Applying the Futures Wheel to the Covid19 global pandemic

Introduction

The Futures Wheel of Consequences (FW) is an old tool in the strategic foresight toolbox. As an architect I first learnt the Futures Wheel in 2001 in a local government leadership workshop conducted by Sohail Inayatullah. The method was first conceived by Jerome C Glenn in 1971 to visualise the direct and indirect future consequences of a change or event. (Futures Wheel, 2020). I concede that in the suite of futures studies tools, the FW is not a method I practice often with stakeholders and is overlooked for other methods such as creative visualisation, scenario development and casual layered analysis.

The FW focusses on direct and indirect impacts in the short to medium term, handy for strategic planning. The general understanding within the Futures Studies field is that the FW is a tool that fits within the second pillar of futures thinking – anticipation (Inayatullah, 2008, 8). As such it may not challenge or generate alternative futures which are needed to transition out of the Anthropocene.

In a time of disruption and crisis, such as the current global pandemic, decision makers need to respond quickly to impacts in a rapidly changing multifactorial environment. The FW tool comes into its strength in this time of global shock.

Case Study – Tasmanian Leaders Inc

So why the FW in a time of shock? It is very quick to learn and simple to use by participants. The FW provides clarity on possible courses of action for the short to medium term with future consequences. In a time of shock where decision makers may be overwhelmed the FW provides a brief pause to suspend the biological flight or fight response that may lead to reactionary and poor decisions and allow instead considered responses.

On 26th March 2020, FutureSense hosted a 90min webinar with 25 cross-sector leaders as part of the Tasmanian Leaders Inc program, teaching them how to use the Futures Wheel of Consequences to anticipate the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic virus on their businesses, sector or organisation. The leaders came from various sections including emergency services, cultural, not-for-profit, tertiary education, transport and energy. Angela Driver, General Manager of Tasmanian Leaders Inc., summed up the group feedback: "participants left the session feeling more connected, resilient and resourced. Three things that they are going to need to draw on over the coming months." (personal correspondence, March 27, 2020).

In preparing the FW workshop, it was found that the most recent innovations to the FW methodology had occurred in the design thinking field. The methodology had been enhanced by overlaying the STEEP [1] categories to the wheel of consequences to ensure a multiplicity of contexts are explored (Behboudi, 2019). Embedding the FW within different stages of the design process is another more recent development (Figure 1). It can help in the initial stages when scanning for opportunities or later in the design process exploring how a solution may unfold. “It is most useful when done with all stakeholders in the room, as it can also serve as a highly effective decision-making tool” (Behboudi, 2019).

 Figure 1: Futures Wheel in the Design Process

Note. From Behboudi, M. (2019) Futures Wheel, Practical Frameworks for Ethical Design

Main Arguments

From the Tasmanian Leaders case study three main arguments are evident and are presented next.

Context specific futures wheel applications

The FW workshop presented a generic global FW of possible consequences due to the COVID-19 pandemic, to demonstrate how to generate first, second and third order impacts through “what if” questioning. The adaptive capacity to climate change research, recognises generic and context specific determinants to adaptive capacity (Smith et al, 2010). Applying this to the FW methodology, the consequences generated by the FW can also be characterised as being generic or context specific. To leverage the benefits of the FW process and to build the adaptive capacity to change within participants, it is critical that participants apply the tool to their specific context. This raises their awareness of the systemic implications to their organisation, business or locality, rippling out from the initial shock of a global pandemic.

In the workshop, participants applied the FW individually to their specific context and then shared consequences within breakout groups to see if patterns emerged. The written feedback from participants [2] shows how the FW with the STEEP framework facilitated multi-factorial consequences to be mapped which leads to systemic critical thinking of possible futures. That is, the search for interrelations between impacts, across social, technological, environmental, economic and political dimensions, not just casual linkages within a dimension.

Generic futures wheel COVID-19 risks and opportunities

The generic implications of a global pandemic relevant to most Western contexts and jurisdictions are presented in the COVID-19 Pandemic FW (Figure 2). It illustrates the complexity and the critical systems thinking required to respond holistically to a pandemic.

Figure 2: Covid-19 Pandemic Futures Wheel Generic Impacts

Note. Daffara, P. Tasmanian Leaders FW workshop Presentation, 26th March 2020

After the consequences are mapped, stakeholders can identify impacts that pose risks or opportunities to their specific context (place, organisation, business etc). Next, I discuss a handful of causal lines of consequence that contain significant risks and opportunities.

Opportunities

Smart cities. To contain the pandemic, certain countries have employed digital technologies to manage the crisis. Taiwan is using big data by integrating “national health insurance, immigration and customs databases, generating data to trace people's travel history and clinical symptoms.” (The Straits Times, 2020). South Korea has employed similar digital technologies to enable real time spatial mapping of COVID-19 cases (Coronamap.site) based on extensive testing and tracking of visitors and citizens and to trace sources of the virus. (Nature, 2020). The Australian government intends to rollout Singapore’s TraceTogether digital application to help trace COVID-19 contacts within communities to refine local lockdowns if required (The Guardian, April 19, 2020). No doubt, proponents for increased surveillance of the public health of populations, referred as bio-surveillance, see the relationship between smart city innovation techno-systems and public health emergency responses. Innovations include the mining and analysis of urban sewers to monitor pathogens, virus loads and other indicators of health (Figure 3) to trace viral outbreaks (Senseable City Lab, 2019; The Guardian, 2016). Smart City advocates argue that “Innovative smart city technologies such as the Internet of Things (IoT), artificial intelligence (AI), 5G, open data, and analytics, offer the potential for cities to respond to the pandemic more effectively.”(Chan and Paramel, 2020).

Smart Cities acting as place-based digital bureaucracies are well positioned to integrate datasets and resources to maintain public health and contain future viruses where poverty and digital divides are not major obstacles within the jurisdiction. Smart cities however, are not a panacea for poverty, inequality, urban apartheid, social polarisation, digital divides and urban fragmentation caused by capitalism and the informational, networked society. (Castells, 1989. 1999).

Figure 3: Luigi 02 – Sampling Robot or sewage bio surveillance device

MIT Senseable City Lab (2019) Retrieved from https://underworlds.mit.edu/

Relocalisation. Place-based lockdowns to contain the spread of the COVID-19 virus (e.g. Wuhan) effectively shut down non-essential production, which resulted in the disruption of global supply chains, particularly for medical equipment. The opportunity for the world, post COVID-19 is to design and create resilient supply ecosystems (Entrepreneur, 2020), going beyond the application of technologies within the current ecosystem, to drive a relocalisation of production and distribution. If Australia can use 3D printing technology to produce ventilators or surgical visors in a crisis when supply is constrained, why not always?

The relocalisation movement seeks to disrupt the globalisation of capital and production of food, materials and services, reducing the ecological footprint of human activities and building community resilience to future shocks (Hines, 2000).

Ecological regeneration. The great pause to the economies of the world to contain the COVID-19 pandemic through the lockdowns and home isolation of half the world’s population have yielded beneficial environmental impacts The observed environmental spinoffs caused by the pandemic’s great pause on production and human activity, include cleaner air, water and the return of wildlife to cities (The Guardian, March 23, 2020., April 10, 2020) (Figure4). A reduction in CO2 and pollution has been observed due to the drastic drop in road and air transportation, and manufacturing.

“First China, then Italy, now the UK, Germany and dozens of other countries are experiencing temporary falls in carbon dioxide and nitrogen dioxide of as much as 40%, greatly improving air quality and reducing the risks of asthma, heart attacks and lung disease.” (The Guardian, April 10, 2020).

The unexpected shock of the virus and the speed with which governments reigned in their respective economies, with resultant ecological benefits, provides an opportunity for perception change within communities. A glimpse of what a zero-carbon world may yield in terms of collective wellbeing and resurgent, resilient ecosystems. “The unthinkable has become thinkable” (Ibid). Rather than a return to business-as-usual:

“UN leaders, scientists and activists are pushing for an urgent public debate so that recovery can focus on green jobs and clean energy, building efficiency, natural infrastructure and a strengthening of the global commons.” (Ibid).

Figure 4: Coyotes have recently been spotted on the Golden Gate Bridge in San Francisco

From: The Guardian (April 10, 2020). Photograph: Shannon Stapleton/Reuters

Risks

The opportunities presented through a scaling up of digital capability for smart cities were previously discussed in respect to public health. The leap in the digital delivery of other services due to the pandemic such as work from home, online learning for schools, mental health support, telehealth, entertainment and creative arts and online shopping are evident in post-industrial, “informational networked societies” (Castells 1999). Two risks emerge from the FW analysis.

Homecentredness. Firstly, the phenomenon of ‘homecentredness” anticipated by Castells (1999, 398) has the potential to escalate during physical and social distancing measures and drastically impact daily home life and ultimately the urban-social contract. A pandemic forces people to retreat to their homes and rely on digital technologies to maintain many aspects of their work-life habits. What I call hyper-homecentredness leads to chronic social isolation and loneliness, poor socialisation within communities and poor mental health outcomes. The health impacts of loneliness are manifold and researched:

“The risk of premature death associated with social isolation and loneliness is similar to the risk of premature death associated with well-known risk factors such as obesity, based on a meta-analysis of research in Europe, North American, Asia and Australia (Holt-Lunstad et al. 2015 cited in Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, 2019).

How many indirect deaths will occur due to the health impacts of social isolation and loneliness compared to the direct deaths of the virus?

The risk or prolonged forms of social isolation until a vaccine is available for the COVID-19 virus is that the enforced banning of and cessation of cultural events, festivals, sports, public gatherings and even protests may erode the public life, identity and spirit of cities, towns and communities. The conveniences of (1) home-based consumption; (2) the digital interconnectedness of devices; and (3) the delivery of products and services to the home enabled by the smart city; may also increase individualism, further straining the sense of belonging to a larger community.

Digital blackouts. Secondly, the ICT risks of digital platforms not having the system capacity to cope with the surge in demand are significant. Take for example the failure of the Australian Government’s Centrelink online Jobseeker registration site within their MyGov platform to deal with the possibly, one million newly unemployed citizens caused by the pandemic’s lockdown laws (The Guardian, March 24, 2020).

A worse scenario to contemplate is the internet going dark whilst the pandemic is still forcing geographic lockdowns, thereby not only physically distancing people but also socially disconnecting them from work based and personal networks. Cyber-attacks against critical platforms are a possibility during this pandemic’s health crisis and economic deep freeze, adding a new dimension to the chaos that would unfold. Are we prepared for this risk, either from state-based cyber terrorists or anarchistic hackers?

Mental health risks. The FW clearly plots the causal line of consequences that ultimately impact a communities’ mental health and wellbeing. Starting with lockdowns and social distancing measures, to mood shifts, increased isolation and loneliness, increased stress within families, the loss of hope and the likely increase in domestic violence and suicides (Figure 5). These probable impacts are well documented in a recent mental health study conducted in the countries that experienced the early outbreak of the COVID-19 virus before a global pandemic was declared by the WHO. (Brooks et al. 2020., The Guardian, March 13, 2020).

Related to mental health issues are the psychological factors that underpin the wellbeing of a community. Mainly poor messaging by governments on what to do and why, with a resultant loss of hope. In the context of macrohistory, the implications of loss of hope are discussed in more detail in a forthcoming article in the Journal of Futures Studies [3].

Figure 5: Home isolation and mental health

From LifeHacker. https://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s---tkdkpxN--/c_fill,fl_progressive,g_center,h_900,q_80,w_1600/lekfbfwhquxxtucjx0lu.png

The litany level: summing up of the futures wheel analysis

The application of the FW of consequences to the COVID-19 pandemic, at the litany level of discourse (Inayatullah and Milojevi?, 2015), challenges the political messaging of governments and chief medical officers, that this virus is mainly a public health and economic emergency. Rather, the COVID-19 pandemic is a whole of systems crisis, as it impacts or disrupts multidimensional qualities of life as shown in the STEEP categories. At the system’s level, I am reminded of Ian Lowe’s model of transition from the pig-face systems model of sustainability to the nested systems model (Lowe, 2016, 230) (Figure 6). The dominant systems worldview today is the ‘pig face’, where the economy remains the dominant concern. Leaders responding to this pandemic need to be reminded that the environment and society are not here to serve the economy (like two little ears on a pigs face), but rather that the economy is to be designed to care for our society, cultures and environment (like nested spheres). Bluntly, responding to the COVID-19 pandemic is an opportunity to redesign our economies to better serve our socio-ecological systems. But this opportunity, I fear, is too daunting for most global leaders who seek a return to economic normalcy and its dominance as soon as possible.

Figure 6: Transitioning sustainability models at the worldview level

Note. Adapted from Lowe (2016, 230) The Lucky Country? Reinventing Australia

Conclusion & Further Research

In conclusion, two main points are offered next.

Firstly, the FW is a quick tool to grasp, giving leaders the agility to respond rapidly in the COVID-19 global pandemic, within their context specific systems, as well as anticipate systemic consequences down the causal line and their possible risks and opportunities.

Secondly, cities are agents of change (Daffara, 2011), each a specific socio-ecological system responsible at a territorial scale for providing pluralistic, diverse futures. I propose that cities are best positioned to engage their citizens to grieve the losses caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, through truth telling fora and to facilitate personal and collective healing. Rather than erect monuments to memorialise the crisis overcome, it would be better to initiate city foresight projects to create shared values and visions for the alternative ways forward. The purpose is to create post COVID-19 creative, learning, and diverse city cultures (Daffara, 2011. 685) with greater adaptive capacity and resilience to respond to the next epidemic and other wicked challenges that persist such as the climate emergency and ecological destruction caused by human activity (The Guardian, March 25, 2020).

At the litany level of discourse, city leaders who are closer to their diverse communities, may also have greater leverage to shift the culture towards a more wholistic worldview. Taking the opportunities to integrate (1) green infrastructure, (2) climate action and nett zero-carbon development, (3) affordable housing, (4) wellbeing programs and (5) smart city initiatives to rebuild community resilience, stimulate new jobs and the relocalisation of production and supply.

Endnotes

[1] STEEP: social, technological, environmental, economic, and political categories used to describe multi-factorial issues within a system.

[2] Written feedback gathered from participants when asked what they learned when using the FW included: (a) “Exploring some of the aspects of STEEP that may have been de-prioritized in the face of economic impacts”; (b) “Complexity and interrelation rather than linear cause-consequence relationship”; (c) “Process for systematically breaking down a complex problem”; (d) “Cool new tool and method to think through a complex situation and extract some useful observations regarding risks and opportunities which can be used to take action against”; (e) “Using the [STEEP] categories to break down a problem”.

Each quote listed from the written participant feedback represents a comment from a different workshop participant.

[3] In the JFS review process: Daffara, P. (2020) Applying the Futures Wheel and Macrohistory to the Covid19 global pandemic. Daffara’s macrohistorical analysis points to the importance of using this great global pause to reset what it means to be human, why we do what we do on this fragile planet, and how we might do better. In short, how might we design alternative futures, not so vulnerable to the cascading shocks and consequences of a global pandemic mapped by the FW.

 Keywords

futures wheel, systems thinking, anticipation, action learning, agility, adaptive capacity, COVID-19

References

Atkisson, A. (1999) Believing Cassandra, Scribe Publications.

Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. (2019, 11 Sept) Social isolation and loneliness. Retrieved from https://www.aihw.gov.au/reports/australias-welfare/social-isolation-and-loneliness

Behboudi, M. (2019) Futures Wheel, Practical Frameworks for Ethical Design. Retrieved from https://medium.com/klickux/futures-wheel-practical-frameworks-for-ethical-design-e40e323b838a

Birkeland, J. (2008) Positive Development, Earthscan Press.

Brooks, SK., Webster. RK., Smith. LE., Woodland. L., Wessely. S., Greenberg. N., & Rubin. GJ. (2020) The psychological impact of quarantine and how to reduce it: rapid review of the evidence. The Lancet, Vol 395, Issue 10227: 912–20.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30460-8

Chan, B., & Paramel, R. (2020) Smart Cities & Public Health Emergency Collaboration Framework. Meeting of the Minds. Retrieved from https://meetingoftheminds.org/smart-cities-public-health-emergency-collaboration-framework-33446?mc_cid=e1c88de2b3&mc_eid=a902b5de1b

Castells, M. (1989). The Informational City: Information Technology, Economic Re-

structuring and the Urban-Regional Process. Oxford, Blackwell.

Castells, M. ([1996], 1999). The Rise of the Network Society, The Information Age:

Economy, Society and Culture, Vol 1. Oxford, Blackwell.

Daffara, P. (2004b). “Sustainable City Futures” in The Causal Layered Analysis (CLA)

Reader Theory and case studies of an Integrative and Transformative Methodology. S. Inayatullah, Eds., Taipei, Tamkang University Press: 424-438.

Daffara, P. (2011) Rethinking tomorrow’s cities: Emerging issues on city foresight. Futures,

43, 680–689.

Entrepreneur. (2020) COVID-19 Will Fuel the Next Wave of Innovation. Retrieved from https://www-entrepreneur-com.cdn.ampproject.org/c/s/www.entrepreneur.com/amphtml/347669

Futures Wheel. (2020) Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Futures_wheel

Hines, C. (2000) Localization: A Global Manifesto. Earthscan.

Inayatullah, S. (2008) Six pillars: futures thinking for transforming. Foresight, VOL. 10, NO. 1, 4-21. DOI 10.1108/14636680810855991

Inayatullah, S. and Milojevi?, I. (2015) CLA 2.0: Transformative Research in Theory and

Practice. Tamsui: Tamkang University Press

Lowe, I. (2016) The Lucky Country? Reinventing Australia, University of Queensland Press.

MIT Senseable City Lab. (2019) The Underworlds Book. Massachusetts Institute of

Technology. Retrieved from https://underworlds.mit.edu/

Nature. (2020) South Korea is reporting intimate details of COVID-19 cases: has it helped?

Retrieved from https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-00740-y

Smith, T.F., Carter, R.W., Daffara, P., & Keys, N. (2010) The Nature and Utility of Adaptive Capacity Research. Report for the National Climate Change Adaptation Research Facility, Gold Coast, Australia.

The Guardian. (27 March, 2016) The MIT lab flushing out a city’s secrets. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/science/2016/mar/27/lab-that-flushes-out-city-secrets-massachusetts-mit-senseable-lab-sewage

The Guardian. (2020) Newly unemployed Australians queue at Centrelink offices as MyGov website crashes again. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2020/mar/24/newly-unemployed-australians-queue-at-centrelink-offices-as-mygov-website-crashes-again#maincontent

The Guardian. (March 13, 2020) Anxiety on rise due to coronavirus, say mental health charities. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/13/anxiety-on-rise-due-to-coronavirus-say-mental-health-charities

The Guardian (March 23, 2020) Coronavirus pandemic leading to huge drop in air pollution. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/mar/23/coronavirus-pandemic-leading-to-huge-drop-in-air-pollution

The Guardian (March 25, 2020) Coronavirus: 'Nature is sending us a message’, says UN environment chief. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/25/coronavirus-nature-is-sending-us-a-message-says-un-environment-chief

The Guardian (April 10, 2020) Climate crisis: in coronavirus lockdown, nature bounces back – but for how long? Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/09/climate-crisis-amid-coronavirus-lockdown-nature-bounces-back-but-for-how-long

The Guardian (April 19, 2020) Australia's coronavirus contact tracing app: what we know so

far. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/17/australias-coronavirus-contact-tracing-app-what-we-know-so-far

The Straits Times. (2020) Coronavirus lessons for the world from ground zero of Asia.

Retrieved from https://www.straitstimes.com/asia/east-asia/coronavirus-lessons-for-the-world-from-ground-zero-of-asia