Which (future) is the fairest of them all? Crafting deliberative policy futures through Horizon Summits

Collective efforts to frame policy problems: the importance of deliberative and participatory methodologies

Uncertainty and disruption are the tenor of our times. The major tipping points across economic, social, environmental, political domains are evidently manifesting, leading to adverse inflection points across numerous policy domains. Such inflection points are akin to a bullet ricocheting in a small room - once these tipping points are triggered, who knows where they will go.

Decisions made in this volatile context will have profound and lasting impacts on society, shaping everything from economic opportunity, civil liberties, environmental health and social cohesion. Many consequential policy domains - such as AI policy, climate change interventions and economic reform - have been crafted in closed-door meetings, driven by government and industry insiders. This approach has often left out the voices of those most affected by these megatrends — including workers, marginalised communities, and the general public.

In this sense, there is a clear intergenerational fairness challenge present in these policy discourses, whereby the wellbeing of current and future generations must be safeguarded.

Already, public distrust in institutions, and shifting demographic and social dynamics, present significant hurdles to navigating intergenerational fairness.

To remedy this, and mitigate these major risks, deliberative and participatory methodologies are very necessary to address epistemic imbalances and asymmetries in policy ideation. Such methodologies create spaces where diverse perspectives are heard and valued, and emphasise collective problem-solving and consensus-building. In turn, this intends to embed a wider range of values and priorities in the shaping of policies, enhancing public trust in institutions and improving the democratic legitimacy of policy decisions.

Image of UN Headquarters (taken by me)

Unpacking The Odyssean Process

Responding to the need for deliberative practices in AI policy design, the Odyssean Institute has embarked on an ambitious agenda to implement ‘Horizon Summits’, using the Odyssean Process.

Expert Elicitation of Judgement (EEJ) is the beginning of the process, which aims to address illusions of predictability in complex policy areas, and also the problem of unstructured consultations with a limited range of expert insights that often dominate complex decision making.

EEJ incorporates the ‘IDEA protocol’, which stands for “Investigate,” “Discuss,” “Estimate” and “Aggregate.” It enhances the repeatability and rigour of the EEJ procedure by drawing on best practice elicitation techniques as well as insights from cognitive and social psychology. Horizon scanning in this way allows foresight exercises to pick up on key trends and uncertainties, as well as allowing for more qualitative outputs.

As such, the Odyssean Process also incorporates strategic foresight methods and principles. Strategic foresight incorporates qualitative tools which often eschew firm predictions in favour of insights about the broad contours of possible futures. Foresight methodologies include scenario mapping, backcasting, stress testing, Causal Layered Analysis (CLA) and the Futures Triangle, to name a few.

The Horizon Summit: a demonstration of participatory (and efficient) policy design

For the Horizon Summit, AI was chosen as the focus area because of its emergent and complex properties. It is a policy domain with numerous uncertainties, but cascading and cross-cutting consequences. Likewise, there is currently a lack of deliberative engagement for AI policy design, unlike areas like climate change which have strong deliberative engagement and advocacy communities.

Specifically, Horizon Summits bring together a wide range of voices from across society—policymakers, technologists, and academics —to collaboratively map a preferred future for different types of policies. As with the Odyssean Process, this initial futures work then enriches full participatory exercises with citizens and civil society groups.

This summit could focus on the use of strategic foresight methodologies, particularly scenario mapping, backcasting and stress testing, through the prism of Bill Sharpe’s 3 Horizons Framework.

This approach helps participants examine policy development across 3 distinct time horizons:

• Horizon 1 (Current State) – Participants will explore the historical context and the current state of a specific policy domain, examining the institutional structures, political forces, and technological capabilities that shape existing governance dysfunctions, and the problems inherent in a business-as-usual approach.

• Horizon 2 (Transition Zone) – This phase focuses on identifying the preferred future for particular policies, based on assessing what bottom-up and top-down governance factors shape different policy futures. Through the use of scenario mapping, participants will establish their preferred policy future, and also identify alternative policy futures that are more harmful.

• Horizon 3 (Long-Term Future) – Using backcasting and stress testing, participants will chart out how to achieve their preferred policy future, but also what factors will lead to alternative, less desirable futures. Importantly, Horizon 3 enables participants to identify qualitative indicators that benchmark and monitor the longer-term trajectory of particular policies in their jurisdiction.

Notably, the Odyssean Institute did a traditional horizon scan in 2024, over 3 months, even shorter than the usual 4-6 month process. This focused on Global Catastrophic Risks (GCRs), and involved 32 expert participants who were asked to submit key tipping points “with cascade potential that contribute to civilisational risk” as relevant issues for scoring, especially those that are new or neglected.

However, in a rapidly changing world, with time pressure in play, we benefit from having a more efficient and succinct version of horizon scanning. Horizon summits can take place over the course of 1 day, as opposed to months. From a practical standpoint, it is cheaper and less time intensive. From a policy design standpoint, it necessitates more focused, targeted deliberation.

This complements further specialised foresight exercises we intend to do. For example, the Odyssean Institute is looking to conduct foresight on key AI issues, in preparation for the iteration of a full Odyssean Process.

Improving decision-making through the Odyssean Process

Horizon Summits will instantiate key elements of the Odyssean Process, particularly the EEJ stage, which is designed to mitigate civilisational risks by improving institutional decision-making and facilitating transdisciplinary research through deliberative means. This complements the objectives and principles of the 3 Horizons Framework, which appreciates the role of overcoming past and present power asymmetries in shaping a more equitable and prosperous future of policies.

Importantly, the Odyssean Process recognises that policy making does not exist in a vacuum—it is shaped by political ideologies, vested interests, and unexpected events. John Kingdon’s Multiple Stream Framework (MSF) posits that durable shifts in policy require ‘policy entrepreneurs’—being individuals or organisations that champion specific policy solutions and generate ‘policy windows’ for systemic change. Therefore, it is imperative to create deliberative avenues for policy entrepreneurs to shape, frame and influence policy windows.

Deliberative policy making practices, such as the Odyssean Process, create space for this. Participants will be encouraged to take a systems-level view of specific policy issues, identifying cross-cutting risks and opportunities. This approach will strengthen the capacity of institutions to respond to rapid technological change while ensuring that governance frameworks are adaptable, resilient, and aligned with long-term societal goals.

In short, Horizon Summits represent a crucial step toward more democratic and inclusive policy development. Crafting policies that are equitable, prosperous, sustainable, and transparent requires more than technical expertise; it requires democratic legitimacy and public buy-in. As such, Horizon Summits provide a model for how societies can rise to this challenge, using collective intelligence and participatory governance to navigate the complex future of contemporary policy making.

From foresight to policy reform

An important, yet often neglected, stage in foresight is the translation of findings into tangible, coherent policy making practices. This requires knowledge of policy translation.

A specific example of where I have conducted this is through workshops about the future of extreme heat governance in Manila, Jakarta, Sydney and Singapore as part of my Next Generation Foresight Practitioners (NGFP) Fellowship.

This foresight exercise brought together civil society, government and academia to discuss how to reform extreme heat governance for their respective cities. It incorporated Bill Sharpe’s 3 Horizons Framework, and the Futures Triangle, to understand what a preferred heat governance future looks like, and what prevents the attainment of that preferred future. In other words, how do we target policies to overcome the barriers to long-term policy action?

As a result of these foresight exercises, I am now working with NGOs and academia in these cities to translate the findings into clear, tangible policy instruments and programs - underpinned by sound theory of change and evaluation processes - to actually implement tangible heat governance reforms in these cities. Examples include my work with ChildFund exploring heat governance for children’s wellbeing in Indonesian cities.

In other words, how can deliberative insights inform targeted taxation, regulation and spending regimes that drive transformative policy changes, with relevant stakeholder groups being active participants?

Policy translation is always a challenge, but also a powerful opportunity for transformative change.

The Odyssean Process is designed to create pressure, in the form of policy windows, to help focus attention on a particular problem. In the case of our forthcoming horizon summit, this will help frame the complexities of AI policy in a manner that is coherent and practical.