38 Chapter 2 2.3.1. Explicit engagement with the concept of anticipatory governance To start with, the notion of anticipatory governance is explicitly used in four influential strands of social science and sustainability science scholarship. First, an influential perspective on anticipatory governance has emerged out of a concern with possible disruptive consequences of scientific and technological innovations (Barben et al., 2008; Guston, 2012; Macnaghten et al., 2014; Stilgoe et al., 2013). This perspective connects science and technology studies, responsible research and innovation, and environmental governance literatures. David Guston, a leading scholar in this tradition, defines anticipatory governance as “a broad-based capacity extended through society that can act on a variety of inputs to manage emerging knowledge-based technologies while such management is still possible” (2014, p. 219). In this view, anticipatory governance is a non-predictive approach to enhance present-day preparedness, including through building capacities in foresight and multistakeholder engagement, all in order to steer away from possible disruptive impacts of novel technologies in the future (Anderson, 2007; Barben et al., 2008, 2008; Guston, 2012, 2014; Nielsen et al., 2011; Stilgoe et al., 2013). The future is conceived here as being inherently uncertain, but which can nonetheless be acted upon in the present, with a focus on building society-wide capacities to anticipate and navigate future trajectories. Second, anticipatory governance is explicitly addressed in national security policy analyses, particularly in the United States. Anticipatory governance is envisioned here as governance that can manage crises ex ante to prevent their destabilizing effects (Fuerth, 2009b; Ramos, 2014; Boston, 2017; Fuerth & Faber, 2013). Building on Toffler’s (1970b) notion of anticipatory democracy, some scholars in this tradition argue for developing new forms of representative governance that can operate proactively “in the face of crushing decisional overload, or political future shock” (Toffler, 1970a, p. xii, see also Bezold, 2006, p. 36; Ramos, 2014). Anticipatory governance is seen here as a way to address future challenges posed by the accelerating rate and complexity of social change. Such perspectives on anticipatory governance focus on the adaptive capacity of national planning systems (Fuerth & Faber, 2013), among others regarding climate change. Studies in this tradition imply that the future can be governed, and risks prevented as long as anticipatory governance is enabled through “a system of institutions, rules, and norms that provides a way to use foresight, networks, and feedback for the purpose of reducing risk” as a means of engaging with the future (Fuerth, 2009a, p. 29). Thus, the future is conceived of as containing reducible risks, which can be acted upon and mitigated through improved planning processes in the present.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk4NDMw