Building Anticipatory Capacity with Strategic Foresight in Government

Executive summary

Governments today operate in an era of profound uncertainty. The green and digital transformations, for instance, demand innovative approaches to policymaking. Short-term planning and reactive decision-making no longer suffice in addressing the complex, interdependent challenges of modern societies.

Anticipatory governance and strategic foresight offer governments tools to explore plausible futures, allowing them to anticipate change, manage risks, and seize emerging opportunities. By strengthening resilience and adaptability, these approaches empower public administrations to improve long-term policy outcomes, ultimately shaping future developments rather than merely reacting to events.

The OECD’s project “Anticipatory Governance: Opportunities for public sector strategic foresight in Italy, Lithuania, and Malta” (hereafter referred to as the LIMinal project), sought to build and institutionalise anticipatory capacity in the governance systems of these three countries. The project examined existing foresight practices, identified obstacles to implementation, and developed frameworks to strengthen anticipatory governance.

Building on pockets of excellence in Lithuania, Italy, and Malta

At the start of the project, each participating country had begun exploring strategic foresight but had not yet integrated it systematically into their governance frameworks:

• Lithuania: Strategic foresight initiatives existed through efforts such as the Parliamentary Committee for the Future and the Lithuania 2050 strategy. However, these efforts remained fragmented. The project revealed the need for stronger institutional embedding and leadership commitment to support long-term strategic planning.

• Italy: Although Italy had engaged in foresight initiatives, especially in central administrations and training institutions, the systematic application of anticipatory governance was still in its infancy. Policy planning tended to focus on economic and fiscal strategies shaped by European constraints, such as the European Semester. The LIMinal project highlighted the importance of broad-based capacity building and the need for leadership commitment and cross-sectoral co-ordination to advance strategic foresight.

• Malta: While recognising the value of strategic foresight—particularly in its National Post-Pandemic Strategy (2021)—Malta had not yet fully integrated it into core policy structures. The project emphasised the creation of a supportive, authorising environment and the implementation of dedicated training programmes to enhance institutional capacity.

A focus on building capacity

To help governments strengthen their capacity to shape the future in the present, the LIMinal project used the OECD’s Anticipatory Innovation Governance (AIG) framework, which includes two critical dimensions:

• Agency: the tools, methods, and knowledge that enable governments to identify emerging trends, explore alternative futures, and experiment with new policy approaches. Strengthening agency ensures that public servants have the skills and resources necessary to apply strategic foresight techniques effectively.

• Authorising environment: the institutional structures and leadership support necessary to legitimise and embed anticipatory practices into the policy cycle. Establishing a strong authorising environment ensures that foresight is integrated into decision-making processes rather than remaining an isolated or ad hoc exercise.

Strengthening anticipation: Lessons from the project

The project identified overarching lessons applicable across diverse governance contexts:

• Institutional anchoring and leadership commitment: Effective strategic foresight requires endorsement at the highest levels to ensure continuity despite political changes. Without robust leadership support, foresight efforts can remain fragmented or dependent on individual champions. Embedding foresight in legislative and executive processes helps align it with overall policy priorities and planning.

• Capacity building and training: Structured learning pathways are essential for cultivating foresight practices in the public sector. Public servants need to develop both cognitive and technical skills—such as horizon scanning, scenario planning, and systems thinking—to anticipate and respond to emerging trends. Tailored training programmes for different levels of government ensure that policymakers, senior leaders, and operational staff can integrate foresight into their roles, moving anticipatory practices beyond isolated projects.

• Inter-ministerial co-ordination and cross-sectoral networks: Tackling complex challenges requires collaboration across government silos as well as engagement with non-governmental actors. Traditional policy structures, which often operate in isolation, may fail to detect risks that span multiple sectors. Enhanced co-ordination mechanisms ensure that strategic foresight informs policymaking broadly.

• Action-based learning and pilot initiatives: For strategic foresight to move beyond theoretical exercises, governments must test its application in real-world settings. Pilot initiatives and policy prototyping allow governments to refine their foresight methodologies, demonstrate their practical value, and identify institutional barriers. A culture of learning and iteration supports continuous improvement in anticipatory capacity and effective risk management.

• Sustaining communities of practice: Long-term success in strategic foresight depends on establishing and nurturing networks of practice. Without sustained engagement, foresight efforts can lose momentum once specific projects end. Peer-learning networks facilitate the sharing of insights, methodologies, and best practices, ensuring that foresight knowledge is continuously refined and transferred across government agencies despite personnel changes.

A changing world calls for changing institutions

The LIMinal project demonstrates that transitioning to a structured anticipatory innovation governance system requires shifts both in mindset and in institutional design. This report, based on the lessons from Lithuania, Italy, and Malta, also offers generalisable models that governments worldwide.

Rethinking structures and functions supporting futures thinking: Chapter 4 introduces a comprehensive framework for rethinking institutional structures and functions that enable effective implementation of strategic foresight in governments. This model provides adaptable and modular options, based on a global scan of existing government strategic foresight units, for embedding futures thinking into public administrations, policy development systems, and decision-making processes.

A comprehensive curriculum for public training institutions: Chapter 5 offers a curriculum and training guide tailored for senior leaders, policymakers, and foresight practitioners in public administrations. Recognising that anticipatory governance and strategic foresight requires specific skills and competencies, this guide provides a structured learning pathway that can be adapted to different national contexts.

A sustained and systemic approach to long-term thinking: Chapter 7 underscores the importance of sharing and sustaining foresight capacity through communities of practice across government. This chapter, based on a survey of existing strategic foresight communities of practice, outlines how governments can encourage peer-learning networks, promote institutional collaboration, and sustain engagement in strategic foresight.

The frameworks developed in this project can also be useful as a roadmap for other countries to build resilient and future-ready approaches to governance.