations,” it placed foresight at the centre of critical dialogues on ethics, Artificial Intelligence (AI), and the evolving futures of work. The conference convened a multidisciplinary group of participants to explore how emerging technologies both shape and are shaped by societal dynamics. Throughout three days, the meeting served as a powerful platform for knowledge exchange and co-creation. Over 330 participants from 40 countries shared tools, methods, and visions of how foresight can support governance, democracy, and collective resilience in uncertain times. Each day featured rich exchanges of ideas through keynote speeches, academic presentations, and participatory workshops.

During the keynote sessions, I was particularly delighted to hear reflections on the ethical assessment of foresight, presented as a compass to ensure that technologies are developed to enhance, rather than harm, humanity, and on the need to govern complexity when approaching the future, underscoring the potential risks and benefits of emerging forms of Artificial General Intelligence (AGI), among others. I was also particularly interested in discussions on the power of certainties and uncertainties, which suggested that good futurists should highlight what might change, what is likely to remain stable, and what is beginning to resist change, in contrast to the simplified perspective that “everything is possible.” Beyond these points, the keynotes offered many other insights on topics such as imagining futures through creativity and new forms of finance in the era of AGI, enriching the broader conversation and providing fertile ground for the discussions that followed (see Futuuri 2/2025).

The conference also offered a wide range of sessions and workshops covering topics such as governance, education, management, environment, and industry, to name a few, allowing participants to explore diverse perspectives and engage in practical foresight exercises. Among these, The Millennium Project’s special session on “The Radical and the Resilient: Narratives to highlight the road to desired futures of work,” (Di Berardo et al. 2025), held on June 11, 2025, offered a unique opportunity to explore socio-technical futures of work through narrative foresight and collective intelligence. The activity was part of a broader foresight project called T-winning Spaces 2035, funded by the Research Council of Finland and Next Generation EU. Its main objectives are to increase understanding of the sustainability challenges of future digital remote work and to explore how these challenges can be addressed through optimal spatial solutions and practices for households and employers.

The Special Session was organized in collaboration with the FFRC, the Finnish Society for Futures Studies, Aalto University, and the Helsinki Node of the Millennium Project. By integrating narrative foresight, embodied participatory techniques, and collective sense-making, it aimed to generate grounded, situated, and plural visions for the futures of work that acknowledge both technological dynamics and lived human experiences. The workshop was designed to elicit situated socio-technical imaginaries about the future of work through group engagement with actor-based, radical narratives set in 2035.

A Futures Clinique (Heinonen & Ruotsalainen, 2013) was applied to facilitate the session, a special structured format designed to engage groups in exploring future uncertainties, disruptions, and opportunities for innovation. The method’s primary aims are to promote futures thinking and preparedness, to stimulate provocative dialogue, and to leverage collaborative creativity in order to generate new insights, ideas, and actionable responses to complex future-oriented topics. By using the metaphor of a medical clinic to explore future-oriented challenges, participants are invited to act as “doctors” and take topics as “patients” facing uncertainties or disruptions, while moderators serve as “diagnostic enablers.” Through tailored tools and collective inquiry, the Clinique helps uncover the root causes of complex issues, not just their symptoms, and collaboratively generate “prescriptions” for healthy, alternative futures. The Futures Clinique held in Turku aimed to further develop a narrative-based foresight methodology grounded in imaginaries of work, and to examine how situated, affective, and socio-culturally embedded narratives can reveal systemic tensions and emerging transitions in future labour landscapes, and potentially help overcome them.

The workshop unfolded through three interconnected phases, characterizing a Futures Clinique: 1) Gaining perspective, where participants engaged with future narratives and provocations to build initial understanding and to receive points of view on the theme that inspired and provoked; 2) Focusing the foresight lens, where group discussions deepened critical reflection; and 3) Digging up the diamonds, where insights were organized and analysed to reveal emergent themes. The workshop revolved around four future-oriented personas set in 2035, discussing, critiquing, and enriching these narratives collaboratively.

The first phase opened with Sirkka Heinonen (FFRC), Saija Toivonen (Aalto University), and Osmo Kuusi (Finnish Society for Futures Studies) introducing the T-Winning Spaces 2035 project, its methodology and results so far, a new paradigm for the futures of hybrid work in 2035 that envisions work as hybrid and multilocal, the four radical actor-based narratives, and the strategic and semiotic power of stories to foster sense-making. Shortly after, a keynote speech by Jerome Glenn (The Millennium Project) explored the disruptive potential of AGI (Glenn, 2025), demographic and longevity shifts, and potential synergies among emerging technologies. He also highlighted the power of self-actualization economy (Glenn, 2019), with education helping individuals develop their unique potential, and stressed the role of cultural creators in shaping how societies imagine and adapt to transformative futures.

The future provocations included four distinct futures of hybrid work through human-centered lenses, originally developed by the FFRC within the T-Winning Spaces 2035 project by using paradox probing, a two-round Delphi study, and expert interviews. These detailed fictional scenarios, each centered on a persona navigating a distinct socio-technical context in 2035, range from ecological restoration and digital freelancing to clinical medicine and quantum computing, providing a wide-angle view on the potential transformations in work. The characters embodied distinct constellations of expertise, life paths, and relational orientations. Edvin the Econaut is an autonomous eco-restorer who combines mobile DIY science and global mobility to counter biodiversity loss while preserving personal independence. Irene the Influencer is a digitally nomadic freelancer who blends personal branding with environmental advocacy and seeks belonging in global, networked communities. Doris the Dream Designer is a clinical researcher applying AI-assisted dream therapy to foster psychological and vocational resilience, guided by a strong internal ethical compass. Ranjit the Quantum Revolutionist operates as a quantum computing expert confronting surveillance and ethical complexities, while dedicating his efforts to collective well-being and diasporic solidarity. These narratives embed their protagonists within rich technological, social, and emotional contexts, offering situated, human-centered visions of the futures of hybrid work.

In the second phase, participants were randomly assigned to seven groups, each working with one of the four personas. Guided by facilitators, they used an revised Futures Wheel (Glenn, 2009, in Glenn & Gordon, 2009). While the traditional Futures Wheel maps cascading consequences in a temporal logic (first-, second-, and third-order effects), the version used in this application was topic-centered rather than time-centered, and functioned as a mind map revolving around three lenses: well-being, environment, and AI. In concentric rings, participants first reflected on what could make the narratives preferable (circle 1), then moved outward to consider how those ideas might be implemented (circle 2). Colorful post-its, worksheets, and collaborative dialogue helped capture emerging insights.

In the final phase, the groups shared their key ideas in short presentations, receiving feedback from experts. Across all seven groups, 58 participants generated 147 post-its: 55 on well-being, 50 on environment, and 42 on AI, with a balanced engagement between proposed improvements and realization strategies.

As for Edvin the Econaut, Group 1 highlighted two tensions in the narrative: motivating action through emotional engagement, especially among youth, and ensuring effectiveness via scientific rigor. AI was seen as a knowledge-generating tool, while lifestyle and culture were considered key for sustainable, experiential change. Group 5 focused on intergenerational communication, noting how Edvin had failed to connect with younger generations. The key tension highlighted the need for proactive, ongoing bridge-building among age groups. Participants proposed using AI as a “translator” to facilitate communication, share skills, and foster community, reflecting optimism that technology can help overcome generational barriers.

As for Irene the Influencer, Group 2 highlighted the blurred boundaries between work and leisure, as well as the tensions inherent in influencer culture within the narrative. Participants envisioned a future in which she combines authentic, documentary-style content with caregiving, linking personal meaning to societal impact. Group 6 focused on Irene’s dual roles as influencer and caregiver, highlighting work-life tensions, gendered expectations, and systemic care challenges. Participants proposed solutions such as time-banking, robotics, and community projects, envisioning a “caregiver influencer” who redefines freedom through care, rest, and social engagement. Group 7 examined Irene’s struggle to balance caregiving, work, and leisure, noting societal inequalities and climate-related constraints. Participants emphasized mental health, the need for free time, and proposed AI, robotics, and sustainable mobility solutions to support both care and work.

As for Doris the Dream Designer, Group 3 focused on fragile yet potential-rich work in 2035, balancing personal purpose with economic pressures. Key themes included shifting from individualism to communality, building multidimensional resilience, fostering trust, and using diverse knowledge to support solidarity and collective action.

As for Ranjit the Quantum Revolutionist, Group 4 focused on Ranjit and his AI assistant, Arto, exploring the impact of its loss on Ranjit’s well-being. Solutions included rebalancing life with more leisure and family time, and less work, alongside redesigning Arto as a less autonomous, more humanoid, and leisure-supporting assistant, highlighting tensions between technological freedom and personal well-being.

During the workshop, participants built on previous studies and engaged in co-creative discussions and visual techniques, while exploring these dynamics through futures provocations and narratives. In doing so, they experimented with the consequences of some of these potential shifts on daily life and professional practices, moving beyond conventional approaches to imagine futures of work that are resilient and desirable, while seeking to balance awareness of challenges with a positive perspective grounded in human needs and aspirations. The Futures Clinique exercise showed that narrative-based, participatory methods can help explore hybrid futures of work, engaging participants with tensions between freedom and control, individual and societal needs, and technology’s promises and risks, while also identifying practical pathways to desirable futures. The workshop highlighted the central role of self-actualisation, personal values, and community resilience, showing that future work is not only shaped by technology or systems but also by our ability to co-create meaningful, adaptive, and sustainable ways of living and working

The experiment suggests that the futures of work, shaped by emerging technologies, environmental crises, and social transformations, require us to not only imagine, but also to actively co-define, discuss, and build preferable futures, integrating values of well-being, sustainability, and ethics at every step. At the heart of this application is the understanding that no single individual or discipline can fully grasp the complexity of the socio-technical transformations ahead, nor can address them alone. By combining diverse perspectives, knowledge, and cultural insights within a systematic methodological framework, collective intelligence serves as an essential and guiding resource that enables us to identify common opportunities and develop responsible, actionable strategies. This experience reinforces the idea that foresight is not just abstract speculation, but a collective practice of responsibility and co-creation within rigorous methodology.

I hope that this work inspires readers to reflect on the value of collaboration and the importance of thinking collectively with positivity, while recognising collective intelligence as a cornerstone for the decades ahead.

Subscribe now

Drawing on the Global Challenge #11, The Status of Women, from The Millennium Project’s State of the Future, the workshop aimed to contribute to its ongoing update by exploring emerging trends, concerns, opportunities, and visions related to gender equality. Advancements in gender equality—driven by the sustained efforts of women and feminist movements worldwide to challenge patriarchal structures—have significantly contributed to broader progress over the past century. Yet, major gender gaps persist. According to current estimates, achieving full gender parity globally could take another 134 years (WEF, 2024). Within the European Union, the Gender Equality Index stands at 71 out of 100 points, reflecting a remaining gap of 29 points (EIGE, 2024).

Millions of women and individuals of marginalised gender identities and sexual orientations continue to be disproportionately affected by violence, restrictions on bodily autonomy, insufficient legal protections, unequal economic opportunities, and underrepresentation in political decision-making processes across diverse global contexts. Moreover, significant backlashes threaten to undo hard-won progress. The pandemic worsened inequalities, increasing women’s unpaid care work, unemployment, and vulnerability to violence. Reproductive rights are increasingly under attack, queer lives and identities face growing threats, and feminist and gender equality organisations and initiatives are losing crucial funding. The hard-won consensus on the importance of gender equality appears to be weakening—due in part to coordinated efforts by anti-gender movements, often supported by authoritarian governments and right-wing parties, which have contributed to the decline in global attention to these issues. Nonetheless, long-term trends suggest that gradual, transformative shifts in gender norms and stereotypes are underway. In many parts of the world, gender gaps in health and education are narrowing—offering grounds for cautious hope.

Achieving gender equality remains a systemic struggle. It requires confronting deep-rooted discrimination and shifting public discourse from victimhood to agency. This context underscores the pressing need for sustained action—through initiatives and projects that promote dialogue and foresight on gender futures and intersectional feminist agendas.

Against this backdrop, the workshop “Around the World in 15 Global Challenges: Exploring the Future of Gender Equality in Europe” engaged participants in a two-part foresight exercise designed to surface both visionary thinking and practical pathways forward. The first part, held in plenary, invited participants to co-create a Feminist Futures Constellation Map, guided by the question: What are your feminist wishes and worries for gender equality in Europe by 2050? Using visual metaphors, participants placed stars to represent hopes and wishes, clouds to symbolise worries or obstacles, and planets to highlight emerging or underexplored issues. This exercise served both as a diagnostic tool and as a source of inspiration, capturing diverse perspectives across multiple thematic areas. In the second part, participants split into smaller breakout groups to deepen the analysis. Each group selected a specific topic from the constellation map and explored it through a forward-looking, action-oriented lens. They revisited their stars, clouds, and planets, and added concrete proposals—written on post-its—outlining the steps needed to realise their feminist visions or address key risks. These included policy recommendations, institutional reforms, educational initiatives, and responsible actors—effectively bridging imagination and implementation.

Participants explored eight pre-identified themes shaping the future of gender equality in Europe by 2050: health and reproductive rights; language, culture, and education; climate and environment; queer futures and gender identity; migration and borders; geopolitics and conflict; technology and digital rights; and the economy, work, and care. Legal frameworks and rights were identified as fundamental elements underpinning and connecting all thematic areas.

The Feminist Futures Constellation Map, populated during the first phase, visually captures a wide array of feminist hopes, worries, and emerging themes for achieving gender equality in Europe by 2050. Participants shared wishes to shift dominant narratives (e.g., on climate), ensure meaningful inclusion of women and marginalized groups in decision-making (e.g., in geopolitics), and improve access to essential services (e.g., reproductive healthcare). At the same time, they expressed worries about the reinforcement of patriarchal norms through technology (e.g., AI), the persistent invisibility of certain identities (e.g., queer communities), and growing vulnerabilities in times of crisis and conflict.

Wishes (stars) ranged from systemic changes—such as building gender neutrality into AI systems, ensuring equitable access to education, and decolonizing knowledge—to more specific desires, like increasing women’s participation in tech for a sustainable future, expanding the recognition of care work, and aligning legal rights with feminist values. Worries (clouds) reflected persistent challenges: AI reinforcing traditional gender roles, disinformation, lack of transparency in digital systems, the continued invisibility of trans and non-binary people, and geopolitical instability undermining women's rights. New topics (planets) pointed to the importance of interconnected concerns, including legal systems and rights as foundational across all thematic areas. The map as a whole reflects a deep commitment to reimagining not only policy but also the cultural and technological frameworks that shape our societies—highlighting that true gender justice will require holistic, cross-sectoral transformations.

In the second phase, AI, digital rights, and technology emerged as key, cross-cutting themes for three of the four breakout groups, while the fourth group focused on the intersection of education, care, and migration.

Groups 1, 2, and 3 addressed the societal and gendered implications of AI from distinct yet complementary perspectives. Group 1 focused on how AI is reshaping human relationships, caregiving roles, and the transmission of values. Participants expressed concern that emotionally affirming yet uncritical systems may reinforce gender stereotypes and undermine traditional social functions such as education and care. The group emphasized the need for transparency in AI design and for greater involvement of women and gender-diverse individuals in technology development—reflecting broader concerns that historical gender biases are being embedded in current systems, particularly through the influence of anti-gender movement actors.

Group 2 explored “hijacking AI” as a form of feminist digital resistance, proposing guerrilla tactics like supporting click-workers and deliberately flooding AI with diverse, feminist-informed datasets to challenge dominant narratives. They emphasized the urgency of AI and gender equality literacy, and the need to reframe polarised, emotionalised, and politicised public discourse around gender. The group also called for strengthening mental health and resilience, especially for vulnerable groups facing political backlash.

Group 3 addressed digital violence and online safety, highlighting issues such as harassment, deepfakes, and child exploitation. They proposed strong legal frameworks, AI-powered ethical content moderation, and comprehensive digital education promoting critical thinking and online safety. Concerns about the growing use of AI for mental health support—especially among young people—led to recommendations for protective safeguards and EU-level ethical standards. The group also called for international collaborations on gender-inclusive AI, incorporating feminist and intersectional perspectives beyond the Global North.

Group 4, which focused on education, care, and migration, underscored that education is the foundational space where gender equality should begin. Participants noted the absence of tools and language to imagine an inclusive future and proposed a “European Gender Cool Storytelling Week” to foster mutual understanding through storytelling across schools and youth spaces. The group emphasized rethinking values as a lever for change, and encouraged relational, inclusive ways of learning and being together, especially for children growing up in diverse contexts. Their discussion reflected a broader concern with improving access to essential services and shifting dominant narratives that limit imagination around gender justice.

All in all, the workshop offered a rich, imaginative, and grounded feminist-informed foresight exercise that connected looking at long-term global trends with the identification of concrete strategies for action. By anchoring the discussion in The Millennium Project’s Global Challenge on the Status of Women, participants were able to engage critically with persistent inequalities while also envisioning pathways toward systemic transformation. The Feminist Futures Constellation Map and breakout group work revealed both the urgency and creativity of feminist futures thinking—from reimagining digital infrastructures and challenging algorithmic bias to cultivating inclusive education systems and storytelling practices that reflect diverse lived experiences.

Rather than framing gender inequality as a static or isolated problem, the workshop positioned it as a dynamic field shaped by emerging technologies, shifting values, and political tensions. Participants reaffirmed a broad consensus that gender inequality, while affecting all of us, disproportionately impacts women and people with marginalised gender identities and sexual orientations. Their proposals call for interdisciplinary collaboration, alongside intersectional, queer, and decolonial approaches rooted in collective solidarity to dismantle systemic patriarchal structures. Advancing gender equality will require not only policy reform and institutional change but also profound cultural shifts in how we relate, care, learn, and lead.

In the future, as Europe, and not only, faces rising social polarisation, democratic backsliding, and technological disruption, this work is likely to become even more difficult, making the role of those fighting for feminist futures and gender equality ever more vital and their resilience all the more necessary. Together, imagining and talking about such futures offers space for hopeful resistance. As such, this workshop served to utilise feminist-informed foresight as both a framework for reflection and a source of collective imagination—capable of informing more equitable, inclusive, and just futures for all—and hopefully inspiring more conversations of this kind.

Share Futures Digest

At the core of the workshop was Garcia’s Fashion Futuring method—a seven-stage participatory approach that blends speculative design, systems thinking, and embodied reflection. Rather than focusing on trends or economic predictions, this method encourages participants to examine the symbolic, cultural, and systemic layers that influence how we wear, produce, and perceive fashion. It draws on the idea that imagining speculative futures through fashion can help societies critically reflect on values, identities, and environmental concerns. Each step of the workshop invites participants to reframe their relationship with fashion—not as consumers, but as agents of change within interconnected systems of meaning and materiality.

During the Thessaloniki pilot, participants moved through the full cycle of the method. We began with personal reflections (Fashion ID), mapping emotional responses and values connected to clothing and self-expression by thinking about a garment that held personal significance for us. Soon after, we collectively mapped the evolution of fashion across time (Fashion Evolution), placing fashion-related images, concepts, and keywords along a visual timeline spanning past, present, and future, with both upsides and downsides. We used these to explore collective assumptions and beliefs about the cultural role fashion has played as a system in society.

From there, we explored broader social and ecological systems (Impossible Worlds). We stretched our imaginations to embrace uncertainty and the unknown as forces for creativity and let go of our assumptions to dive into fiction. Through collaborative storytelling based on a photo picked from a deck of cards on context, we explored snapshots of the future, imagery-driven fictional worlds where fashion had evolved in response to new values. We asked ourselves what we saw in that image, what emotions it evoked, and what the future looked like based on it.

Shortly after, these imagined futures took form through drawing fictional fashion items (Wearing Fiction) by picking from decks of cards on fashion artefacts, technology, and materials—artefacts not merely of style, but of imagined societies imbued with cultural and symbolic significance. The process facilitated reflection on the values and meanings behind the fictional objects proposed in relation to those Fashion Futures, and helped us identify the potential cultural roles fashion might assume in society and in the future.

The following Fashion Futuring Wheel, an original way to redefine the classic Futures Wheel, helped us ground the values identified in the previous step within a systemic backcasting tool and discuss, from future to present, what actions should be taken to enable a values-driven transformation across different sectors: manufacturing and distribution, material science and technology, design principles and communication, consumption and trends, education and politics, arts and philosophy, and environmental, social, and governance dimensions.

In conclusion, we collectively reflected on and evaluated our impressions of the process, including an assessment of our fictional future by positioning it along intersecting past–future and fiction–reality axes. This prompted us to reconsider what was possible and what was not, given the present, and helped us interpret what these creations revealed about our current anxieties, aspirations, and possible pathways toward more desirable futures.

Subscribe now

The energy in the room was palpable, as ideas flowed freely, anchored by meaningful conversations and visual prototyping. We weren’t just discussing change—we were enacting it through imagination, creativity, and empathy. I confess that my group was quite dystopian, with my sci-fi background somehow taking charge. We envisioned a divided society suspended between hyper-technological advancement and environmental nostalgia. In this snapshot, joy, generosity, and playfulness coexist with fear, inequality, and a sense of overwhelm. While some communities thrive in abundance, others remain excluded—often within virtual realms—longing for a nature that only exists as a curated, simulated experience. In this future, food has become the ultimate form of wealth, surpassing fashion in importance, and the most luxurious lifestyles are attainable only in virtual environments. The big contradiction is that we have many solutions, but only a few people can afford them.

Against this backdrop, we designed a speculative fashion artefact: a hybrid, gender-neutral swimsuit that responds dynamically to its environment. Crafted from nanoscale materials, it can adapt its shape—transforming into a wave or shell depending on the situation—and can even emit protective sounds underwater. It doubles as a functional tool, collecting materials or aiding survival, and includes embedded technology that enhances adaptability and protection, such as regulating temperature or shielding from the sun. The garment is distributed equitably in its basic version—you can tell that we tried to add some positivity here—but premium, customizable editions remain accessible only to the privileged, subtly echoing the broader inequalities of this imagined world. This artefact embodies the contradictions of its time: designed for collective resilience and equality, yet inevitably shaped by the same forces of exclusivity and hierarchy that define its societal context.

The broader system surrounding the artefact reflects a world where advanced nanomaterials give rise to smart textiles, which gradually evolve into adaptable, sustainable garments. The swimsuit emerges from a landscape where design shifts from uniform and accessible forms to expressive and individualized versions, with sustainability guiding material choices. Communication centers on empathy and environmental consciousness, encapsulated in a collective mantra: it's not the suit that suits you, but the fabric—“Gaia”—endorsed by the planet itself. Social trends lean toward minimalism, limited consumption, and a heightened sense of individuality, shaped by an urgent need for protection in the face of global catastrophes. Education and politics reinforce the tension between uniformity for safety and the freedom of personal expression. Manufacturing and distribution rely on blockchain and Artificial Intelligence (AI), ensuring material efficiency and traceability—revealing how even the most forward-thinking designs are intertwined with evolving systems of governance, technology, and ideology.

While our group explored a dystopian future marked by technological extremes and environmental nostalgia, other groups presented alternative visions, each offering unique perspectives on the intersection of nature, technology, and human values. One such vision depicts a future where nature is governed by AI, with freedom as a core value and people prioritizing the soul over what is material. In this future, the big contradiction lies in the fact that AI prioritizes the image of nature over human beings. Here, Mother Earth is sacred, and what’s unexpected is the sense that all can become one—and the invisible, visible. Fashion is all about connection and the fashion artefact representing this future is an empathic air shoe which enables the connection among human beings, nature, and AI.

Another group envisioned a dystopian future where daily life is governed by the need for flexibility and emotional safety. Their fashion artefact, a multifunctional backpack with various features and alternatives, embodies adaptability and comfort, expressing a desire for a “fluffy” existence in the midst of uncertainty. It seems that the backpack isn't just practical—it becomes a symbol of psychological and physical cushioning in a world that feels increasingly unstable.

Another perspective came from a group who emphasized the value of protection, specifically of privacy and identity, in a highly digitalized world. This future includes a raincoat—only one over a lifetime—that not only shields the body for privacy but also allows the wearer to project multiple identities. In this narrative, fashion seems to become a tool for both safeguarding data and exploring fluidity in self-representation.

Yet another group envisioned a divided world again, where privilege is marked by access to AI-integrated smart fabrics, while the less privileged rely on natural materials. Here, survival takes center stage as the core value. The group picked the raincoat card again, and they imagined it enhanced with sensors—reflecting the necessity of technology for those who can afford it, in contrast with the resilience of those grounded in nature-based solutions.

As Clarice Garcia noted in the final reflections, these divergent yet overlapping visions reveal shared anxieties of our time. The recurring presence of protection—from environmental threats, digital exposure, or societal division—demonstrates how current fears shape our speculations about the future. Through technological artefacts or symbolic garments, each group unpacked values like safety, identity, connection, and survival in multifaceted ways, offering a tapestry of fashion as a language for future-making.

Despite the deep focus required and the occasional anxiety that surfaced while reflecting on these uncertain futures, the workshop was an enjoyable and enriching experience. Although I believe there are still some gaps to bridge between the workshop and its potential influence on real-world decision-making processes, introducing a clearer time horizon could strengthen the connection between speculation and strategy. Likewise, making the underlying values—such as sustainability, equity, and collective responsibility—more explicit from the outset might help participants ground their creative explorations in principles that support actionable, long-term visions. In this sense, the method’s power lies not only in what it imagines, but in how it might begin to shape the way we think, plan, and decide together—well beyond the context of the workshop itself.

The event provided us with a space not only for strategic thinking but also for emotional and creative engagement, prompting us to rethink how we consider the objects of our daily lives. The framework challenged us to see clothing not just as a product but as a process—a relational object through which society makes sense of itself. And in a time of environmental breakdown, social fragmentation, and technological acceleration, this reorientation may prove not only necessary but also insightful.

The venue itself, MOMus–Museum of Modern Art, played a key role in shaping the day. As a space dedicated to celebrating modern visual culture, its architecture and curatorial vision enhanced the speculative atmosphere. There was something profoundly poetic about discussing fashion futures amidst exhibitions that themselves challenged traditional perceptions and aesthetic norms. We found ourselves surrounded by Collective Threads: Anna Andreeva at the Red Rose Silk Factory, a powerful exhibition bridging textile heritage with contemporary artistic interpretation, and the evocative energy of the Russian Avant-Garde collection, which provided a compelling journey through revolutionary visual languages and philosophical inquiry. These exhibitions created an immersive environment harmonizing perfectly with the themes of imagination, transformation, and cultural reflection central to the Fashion Futuring workshop, reinforcing an open dialogue between past, present, and future possibilities.

Heartfelt thanks to the organizers and fellow participants. The thoughtful facilitation by Clarice Garcia, the insightful contributions of Epaminondas Christophilopoulos—UNESCO Chair in Futures Research and MOMus President—as well as those of Stavros Mantzanakis and Eliza Savvopoulou from Helenos Consulting, along with the warmth of all the invited experts and the Thessaloniki community, created a rare kind of gathering: intellectually stimulating, emotionally meaningful, and deeply human.

As this pilot feeds into the broader Eye of Europe project, it contributes to a growing body of knowledge about how we might collectively design for desirable futures—not just in fashion, but across all systems of human and planetary interactions.

Let this be just the beginning.

Share

Every year on March 1st, World Futures Day (WFD) brings together people from around the globe to engage in a continuous conversation about the future. What began as an experimental open dialogue in 2014 has grown into a cornerstone event for futurists, thought leaders, and citizens interested in envisioning a better tomorrow. WFD 2025 will mark the twelfth edition of the event.

WFD is a 24-hour, round-the-world global conversation about possible futures and represents a new kind of participatory futures method (Di Berardo, 2022). Futures Day on March 1 was proposed by Humanity+ in 2012 to celebrate the future. Two years later, The Millennium Project launched WFD as a 24-hour worldwide conversation for futurists and the public, providing an open space for discussion. In 2021, UNESCO established a WFD on December 2. However, The Millennium Project and its partners continue to observe March 1 due to its historical significance, its positive reception from the futures community, and the value of multiple celebrations in maintaining focus on future-oriented discussions.

This year’s edition of the event is hosted by The Millennium Project in collaboration with the Association of Professional Futurists (APF), Humanity+, the Lifeboat Foundation, the World Academy of Art and Science (WAAS), and the World Futures Studies Federation (WFSF). Together, they ensure that diverse perspectives are represented.

WFD on March 1st provides a virtual space where self-selected, future-oriented individuals from around the world can discuss humanity’s biggest challenges and opportunities in a relaxed, agenda-free format. The method explores possible and desirable futures and solutions, helps define aspirations and strategies, and contributes to a framework of understanding that supports decision-making on complex problems. It illustrates shared perceptions, disseminates knowledge, and highlights the contributions that the futures community can make, drawing on input from hundreds of people (Di Berardo et al., 2023). It fosters collective intelligence by facilitating debate, gathering ideas, generating new knowledge, encouraging cross-disciplinary exchange, exploring alternatives, and emphasizing global interdependence through diverse perspectives.

Jerome C. Glenn, Executive Director of The Millennium Project, describes the event as an incubator for fresh thinking: “No matter your time zone, you can pull up a virtual chair and join the conversation on Zoom. People come and go as they please. They share their insights with others from all over the world in a relaxed, open conversation that often leads to unexpected ideas, collaborations, and even friendships.”

Abril Chimal and Jeremy Wilken, the new Co-Chairs of APF, highlight the critical role of futures thinking in navigating times of profound uncertainty: “On World Futures Day, we at the Association of Professional Futurists recognize that in times of deep uncertainty, futures thinking is more than a theoretical exercise—it is a necessary practice. As the world faces accelerating change, the ability to anticipate, adapt, and respond to emerging challenges is crucial. Foresight professionals play a key role in turning uncertainty into opportunity, using strategic methodologies to navigate complexity and shape more inclusive, resilient futures. Now more than ever, the practice of futures must move beyond speculation to tangible action. By integrating diverse perspectives, fostering long-term thinking, and challenging dominant narratives, foresight practitioners help communities, organizations, and policymakers make informed decisions. World Futures Day is a reminder that the future is not something we wait for—it is something we actively create.”

Natasha Vita-More, President of Humanity+, emphasizes the importance of proactive engagement with the future: “The future is a mystery. Looking back, we often wish we had seen what was coming—an opportunity missed, a path not taken. Have you ever wanted to rewind time and fix something? If so, why not look ahead instead? That’s why we need Future Day. Future Day offers a moment to pause and ask: What future do we want to build? Future Day is a celebration of imagination, critical thinking, practical optimism, and extraordinary vision that knows no bounds and invites us to be bold and forward-thinking— to make the unachievable become achievable.”

Eric Klien, President of Lifeboat Foundation, highlights the unique forward-looking nature of WFD: “Working with The Millennium Project and others on the important World Futures Day is an honor. Unlike pretty much all holidays which celebrate events that happened in the past, this day celebrates events that are yet to come. It is time for humanity to look forward and not backward.”

Garry Jacobs, President of WAAS, reflects on the challenges we face and the imperative for collective action: “Many of us are exhausted at the seeming regression we witness in all walks of life worldwide and wonder if all our efforts are like the labours of Sisyphus. But the metaphor of the night being darkest before the dawn is valid both in physical nature and human life. Whenever humanity moves close to realizing a greater truth and embracing a higher set of values, all that feels threatened or opposed to the coming transformation rises out of the depths to reassert its outdated claims and the organized privileges of the past which we have not yet fully abandoned. Future beckons us to shake off all forms of fear, complacency, resignation, and self-righteous indignation and move forward with self-determination and self-confidence unshaken by the threats and setbacks that have always characterized humanity's long, slow evolutionary journey. Our main challenge now is of human will, individual and collective, to transform the problems we face into opportunities to build a world that reflects our highest values and aspirations. This round-the-globe round-the-clock conversation on our collective future by The Millennium Project can give voice to those aspirations and catalyze global social transformation.”

Erik F. Øverland, President of WFSF, underscores the critical role of dialogue in navigating increasing global complexities and uncertainties: “Investigating uncertainties is one of the most important characteristics of the Futures Field. So, when the world is getting more complex and the uncertainties about futures options are peaking, the use of foresight and futures research is more needed than ever. These investigations, however, starts with dialogues, dialogues about the futures. And this is exactly what we are aiming at on World Futures Day on March 1st.”

WFD discussions can be framed within four main thematic clusters (e.g. Di Berardo, 2024a), each encompassing a broad array of critical topics that shape humanity's future. These topics are featured in the Global Futures Agenda, a report derived from an in-depth analysis of that year’s discussion (Di Berardo, 2022; Di Berardo et al. 2023; Di Berardo, 2024b), summarizing the most important and urgent issues for the futures community each year.

One key cluster, “Complex solutions for complex problems,” explores some of the most pressing global challenges and opportunities. Recent discussions have revolved around wars and pandemics, environmental and climate change (including the idea of granting rights and personhoods to the living planet), economy and governance systems, urban development and wellbeing, agriculture and food innovation (such as synthetic meat and alternative proteins), transnational organized crime, energy sustainability, and the future of space exploration.

Another major theme, “A hyper-technological humanity,” delves into the societal and ethical implications of emerging technologies. Recent key topics have included the evolution of metaverses and digital security, the dynamic relationship between humans and robots (including debates on robot rights and citizenship), the rise of hybrid human-machine systems and the emergence of a trans-human world, the development of a governance system for the transition toward artificial general intelligence, and the possibility of establishing a Cyber Minister.

This annual event also serves as a key forum for forward-looking reflections on “Education and learning for a better future.” Discussions focus on how education and learning can adapt to future challenges, covering topics such as the future of education, virtual and AI-driven teaching and training, emerging skills and innovative learning methods, and strategies to enhance human intelligence. It also underscores the importance of futures literacy and futures thinking at all levels and highlights speculative fiction as a powerful tool for fostering creativity and visionary thinking.

Additionally, a significant focus is placed on advancing futures studies and foresight methodologies to enhance our ability to anticipate and navigate complex futures, as explored in the “Improving global foresight” cluster. Topics within this cluster examine the evolution of futures research, its methodologies and approaches, including the evaluation of trillions of scenarios, as well as the understanding of randomness and complexity. Discussions also explore innovative decision-making and planning strategies, promoting deeper engagement and driving leadership transformation. Recent key ideas include the creation of a UN Office of Strategic Threats, strategies to develop the UN’s five foresight elements, and the establishment of futures committees and bodies worldwide.

Participating in WFD is simple and open to all. The event kicks off at 12 noon in New Zealand and follows the sun westward, concluding 24 hours later in Hawaii. While participants are typically invited to join at noon in their respective time zones, they are welcome to drop in at any time—and as often as they like—throughout the 24-hour conversation to listen, engage, and share their ideas. Registration is required to attend WFD 2025, as it grants access to the Zoom link and participation in the discussions. These discussions follow the Chatham House Rule, ensuring open and honest dialogue without formal attribution.

Over the years, WFD has featured renowned thought leaders and experts, including Internet pioneer Vint Cerf and futurist pioneer Ted Gordon. Last year's event opened with a tribute to Gordon’s legacy, and there are rumors that Vint Cerf may join again this year for the sixth time. In addition to the main 24-hour event, WFD on March 1 also includes various side events organized by international organizations, offering diverse opportunities for engagement and collaboration.

Teach the Future, in collaboration with The Millennium Project and others, hosts World Futures Day – Young Voices, a side event designed to share younger generations' perspectives. Students and young leaders engage with professional futurists and other participants to discuss their visions for the future. Various side events in different national languages often take place throughout the day, further enriching the global conversation and making futures discussions more accessible to diverse communities. This year, for instance, in celebration of the 20th anniversary of the Turkish Futurists Association, a full-day hybrid event will take place on March 1st, featuring esteemed speakers who will engage in discussions on the future.

Participation in WFD has consistently remained high over the years. Through collaborative dialogue, participants exchange ideas, discuss global challenges, and uncover new insights. At times, they also develop follow-up actions—such as in 2021, when over 200 experts signed an open letter shortly after WFD and sent it to the UN Secretary-General, calling for a feasibility study on a UN Office on Strategic Threats. With hundreds of participants joining in, the event brings together a wide range of perspectives, including minority and indigenous voices, fostering the cross-pollination of ideas and highlighting global interdependencies. This commitment to inclusivity offers participants worldwide a unique opportunity to exchange views, gain insights, and connect across diverse backgrounds.

In a world of rapid technological, environmental, and social change, open forums like WFD are more crucial than ever. They provide a rare opportunity to pause, reflect, and collectively envision bold new possibilities for our shared future. As a global meeting ground, WFD brings together diverse voices and experiences, fostering a deeper sense of interconnectedness.

Whether you're a futurist, policymaker, technologist, artist, entrepreneur, scientist, or simply curious about what lies ahead, WFD invites you to be part of the conversation. Together, we can shape a more sustainable, inclusive, and equitable future for all.

In a previous article, we highlighted how the Pact drew insights from earlier processes, its main contents and commitments, and what may immediately catch the eye of a futurist—such as the focus on future generations and the appointment of a special envoy, the attention to rising catastrophic and existential risks, and the commitment to support international governance of artificial intelligence for the benefit of humanity. As we navigated this significant milestone, we wondered what the futures community thinks about it and gathered insights and perspectives.

Jerome Glenn, CEO and Co-Founder of The Millennium Project, applauds the Pact as a “massively complex and quite comprehensive normative statement that recognizes existential risks and the potential of global transformation to a better future for all.” However, he also expresses significant disappointments regarding its contents: “Much of the text is more about reaffirming past agreements than about the potential futures of civilization,” a sentiment that seems to resonate with many. He further highlights notable omissions: “There was not a word about synthetic biology—potentially a bigger impact on the future of civilization than the industrial revolution. Most children born today will see the year 2100, and nearly all of their lives will be augmented by Artificial Superintelligences—no evidence of this kind of insight is anywhere.”

When expected topics are covered by the Pact, such as governing AI at an international level, the results appear unsatisfactory in some instances. Glenn remarks that the “Global Governance of the transition from Artificial Intelligence (AI) we have today to Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) we could have within this decade is the most complex and difficult management question humanity has ever faced. Its urgency is not mentioned anywhere except for some mild statements in the Global Digital Compact.” These include enhancing AI governance for humanity’s benefit, governing AI in the public interest, ensuring that it fosters diverse cultures, defining an agile, multidisciplinary, and adaptable multi-stakeholder approach with the UN playing a key role, and establishing a UN-based Independent International Scientific Panel on AI for evidence-based risk and opportunity assessments. Additionally, he suggests carefully defining the criteria for selecting the experts of the panel and establishing the UN coordination office in the form of a collective intelligence system.

Erik F. Øverland, President of the World Futures Studies Federation, reflects on the significance of this Pact and how to move forward, suggesting that “The Futures of Humankind are the Futures of Truth. Let’s move beyond current dichotomies like modernism vs postmodernism, Natural vs Artificial, and establish a sound foundation for Humankind Commons.” 

Underscoring the opportunities that this pact opens, Jeremy Wilken, board member of the Association of Professional Futurists, states that “The key insight is the call for the UN system to leverage foresight as a key part of the methodology for addressing the challenges we face. This provides a unique opportunity for practitioners and futures literates to make a large impact in shaping the implementation of foresight practices, since it was left largely undefined. For this to work, we need to embrace and expand the global diversity of the foresight community, help to realize new and expand existing multilateral institutions and practices, and find ways to increase the involvement of youth, women, and other marginalized groups.”

Although Garry Jacobs, President of the World Academy of Art and Science, considers the Pact "a powerful and idealistic statement,” he recalls what UN DSG Amina Mohammed said at a high-level event on education in April: “‘We need to focus on three words: ‘Implementation. Implementation. Implementation.’ We need more region-specific implementation strategies, as different regions may face unique challenges in applying the decisions. A framework of viable targets and indicators must be developed that addresses each of these strategies and scales of engagement. We need to harness advanced technologies, including cutting-edge Generative AI, to expand and enhance global capacity for the task at hand.”

Indeed, many share the concern that these agreements may end up being little more than symbolic promises. For instance, Nicolas Balcom Raleigh, President of the Foresight Europe Network, speaking as an individual, notes that “The Pact echoes worldwide concern about the present-day military conflicts, a reason people migrate and cause of great suffering to now-living generations.” However, he adds, “It is challenging to believe the sincerity of some of UN member states’ commitments expressed in the outcome document in light of the wars and armed conflicts which continued to kill, harm, and destroy during the Summit itself.” He proposes that, in the future, all parties should voluntarily agree to a worldwide ceasefire to honor the significance of the occasion.

While implementation remains a top concern, there is hope that the emphasis on future generations will guide lasting change; however, doubts about the true forward-looking potential of the Pact persist. “Nearly all paragraphs of the Pact for the Future and its annexes include expressions of norms and values which are largely based upon previously shared understandings in the UN System about what should be done concerning significant international issues already in view (…). The Summit’s Outcome Documents can be read as written expressions of collectively agreed present-day norms and values, which can illuminate purposefulness and the greater good in near-future decision-making,” Balcom Raleigh continues. 

Eppu Mikkonen, Development Policy Specialist at the Finnish Development NGOs Fingo, reinforces this point by stating: “The world and the solutions it describes are largely of the present (...). Yet we are on the brink of an unforeseen transformation of world population from pyramids to pillars—the future is older. It requires a whole new perspective.” Gabino Ayarza Sánchez, Founder of Ciudad del Saber, adds that “The future is moving at an unprecedented pace, driven by rapid technological advancements, societal shifts, and environmental pressures (…). The ability to adapt to these changes while maintaining ethical, sustainable, and inclusive frameworks will determine how well we navigate the challenges and opportunities ahead.”

Mariana Todorova, Associate Professor in Futures Studies and Strategic Planning at the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, says that while the Pact addresses nearly all of the problems and challenges of the future, “the document is static. That is, no synergies are foreseen, for example, between technologies, disruptions, and discontinuities, black swans. It does not account for the fact that both the problems and technologies will evolve and change. This is most evident in our issue—AGI. We no longer have time to stay at the level of mere observations.” 

José Luis Cordeiro, founding member of the Faculty of Singularity University, WAAS fellow, and Vice Chair of HumanityPlus, emphasizes the need to open possibilities: “Even though the general vision of a Pact for the Future might seem like a great idea now, we also have to consider the problems, for example, of a unique dystopian future like George Orwell’s 1984. Thus, with hindsight, instead of a monolithic world supervised by global bureaucrats, it is important to keep our minds open for more future possibilities as different countries improve their conditions (…).”

As stated earlier, the futures community has widely embraced specific commitments regarding the use of foresight. “It is pleasing to see the summit’s outcome documents mention an intention to increase the use of foresight in governments and in the UN system itself,” Balcom Raleigh says. However, he continues, “While all futures studies scholars, foresight practitioners, futures studies teachers, and students know that there are several far more dynamic methods for generating, exploring, and discussing ideas about the future, the summit proceedings—to the best of my knowledge—did not include any foresight workshop or exercise for its high-level participants. A future when all UN Member States and UN agencies actively and cooperatively conduct, share, and thoughtfully discuss foresight will require new skills and capacities in governments, organizations, and societies.” Futures literacy, mentioned in Annex II, “is in my view a general-purpose capability that would help all who attempt to launch, deepen, and network their foresight processes to do so more reflexively while moving inside the transformations they seek to catalyze.”

Eric Noël, initiator of the Canada Towards 2030 project, says that the commitments to improve long-term thinking and foresight in policy-making to safeguard the needs and interests of future generations “are bold, important, and timely for everyone, not just for futurists, foresight specialists or international treaty drafters; but the Declaration does not say how we will do that. Appointing a UN Special Envoy for Future Generations, probably boosting UN in-house foresight capacity, and maybe having ad-hoc follow-up forums won’t be either effective nor enough for the above to-do list. I think that creating a new and independent intergovernmental panel could do the ‘how to.’” That’s why during the Summit’s consultation in December 2023, the Canada Towards 2030 Project submitted the idea to launch a new panel named Intergovernmental Panel on the Future of Humanity (IPFH). Drawing a parallel to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the IPFH could “meet the commitment of producing, uniting, optimizing, and communicating independent and original futures studies and related long-term policy innovation and option among Member States, with and within the UN system, and, even more importantly, with civil society, private sector, academia, and NGOs. A global, panoramic, integrated, non-siloed, proactive, and highly competent ‘observatory’ would expand the world’s awareness of and preparedness for multiple, complex, and emerging trends and technologies that could affect tomorrow’s planet, people and policy.”

The Pact of the Future is a substantial document that touches on a wide range of topics, each serving as a catalyst for future discussions and actions. References to global challenges restate previous agreements with increased urgency and ambition in light of the Agenda 2030 and beyond. On the Pact’s ambitions, Ufuk Tarhan, member of the high advisory board of the Turkish Association of Futurists, says: “The UN’s Pact for the Future sets big goals, but faces major obstacles like energy shortages/costs, weak/no internet access, unfair financial systems and Income inequality, cyber security issues and AI governance. These challenges are tied to deeper political and economic issues, making progress hard since nations often prioritize their own interests. Corruption worsens this by misusing resources and breaking trust, essential for real change. The pact’s ideas for peace and digital fairness are inspiring, but ongoing conflicts over resources and the digital divide show how hard it is to put these plans into action. Young people are frustrated, often doubting whether global agreements will truly improve their lives. In reality, the pact might be better as a guideline rather than something strictly enforced. It could push for small, steady improvements, especially in areas like climate change. For real success, global agreements must turn into actions that make a difference locally. This requires not just international teamwork but also overcoming the cultural and system-wide challenges within individual countries. The key is to be realistic and patient, knowing that change takes time, especially in complex global and domestic environments.”

All things considered, many doubts remain regarding the three texts approved at the Summit of the Future. These doubts primarily concern the real political will to fulfill the stated purposes and commitments, the UN’s actual capacity to promote and implement them in the new multilateral system, and the availability of funding needed to support these commitments. Beyond these concerns, one fundamental issue seems to underlie all the texts: they lack a genuine forward-looking vision beyond mere rhetoric about the future. Nevertheless, there is reason for optimism; the Pact for the Future provides a promising framework for dialogue and collaboration, emphasizing the potential for innovative solutions and collective action to address pressing global challenges. Although “there are so many statements that make one shout: ‘Come on! How? Who?’” Glenn states, “people will be able to use this document to lobby their governments for better conditions saying, ‘You agreed to the Pact for the Future that includes doing X and now you should do X.’ May it help move the diverse masses of humanity, laws, politics, built environments, and global nervous system in improving directions.”

Similarly, Balcom Raleigh concludes that “the document did and will serve a purpose of driving consensus on urgent matters.” Guillermo Gándara, the recently elected President of the Red IBERoamericana de Prospectiva, states that “The Pact for the Future lays the foundations for answering the questions: How to respond to the needs of the present while preparing for the challenges of the future? And how can we better cooperate to make the aspirations of achieving better futures for everyone a reality? It seeks to accelerate efforts to fulfill our international commitments and adopt measures to face new challenges and take advantage of new opportunities that arise. In summary, the Pact for the Future represents a unique opportunity to demonstrate that international cooperation can respond effectively to the challenges that have arisen in recent years or those to come.”

Ibon Zugasti, Deputy Director of The Millennium Project and Managing Director of Prospektiker, adds, “The Pact may not be perfect, and may not respond to all the demands of the international community, but it establishes a framework and begins the work of aligning peace and security efforts more closely with sustainable development. The Pact needs to be approached in its entirety; its value comes from the sum of its parts—it is ultimately a forward-looking document.”

While the Pact for the Future lays the groundwork for meaningful collaboration, its successful implementation hinges on the alignment and support of major stakeholders, particularly in addressing pressing global challenges. There cannot be an effective implementation plan if the major actors influencing compliance are not aligned first. Although the Secretary-General Guterres has been heard by states and stakeholders, he has not received sufficient support to implement the commitments, especially in light of the ongoing conflicts in Ukraine, the Middle East, and Sudan.

Three critical issues urgently require resolution, and a basic consensus should be pursued immediately: Artificial General Intelligence, Climate Change, and Peace and Security. If a firm, practical consensus is not reached on these issues, much of the Pact will remain precarious and at risk of existential irrelevance. There must be a global mobilization—across civil society, science, business, think tanks and NGOs, and the broader public—pressing for compliance with the Pact and empowering the UN to generate feasible, actionable plans for each member state. Moreover, further contributions from the futures community will be essential to define long-term strategies that better anticipate future challenges, and the community is willing to continue contributing.

In conclusion, we wish to express our appreciation for the extensive efforts and diverse content encompassed in the Pact for the Future and its annexes. We join many others in hoping that this Pact will serve as a powerful catalyst for change, guiding humanity toward more long-term, integrated, and sustainable pathways, ensuring that future generations inherit a world that is not only viable but also thriving.

The first decision relates to the twelve commitments approved at the seventy-fifth General Assembly in 2020, marking the organization's anniversary: leave no one behind; protect our planet; promote peace and prevent conflicts; uphold international law and ensure justice; place women and girls in the center; build trust; improve digital cooperation; upgrade the United Nations (UN); ensure sustainable financing; boost partnerships; listen to and work with youth; and be prepared for future crises. To achieve these goals, they emphasized the need for a revitalized, inclusive, networked, and effective multilateralism.

The second decision pertains to the report “Our Common Agenda,” prepared by Secretary-General António Guterres under the mandate of the Assembly and presented in 2021. The agenda reflects the outcome of a year-long process involving Member States, intellectuals—futures organizations included, young people, and civil society, plus an electronic survey that was answered by one and a half million people and polls in 70 countries. The Agenda is structured into main areas related to establishing a new social contract centered on human rights; renewing solidarity with younger and future generations; a new global deal to deliver public goods and address major risks, and adapting the UN to a new era. As emphasized by The Millennium Project (see Section 5 of the recently published State of the Future 20.0), the Agenda contains important foresight elements and proposes to reach effective commitments through key moments along with the Pact and its annexes, such as the Summit on transforming education, held in 2022; a Social Summit, to be held in 2025; and the Summit of the Future, held in September 2024.

The Pact for the Future is organized into five areas, leading to fifty-six actions that affirm commitments to achieve concrete deliverables.
Sustainable development and financing for development encompass 12 actions focusing on eradicating poverty, ending hunger, closing financing gaps, achieving gender equality and environmental protection, and promoting culture and inclusive and peaceful societies, while ensuring the full implementation of the 2030 Agenda by that year and beyond.

The fifteen actions outlined in International Peace and Security focus on establishing and maintaining peaceful, inclusive, and just societies. These actions aim to protect civilians, support humanitarian needs, promote international cooperation and conflict resolution, fulfill disarmament obligations, address security threats like terrorism, organized crime, and nuclear weapons, and adapt peace operations to contemporary and emerging challenges, such as preventing an arms race and advancing discussions on lethal autonomous weapons systems. Additionally, these actions emphasize harnessing new technologies while managing associated risks.

Science, technology and innovation and digital cooperation include six actions leveraging them to benefit people and the planet, strengthening capacities in developing countries, ensuring human rights and gender equality, integrating indigenous and local knowledge, and enhancing the UN's role in fostering international cooperation in these fields.

The four actions included in Youth and future generations emphasize investing in the social and economic development of children and youth, promoting their human rights and social inclusion, and enhancing meaningful youth participation both nationally and internationally.

Transforming Global Governance includes nineteen actions focused on revitalizing the multilateral system by reforming the Security Council for greater inclusivity and accountability, strengthening the roles of the General Assembly, the Economic and Social Council, and the Peacebuilding Commission, and accelerating reforms of the international financial architecture to support sustainable development, address the needs of developing countries, and effectively respond to global challenges. Key themes of the Pact can be explored on a dedicated UN site.

The Global Digital Compact (GDC), outlined in Annex 1, focuses on the specific objective to harness digital and emerging technologies, including Artificial Intelligence (AI), for sustainable development while managing associated risks. The Compact serves as a comprehensive global framework for digital cooperation. It includes five objectives related to closing digital divides, expanding inclusion in the digital economy, fostering a secure digital space that respects human rights, advancing equitable data governance, and enhancing international governance of AI for the benefit of humanity. Based on specific principles related to digital cooperation, each objective details commitments to achieve meaningful and measurable actions by 2030. These should promote agile and adaptable cooperation in a rapidly evolving digital landscape in collaboration with the private sector, the civil society, international organizations, and the technical and academic communities. The implementation of the Global Digital Compact must take into account different national realities, capacities, and levels of development, respecting national policies and priorities and legal frameworks. To facilitate this, a follow-up and review process is also included, aiming to create an implementation map for monitoring progress and a high-level, inclusive review meeting to be held during the eighty-second General Assembly session.

Finally, the Pact also includes a Declaration on Future Generations in Annex 2, a key theme highly valued by experts in futures studies. The Declaration, together with the Pact, underscores the importance of considering “all those generations that do not yet exist, and who will inherit this planet,” whose needs and interests must be safeguarded. The declaration includes guiding principles upon which it is based, and actions to implement, institutionalize, and monitor the above commitments in national, regional, and global policy-making. These actions include measures such as leveraging science and data, ensuring inclusive access to knowledge, strengthening accounting systems, investing in capacity to prepare for challenges and shocks, adopting a whole-of-government approach, and enhancing stakeholder cooperation.

What may immediately catch the eye of a futurist is the recognition, both within the Pact and the specific Declaration, that we must safeguard the needs and interests not only of the present but also of future generations. Futurists have been talking about intergenerational fairness for decades, both as a challenge and as a responsibility, as has the UN, admitting that youth and future generations “will live with the consequences of our actions and our inaction.” The Pact focuses on improving their prospects and those of the generations yet to come by systematically listening to them in participatory policy-making, an opportunity and a duty that is being pursued by futures-oriented organizations as well. It promotes the use of strategic foresight, anticipatory planning, and futures literacy in terms of analysis, planning, and education, and commits to follow up on the Special Envoy for Futures Generations to represent and advocate for future generations, raise awareness of intergenerational impacts of decisions, and facilitate collaboration. The UNGA will convene a high-level plenary during its eighty-third session to review the Declaration's implementation and actions, with the Secretary-General presenting a related report for consideration.

A second prominent point for futurists is the awareness that we are living in a time of profound global transformation - at a faster and faster rate of change and complexity, we would add - where “We are confronted by rising catastrophic and existential risks, many caused by the choices we make”. The urgency to anticipate, assess, and address all those, more or less potential, risks that threaten our lives has been raising concerns for years, prompting actions such as, for instance, a global call for a new UN Office of Strategic or Existential Threats. For these and for all the many challenges that we face and that are included in the outcome, the Pact underlines the fundamental importance of a new multilateralism to ensure a better future for people and planet and to strengthen partnerships with society, perhaps one of the most important ways to address global challenges that are, as The Millennium Project has been stating for years, transnational in nature and transinstitutional and interdisciplinary in solution. The Pact also declares “a more coherent, cooperative, coordinated and multidimensional international response to complex global crises and the central role of the United Nations.” After all, there is “hope and opportunity”, says the Pact by sharing the need highlighted by many to stimulate positive futures, and we can follow “a path for a brighter future for all of humanity” through the actions that the Pact includes.

A third topic that may be futuristically thought-provoking is related to the opportunities and potential risks associated with new and emerging technologies, AI included. Given the recent initiatives on governing the transition to Artificial General Intelligence (AGI)—see, for instance, a recent global call signed by hundreds of experts—this has become a highly anticipated topic across many fields. The Pact emphasizes how AI could be used to support sustainable development while also highlighting the risk of abuses, inequalities, and human rights violations if not properly regulated. The commitments for an inclusive, open, sustainable, fair, safe, and secure digital future for all include enhancing international governance of AI for the benefit of humanity by assessing and addressing potential impacts, opportunities, risks, future directions, and implications through an agile, multidisciplinary and adaptable multi-stakeholder approach. By acknowledging the UN role in shaping, enabling and supporting such governance, a specific multidisciplinary independent international scientific panel on AI will be established within the UN, in order to promote scientific understanding through evidence-based impact, risk, and opportunity assessments. A procedure for voluntary endorsement of the Compact will be defined in December and a Global Dialogue on the governance of AI will be launched alongside existing relevant UN conferences and meetings.

The Pact is a dense document and contains many other topics, mostly related to some of the major global challenges we have been discussing for years, such as climate change, poverty, hunger, and gender equality, to name a few. This is not surprising, considering the Pact itself states, “Progress on most of the Goals is either moving too slowly or has regressed below the 2015 baseline.” Previous commitments are reconfirmed, and even scaled up, with some “future sparks”, such as, for instance, preventing and combating transnational organized crime through comprehensive strategies, including prevention, early detection, and investigation; requesting the Secretary-General to make recommendations on sustainable development indicators beyond gross domestic product; and continuing the consultations on the proposal for a fourth UN Conference on the Peaceful Exploration of Outer Space (UNISPACE IV) in 2027.

The Pact of the Future continues to shape conversations about the paths we will take moving forward, and establishes review processes for its overall implementation, a coordination office to support its progress, and reports during upcoming sessions of the UNGA.
What are our thoughts on the Pact? Is it what we anticipated after all those years of preparation? As we explore the documents and shape our opinions on this significant milestone, we’ve been wondering what the futures community thinks of this work and its commitments, and we’re reaching out to gather insights and opinions to better understand the Pact and its implications.

We invite you to subscribe to receive updates on the next article and share your thoughts on the Pact with us.

The State of the Future 20.0 by Jerome Glenn, Theodore Gordon, Elizabeth Florescu, and The Millennium Project team—a global think tank for futures research composed of over 70 Nodes around the world—is a monumental 500-page report that provides an extensive overview of the key issues and opportunities shaping the future of humanity.

The 20th edition is dedicated to Ted Gordon, a visionary whose contributions have profoundly shaped the future of futures research. I have had the opportunity to meet him over the years and exchange ideas, and I truly believe he is one of the most knowledgeable and gentle people I have ever encountered. Ted has pioneered more methodologies in the field of futures studies than any other futurist, as rightly noted in the tribute. This alone merits a dedicated post—or even a book—, so let’s return to the matter at hand.

The State of the Future represents a cumulative body of work, combining decades of research and incorporating contributions from hundreds of futurists and experts worldwide, along with numerous studies conducted by The Millennium Project. Each new edition extends further into the future, offering fresh insights and innovative proposals.

In releasing the 20th edition, Jerome Glenn, CEO and Co-Founder of The Millennium Project, said that this “500-page whopper could have the greatest breadth and depth on issues of the future of the world in existence today.” “We are winning more than we are losing,” he added, “but where we are losing is very serious; humanity has the resources to address these challenges, but not the decision-making yet.”

The Executive Summary of the State of the Future 20.0, available for free download, provides a concise yet impactful overview of the prospects for civilization. It offers a clear perspective on both present global challenges and future opportunities. This opening section sets the tone for the publication by highlighting critical trends and emerging possibilities, while preparing the reader for a deeper exploration of the strategies needed to navigate an increasingly complex and interconnected future.

Section 1 of the report by Jerome Glenn presents an updated overview of 15 major Global Challenges facing humanity, which The Millennium Project has been monitoring since the late 1990s. These challenges are considered equally important and interconnected, and each includes regional overviews and potential solutions, making the contents highly actionable for decision-makers at various levels.

In Section 2 by Elizabeth Florescu, the State of the Future Index 2035 integrates 29 different variables to assess whether the future is getting better or worse. This future scorecard is an indication of the outlook for the future based on a combination of quantitative data and judgements. It offers key insights into “areas where humanity is winning, losing, or stagnating”.

AI plays a major role in Sections 3 and 4 of the report. Section 3, coordinated by Jerome Glenn with contributions from José Cordeiro, Zhouying Jin, Mariana Todorova, and David Wood, focuses on the transition from Artificial Narrow Intelligence (ANI) to Artificial General Intelligence (AGI), reporting the major results of the first two phases of the ongoing study by The Millennium Project. The first addresses insights from 55 global AGI experts, answering 22 critical questions on the future development of AGI. From these insights, the study identifies 40 national and international regulations and 5 governance models, which are evaluated by an international panel of 299 experts in the second phase. These insights are crucial for shaping policy frameworks to ensure that the transition to AGI is managed safely, ethically, and in ways that benefit humanity. They will be followed by alternative scenarios very soon.

Fast-forwarding to 2045, Section 4 on Beneficial AGI, led by Jerome Glenn along with Verónica Ágreda de Pazo, José Cordeiro, Elizabeth Florescu, Theodore Gordon, and Maria Mateo, presents a scenario of a typical day in the world of 2045, where AGI has become an integral part of our daily life. This scenario explores how AGI could enhance the quality of life, solve complex societal challenges, and unlock new opportunities for human progress. The work, accompanied by answers about AGI, is a result of The Millennium Project's entry in the Future of Life Institute competition in 2022, where it reached the 4th place. You can watch the video to have an idea.

The report also aligns with the United Nations Secretary-General' Our Common Agenda, addressing its five key foresight elements in Section 5, led by Jerome Glenn. A Real-Time Delphi study by The Millennium Project, conducted in 2022 with 189 experts from 54 countries, highlights how the futures community supports these elements as an integrated system. The study evaluates their importance for global foresight and provides a synthesis of panel feedback, insights, and strategies for implementing UN reforms.

World Futures Day, , the focus of Section 6 that I had the pleasure of writing, synthesizes the 24-hour global discussions on the future held annually on March 1 by The Millennium Project and others since 2014. I must confess that I’m thrilled to have contributed by illustrating a method that I believe offers a significant opportunity for sharing and reflecting together on the futures. The insights shared by hundreds of participants each year are analyzed to produce Global Futures Agendas, capturing these collective views and guiding further conversations. The section illustrates the method and showcases some of the main key global perspectives from the latest WFDs that may help shape a better future.

In a particularly imaginative part of the publication, Section 7 by Jerome Glenn explores the possibilities of AI robots by 2050. It delves into potential applications of robots in governance, ocean exploration, space missions, and even in personal relationships, predicting that they will outnumber humans and be involved in everything from healthcare to space colonization. This futuristic vision paints a vivid picture of how robotics might reshape society in ways previously unimaginable.

The report concludes with policy recommendations aimed at addressing the global challenges and opportunities identified. These recommendations are designed to guide hard-headed pragmatic idealists in adopting forward-thinking strategies that promote sustainable development, encourage innovation, and ensure a better future for everyone.

As reported in the endorsements, Jehangir Khan (UN Council of Presidents of UNGA) considers the State of the Future 20.0 timely in view of the UN Summit of the Future and a must-read for all. Danica Purg (IEDC-Bled School of MGT) finds it essential for leaders concerned about AGI. Koo Yun-cheol (Minister of Government Policy Coordination, Republic of Korea) suggests considering the report a required textbook. Oana Stănilă (Bucharest University of Economic Studies) describes it as a valuable resource for business. Garry Jacobs (World Academy of Art and Science) views it as a visionary roadmap for global collaboration, and Gemma Santana (Choose for Climate) highlights the urgent need for sustainability as emphasized in the report.

The State of the Future 20.0 is one of the most thorough and insightful publications on future studies available today. It offers invaluable perspectives for globally minded citizens, policymakers, and researchers, providing the knowledge necessary to make informed decisions that will shape a more promising future. I look forward to exploring the insights and implications of this important work with all of you!

Futures Digests is your go-to source for global news and research in futures studies and foresight. Stay informed on the latest trends and insights shaping the future.

Subscribe now

Current efforts in governing the field focus on addressing the proliferation of Artificial Narrow Intelligence (ANI) technologies, which are widespread today. However, there is often insufficient attention to the distinction between ANI and its potential evolutions into AGI and Artificial Superintelligence (ASI), as outlined in the scenarios included in the “Work/Tech 2050” study by The Millennium Project, and to the development of global governance models for the transition to AGI, which is the subject of an ongoing study by the same organization.

Signed by 230 political, business, and academic leaders from around the globe, the letter expresses growing concerns about the safety and governance of the transition to AGI, a form of AI expected to emerge within the next decade. Unlike current AI systems—referred to as ANI, which excel in specific tasks—AGI would possess the ability to learn and perform a wide range of cognitive tasks, eventually surpassing human intelligence.

The signatories stress the critical need for establishing global regulatory frameworks before AGI systems are developed and deployed, and urge the UN General Assembly to convene a special session focused on the governance of the transition to AGI during its upcoming meeting in September. Specifically, they calls for a UN resolution to establish a "Committee of the willing" tasked with drafting a global convention on AI. This proposed convention would address both ANI and AGI, laying the groundwork for a specialized international agency responsible for overseeing the safe development and deployment of AI technologies.

This is not the first time that The Millennium Project and its partners have led similar initiatives. In 2021, following a global discussion held during World Futures Day on March 1, they proposed creating a UN Office on Strategic Threats to centralize and coordinate global efforts on long-range risks for humanity, including advanced AI, in an open letter to UN Secretary-General António Guterres. Shortly thereafter, the UNGA Secretary-General released the well-known report titled “Our Common Agenda” that includes periodic UN Strategic Foresight and Global Threats reports among its foresight elements. But we’ll revisit that at a later date.

Today's open letter on the governance of the transition to AGI emphasizes the risks associated with unregulated AGI development, warning that without a coordinated effort involving national licensing systems and UN oversight, rogue versions of AGI could be released on the Internet. These systems could potentially rewrite their own code, continually increasing their intelligence at an exponential rate, and evolve into ASI, which would exceed human control and understanding.

Stuart Russell, a leading AI expert from the University of California, highlights the gravity of this situation, stating, "Failure to solve (this problem) before proceeding to create AGI systems would be a fatal mistake for human civilization", as reported by The Millennium Project.

As noted in the letter, the United Nations has made significant progress with the approval of AI-related General Assembly resolutions, the preparatory documents for the Pact for the Future and the Global Digital Compact, and with the advancement of work by ad-hoc expert groups on AI. However, the signatories believe that these efforts are not yet sufficient and that additional political and institutional support is needed to ensure that AI development remains safe and aligned with human rights.

The UN convention advocated in the letter should lead to the creation of a specialized multi-stakeholder, multilateral UN agency on Artificial Intelligence to continually study, guide, coordinate, and propose to member states the necessary measures and actions for the governance and safe development of Artificial Intelligence in all its forms.

A recent international study, set to be published in the upcoming “State of the Future 20.0” by The Millennium Project, found that such a structure for the agency is the most likely approach to ensure AI development aligns with human rights, ethical considerations, and the overall well-being of society. This governance model would involve the participation of a diverse array of stakeholders, working together to guide the transition to AGI in a safe and ethical manner.

The open letter to the President of the UN General Assembly underscores the urgency of addressing the governance of the transition to AGI as a global priority. Jerome Glenn, CEO and Co-Founder of The Millennium Project, describes governing this transition as "the most complex, difficult management problem humanity has ever faced." With AGI potentially revolutionizing every aspect of society, the need for robust, forward-thinking governance is more pressing than ever.

Speaking about WFSF's support for this initiative, its President Erik F. Øverland comments, "In a world where the distinction between the artificial and the natural is becoming increasingly blurred, it is more important than ever to regulate artificial intelligences."  

Similarly, Garry Jacobs, WAAS President and CEO, emphasizes the organization’s support for the letter, highlighting that "Addressing the governance of AGI is not just a technical challenge; it is a profound responsibility of both the scientists and technologies who create it and the policy-makers empowered to protect. WAAS stands firmly behind this call to the UN to prioritize and lead the global effort in ensuring that the development of AGI aligns with our shared values of safety, ethics, and human rights. It is imperative that we act now to establish robust frameworks and institutions capable of guiding this transformative technology in a manner that benefits all of humanity."  

Ambassador Héctor Casanueva, Coordinator of the initiative and Founder and Co-Chair of the Chile Node of The Millennium Project, emphasizes that "With this open letter, we are also showing the enormous moral and intellectual strength of hundreds of leaders and professionals from around the world to support the Secretary General of the UN in his call to UN members to take the risks of uncontrolled development and use of technology, and especially AGI, seriously, to strengthen human security through multilateralism".

In closing, the signatories call on the United Nations to take a leadership role in navigating this pivotal moment in human history. The safe development of AGI could either enhance the future of humanity or pose existential risks beyond our control. The governance of the transition to AGI is set to remain a major topic at forthcoming forums. As the world stands on the brink of an AI-driven transformation, the decisions made today will shape the future for generations to come.

Futures Digests is your go-to source for global news and research in futures studies and foresight. Stay informed on the latest trends and insights shaping the future.

Subscribe now

Have you noticed that the field of Futures Studies is buzzing lately? Even though it's a relatively young discipline, it’s quickly gaining interest and attracting enthusiasts from around the globe, diversifying approaches and objectives. As we navigate through unprecedented challenges and opportunities, understanding and anticipating future developments has never been more crucial.

I am a futures studies enthusiast with broad experience in futures research, communication, and managing international projects and collaborations. My interest began with my undergraduate thesis, deepened during my doctoral research, and continues to flourish. Diving into futures studies often transforms how we see what's possible. The idea of plural futures, for instance, which has been part of the discipline of Futures Studies from the late 60s, is not just fascinating but also empowering, and offers a new lens through which we can envision and shape our tomorrow.

I decided to launch Futures Digest because of my daily engagement with leading futures networks and organizations around the globe. In my roles as Director of Communication for The Millennium Project, Co-Chair of its Italy node, Communication Officer for the Foresight Europe Network, and scientific consultant for various bodies, I engage with a diverse range of global futures initiatives and cutting-edge research. No time to stop learning and dreaming!

My goal is to make the latest news and developments in futures studies accessible and inspiring for the next futures enthusiasts! If you're fascinated by international futures scenarios, methods, and projects, keen to see how the world is building and envisioning the future, or just curious about what lies ahead in the long-term, then this newsletter is for you.

Futures Digest will be your go-to source for global futures research. With a little help from AI, I’ll bring you a curated selection of insights and updates each week, mostly at no cost.

Stay tuned for updates, and let’s enjoy exploring the futures together!

Subscribe now

Subscribe now

Read more