Dear Colleague:

On behalf of the Millennium Project of the American Council for the United Nations University in cooperation with the Smithsonian Institution and The Futures Group, we have the honor to invite you to participate in the second round of the 1998 Global Lookout Study.

The 1996 and 1997 Lookout Panels identified developments that may have important future implications. These panels have involved about 300 people in 60 countries who identified and rated almost 300 developments. These developments have been distilled into 15 Global Issues and 15 Global Opportunities with a range of views from policy makers about actions to address each. The results, together with other work of the Millennium Project, were published in the 1997 and 1998 State of the Future. Those who respond to this questionnaire will receive the results in a complimentary copy of the 1999 State of the Future. Your comments will not be attached to your name - no attributions will be made without permission, although participants' names will appear in the report.

The first round of the current study had two parts: 1) a questionnaire to the Global Lookout Panel to identify new developments, changes in the importance of global issues & opportunities, and global ethics; and 2) interviews with policy makers and experts to identify impediments and aids to timely response to early warnings and the ethical issues involved.

The enclosed second round is built on the results of the questionnaire and interviews. It poses five questions, requesting your judgments about:

1. Impediments and aids to timely policy making

2. The nature of decision relevant information

3. Reasons why certain developments, issues and opportunities seem to be changing in importance

4. The likelihood, importance and your experience about newly suggested developments

5. Important moral and ethical issues in decision making

Please follow the instructions on the next page and return your questionnaire by 23 November 1998. Based on the results of this second questionnaire, a third and final round will include the most relevant ideas for your further comments. We look forward to your responses.

Sincerely yours,

Jerome C. Glenn and Theodore J. Gordon

co-directors, AC/UNU Millennium Project

Please answer just those questions that are in your areas of expertise and are of greatest interest to you. While it is not necessary to examine the previous developments, issues, opportunities, and actions to complete the enclosed questionnaire, you may view them at the Project's Web site at: http://millennium-project.org, under the "Global Lookout Study".

You can return your responses in several ways:

1. Since faxes that include hand written responses may be difficult to read, please consider sending your response by email to make sure your views are recorded correctly. You can download this questionnaire, fill it out on your computer and then send it back by email to jglenn@igc.org, with copy to acunu@igc.org.

2. You can type your answers without the text of the questions and send an email, fax, or letter. For example:

Question 1.

1. #

2. #

3. #

etc.

Questions 2.

1. # Example -------------

2. # Example -------------

etc.

3. You can fill out this questionnaire and send it by airmail or fax to:

Which ever way you choose, please send your responses so that they can be received by 23 November 1998.

If you have not already done so, please send us a copy of your resume (and whether it can be added to those on the Millennium Project's web site).

In Round 1, policy makers were interviewed and asked to list factors that they thought might affect the timeliness and effectiveness of response to early warnings and the information that they thought could promote more timely responses. You are now asked to review the answers they have provided so far, add to the set, and provide insights you might have for reducing these impediments.

The following table presents a list of types of impediments to decision making and subsequent actions that have been identified so far. We recognize that impediments to decision making might be situation-dependent, but as you think back over key decisions that were not made in a timely fashion, please consider whether the items in this list were at least partially responsible. Please provide your judgments about the relative importance of these impediments according to the following scale:

5= Almost always involved when important decisions are delayed

4= Quite often involved in delays

3= Might be a factor but other factors need to be present, as well

2= Other reasons are usually more important

1= Not usually involved or only a minor contributor

Please add other types of impediments that you think important, to the bottom of the list.
 

Types of Impediments to Timely Response to Early Warning	Importance
1. Financial: lack of funding or the fact that the people who ought to pay are unwilling to do so.
2. Institutional: the fact that no one has responsibility to act; lack of adequate coordination among responsible ministries and agencies; institutional inertia.
3. Political: the action interferes with national interests or it has been proposed by a political opponent; lack of involvement of regions, corporations and specific groups.
4. Cultural: roles of men vs. women, racism, or ethnocentrism.
5. Psychological: the fear of making a mistake or looking silly.
6. Information: lack of accurate, reliable and sufficient data and information, or the uncertainty of the risk; conflicting information; lack of coordinated scanning.
7. Personnel: lack of decision skills - decision-makers do not understand the complexities of the issues about which they must decide; lack of professionalism of policy makers; lack of trained personnel; lack of an inventory of national and regional capacities; reduction of brain drain.
8. Resources: lack of required natural resources, including biological resources; lack of adequate technology transfer, particularly between developed and developing countries.
9. Legal: lack or inadequacy of necessary laws and appropriate regulations.
10. Communication: inadequate reports - unduly complex or too long for decision-makers.
11. Complexity: lack of understanding of the magnitude of problems; lack of models showing complex interdependence of events and policies; lack of understanding of consequences of actions; stereotypical thinking.
12. Strategic: lack of clear-cut strategy and goals, lack of coordinated actions among nations.
13 Technological: lack of required technology or unwarranted trust in technology.
14 Lack of consensus: differing interests and ideology among key actors, politicians, public, and particularly lobbying groups in society.
15 Complacency: public complacently; the growing cult of leisure; materialism; lack of a sense of dedication and sacrifice and changing attitudes about the value of hard work.
16 Planning inadequacy: lack of a long-term view.
17 Lack of receptiveness: lack of a crisis atmosphere; conflicts between effective actions and ideology of policy makers and between proposals and tradition.
18 Moral lapses: loss of morality in decision making; taking the easy way rather than the right way.
19 Disinterest in the future: near term issues gain more attention than those that have more distant future consequences.
20 Criminal activities: corruption and bribery.
21 Inadequate time available to study the issue; press of other matters.
22.
23.

 

Question 2: Information Leading to Decision-Making

In the interviews with policy makers, that preceded this round, the interviewees were asked to think about situations when early warnings were given and timely actions followed. For these situations, the interviewees were asked to identify the type of information that had been important to effective decision making.

Please provide your judgments about these answers (which have been augmented by comments of the reviewers of this questionnaire) and add other types of information that you think would be useful to decision making. You are asked for judgments about the usefulness of this information, if available and to add to the column of "Examples cited". In answering these questions, please select examples from your own field of expertise. Please use the following scales:

Usefulness if available

5= extremely useful, if it could be produced 2= probably not worth the effort

4= clearly of great benefit 1= counterproductive; would extend

3= likely to be of moderate use decision time

Also, please add other entries at the end of this table and in the final column.
 

Information Leading to Decision-Making	Usefulness if available	Examples Cited
1. Information that demonstrates unequivocally that a crisis is pending.		6 hour weather forecasts; Mettur Dam release; Species depletion; Ozone hole
2. Testimony of eminent scientists.		Montreal Protocol; Natural calamities; AIDS forecasts; IPCC's influence in global warming debate
3. Accurate projections of computer models.		Weather forecasts; Forecasts spreading epidemics
4. Intended actions of other ministries, countries or decision-makers.		International police information
5. Development and popularization of appropriate indicators; coordination of indicators among institutions that rely on cooperation to design and implement policy.		Municipal air quality; Flow of financial resources; Currency reserves; Human Development Index from the UNDP Human Development Repor
6. Information about the success or failure of other institutions and countries that have similar problems and have attempted to implement policies; inspiring success stories.		Grameen Bank; Internet-based entrepreneurs
7. Popularization of issues through public communities, business, research institutions, individuals under leadership and guidance of government.
8. Popularization of visions showing the consequences of and possible outcomes of the issues; cooperation between artists (e.g. Spielberg) and futurists.		Jurassic Park  Toffler's forecasts of migration
9. Knowledge about criminal activities that could adversely influence decision making by institutions and governments.
10. Information about (or derived from) corporate lobbying that could influence decision making by institutions and governments.
11. Information about probability and risks associated with issues and their policy solutions.
12. Creation and use of accurate simulations and training which make clear the consequences of actions.
13. Sufficient information about what is required to implement various policy options: e.g. manpower, systemic effects, technological change, etc.
14. Attention paid to the issue by the media.		TV images of famine in Somalia affected decision to get involved.
15. A set of long-term scenarios, ranging from dreadful to positive.
16. Simple, clear, precise information in political, cultural and social (non-technical) terms, connected to goals and strategies
17.
18.
19.

 

Question 3: Differences in Perceptions Between the Current and Earlier Panels

In Round 1, the panel was asked about the importance and likelihood of previously cited (1996 and 1997) developments. In some instances, the panel's judgments about likelihood were appreciably different from earlier perceptions. (No appreciable changes in importance were noted.) Listed below are those developments, for which perceptions about likelihood have changed appreciably. Where possible, please note whether or not you agree that shifts have taken place and then a few possible reasons for such shifts. For comparison purposes, the prior averages are shown in parenthesis. The scales range from 5 = "almost certain by 2025" to 1 = "almost impossible by 2025."
 
 

Development seen as becoming more likely	Do you agree?  If so, why might the change have taken place?
9. Expanding science frontiers: new theoretical principles leading to great improvements in energy, motive engines, information systems, geophysical devices, material processing, medical devices, etc.  (1997= 3.57; 1998= 4.17)
Developments seen as becoming less likely	Do you agree?  If so, why might the change have taken place?
17. Increasing microbial resistance to antibiotics.  (1996= 4.43; 1998= 3.88)
3. High population growth among certain poor nations and people; the potential for food scarcity among these nations and people.  (1996= 4.58; 1998= 3.95)

In Round 1, respondents also were asked to judge whether the issues identified in 1996 and the opportunities identified in 1997 were becoming more or less important on a scale in which 5 was "much more important" and 4 was "more important." Those issues and opportunities that received a score of 4 or 5 are shown below. No issue or opportunity was seen as becoming less important. Please indicate whether you agree and indicate why you think the changes may have occurred.
 

Opportunities Seen as Becoming More or Much More Important	Do you agree?  If so, why might the change have taken place?
1. Achieving sustainable development. (1998 = 4.23)
10. Increasing advances in biotechnology. (1998 = 4.14)
8. Developing alternative sources of energy. (1998 = 4.11)
9. Globalizing the convergence of information and communications technologies. (1998 = 4.06)
3. Expanding potential for scientific and technological breakthroughs. (1998 = 4.03)

 
 

Issues Seen as Becoming More or Much More Important	Do you agree?  If so, why might the change have taken place?
2. Scarcity of fresh water in localized areas of the world. (1998 = 4.12)
10. Information technology holds both promises and perils. (1998 = 4.03)
7. The adverse interaction between- on the one hand- growth of populations and economies and- on the other- environmental quality and natural resources. (1998 = 4.02)

 

Question 4 : Importance and Likelihood of Newly Perceived Developments

Round 1 also requested suggestions about newly perceived developments that might have important consequences. Many of the developments from round 1 repeated those suggested by the 1996 and 1997 global lookout Panels. Only those that were not duplications are listed below. Please rate these newly suggested developments using the following scales:

Importance Likelihood

5 = Urgently important . 5 = Almost certain by 2025

4 = Important 4 = Likely

3 = Modest importance 3 = As likely as not

2 = Unimportant 2 = Unlikely

1 = Trivial 1 = Almost impossible by 2025

In the final column please provide your assessment of your own competence and expertise in the area of the development according to the following scale:

5= Working in the field; know it well

4= Have reading knowledge in the field

3= Generally acquainted with the field; informed layperson

2= Have some interest in the field

1= Have heard about this development

x= Have not heard about this development
 

New Developments	Importance	Likelihood	Experience
1. Local failures in electronic/ communications systems affecting the whole world; e.g. Y2K and satellite paging system failures.
2. Growing uncertainty in world economy resulting from deregulation and globalization.
3. Return to old values, ideas, ethnic associations, spirituality, metaphysics, and religions- both traditional and non-traditional- as a result of the pace and scope of change.
4. Deterioration of urban infrastructure of major cities (e.g. bridges, roads, natural gas pipes, etc.).
5. Requirement for young people to complete two years of local or global community service.
6. Evolution of new effective means of inculcating values such as TV programs that depict desirable behavior and relationships.
7. Privatization of genetic research, including patenting of human genetic information.
8. Interaction with extraterrestrial intelligence (in one form or another).
9. Ability to select a baby's gender before birth.
10. Return to traditional and natural technologies (such as alternative medicine).
11. International manned Mars's exploration.
12. Development of a thorough understanding of zero-point energy physics (ambient energy that pervades space).
13. Demonstration of solar power satellites beaming power to Earth.
14. Development of anti-aging (and even rejuvenation) technology to render most of body extremely long-lived.
15. Spread of nuclear weapons.
16. The rise of new technologies for the production of food, including genetic augmentation of plant properties, new irrigation, and possibly new factory grown and manufactured foods.
17. Major advances in desalination.
18. Availability of computers that "understand" natural language and solve everyday problems faced by ordinary human beings.
19. Ability to copy any natural product with an exact synthetic copy.
20. Islam providing a global peace paradigm, working hand in hand with democracies.
21. Appearance of new concepts of social classes: e.g., a society of knowledge and inhabitants of dual cities.
22. Political confrontation between the US and the emerging superpower, China.
23. Attempts by governments to use "social engineering" to control violence in society through by capturing the "hearts and minds" of the population.
24. Change in view of what is natural vs. synthetic and hence need to conserve different global resources.
25. Growing use of communications networks by dissidents to make their points well known to the world at large.
26. New and recurrent psychiatric diseases.
27. Human beings becoming more at home with machines; ever more sophisticated "machines" replace some human interactions.
28. Development of quantum computers, leading to unprecedented abilities to model global environmental and economic systems.
29. Diminishing boundaries between different fields of knowledge.
30. Scarcity of oil around the year 2020 because of depletion of existing stocks - increased consumption worldwide.
31. Global depression resulting, for example, from collapse of financial institutions, deregulation, and inadequacy of solutions provided by international financial safety net institutions such as IMF.
32. Water becoming more and more a source of negotiation, solidarity or conflict among nations and even regions.

 

Question 5: Role of Moral and Ethical Values

In both the interviews and questionnaire, a question was included about the role of moral and ethical values in decision making. The list below is presented in the order of importance as determined by the panel. Please list actions that you think might address the issues and rate the newly suggested moral and ethical issues using the following scale:

5= of highest importance

4= of great importance

3= of modest importance

2= of some importance

1= trivial
 

Original List:  Moral or Ethical Issues	Import in my Country	Import in the World	How might the moral or ethical issue be addressed?
Insufficient attention to the needs of future generations	3.9	4.0
Corruption in government	3.8	4.1
Greed and self-centredness	3.7	3.7
Economic inequities	3.7	4.1
Waste	3.7	3.6
Lack of respect for the environment	3.6	4.0
Lack of compassion and tolerance for others	3.5	3.6
Lack of honor and lying	3.4	3.5
Lack of means for educating about morals and ethics	3.3	3.6
Lack of transparency in decision making	3.3	3.6
Barriers to freedom of inquiry	3.0	3.7
Disrespect of authority	3.0	3.1
Lack of respect for human civil rights (especially women's)	2.8	3.7
National sovereignty used to cover human rights abuses	2.8	3.6
Godless-ness	2.6	2.7
Newly Suggested  Moral  or Ethica Issues	Import in my Country	Import in the World	How might the moral or ethical issue be addressed?
Corruption of political leaders, policy makers, corporate leaders.
Non-action, the most severe corruption. Honor in leadership is to assume responsibility.
Undue pressures from lobbying groups.
Infiltration of organized crime and criminals into government and business
Alienation of people from self and nature.
Lack of a holistic view of the world; fragmentation among many people with a more or less holistic view.
Advertising promoting inappropriate products and purposes; promotion of "over-consumption."
Lack of role models.
Lack of common agreement about ethics and morals; it changes with advancing knowledge and socio-economic conditions.
Undue pressure from fundamentalist groups.

 

Thank you for your participation.