This policy brief provides insights into the thematic areas addressed in the first five Eye of Europe workshops. It also informs about the upcoming workshops and the futures4europe platform, the online home of the European foresight community, where visitors can explore a rich collection of foresight projects, showcase their work, and discover foresight-related upcoming events.

Founded in 1989 as an academic spin-off of Sussex University (UK), Technopolis Group is an international research and consulting organisation working for the public sector. Starting as a frontrunner in the science, technology and innovation policy sector, we have grown and diversified our areas of expertise and solutions to climate change and environment, digital transformation, education and skills, life sciences and health, and international cooperation. We have expanded our activities beyond Europe, to Africa, Latin America and the Caribbean, Asia and the Pacific. 

Technopolis Group combines state-of-the-art social science methods with international expertise in core domain areas. We conduct strategic and foresight studies on a wide range of topics related to research and innovation, entrepreneurship, SMEs and industry, digital transformation, regional development and cohesion, higher education and skills, green economy, and health and life sciences.

In the small seaside township of Diano Marina, Liguria Region, Italy, the local community has been organising frequent meetings to help people overcome growing fears of an increasingly uncertain future. This initiative, called ‘Fridays of Knowledge’, aims to equip the local community with scientific tools and knowledge to understand the risks and implications of new technologies in a dialogue together with students, academics, and journalists. Communication Manager for Fridays of Knowledge, Damiana Biga, tells Futures4Europe how this initiative sparks debates across different generations and backgrounds, fostering a sense of shared responsibility and curiosity.

At Futures4Europe, we had the pleasure of chatting with Petranka Malcheva, Policy Lead for Health, Long Term Thinking and Prevention at the Office of the Future Generations Commissioner of Wales. Her mission is to reduce health inequalities in Wales and to shift the focus from treatment to prevention guided by Wales’ pioneering Futures Generations Act. Petranka also leads the work on long-term thinking, supporting Wales’ public sector organisations to increase capabilities, skills and balancing short-term urgent issues without compromising the well-being of people living in the future.

Petranka will address the role of “Collective Intelligence” in Foresight for Research and Innovation Policy at the upcoming Futures4Europe Conference 2025, held in Vienna on the 15-16 May 2025.

Welcome to the fourth issue of Horizon Futures Watch! In this edition, we explore two pivotal yet distinct themes: the future of civic resilience and the future of intellectual property. Civic resilience refers to the ability of communities to adapt and thrive amidst challenges and changes, a crucial aspect in today’s rapidly evolving global landscape. On the other hand, the future of IP delves into evolving dynamics crucial for fostering innovation and for protecting the interests of creators in an increasingly digital world. While these themes stand independently, together they underscore the importance of adaptability and creativity in shaping the future. 

An overview of the latest selection of news about foresight projects and topics opens the issue.

Welcome to the third issue of Horizon Futures Watch. Here, we delve into two interrelated themes that may frequently be paired together (or seen in isolation): the future of green skills and the future of big tech.  

Sustainability meets technological progress. A focus on green skills may be amplified with the entrance of innovative, data-driven technologies. Technology may sometimes be viewed as the answer to the need for more sustainable processes, while green skills may provide the essential human touch necessary to ensure these advancements are effectively and ethically applied. But is this always the case? And is there a universally optimal balance between the two? Such questions are explored in the six different projects that follow.

An overview of the latest selection of news about foresight projects and topics opens the issue. The Foresight in the Field section presents a report on the EEA’s recently published Horizon Scanning – Tips and Tricks.

Welcome to the second issue of Horizon Futures Watch, bringing you a fresh batch of articles revolving around the latest foresight developments in Horizon projects and beyond. Two new themes are treated in this issue: Tackling security concerns and the future of Science for Policy. 

The ‘Tackling security concerns’ section goes beyond the scope of the Futures4Europe platform foresight project on the ‘interpenetration of criminal and lawful activities’ and explores new needs that arise for fighting crime and countering hybrid threats as a result of rapid technological developments. 

The Science for Policy theme explores novel approaches taken to support the democratic process through evidence-based methods for policymaking.  

We open this issue with an up-to-date selection of news on foresight projects and publications. The Foresight in the Field section presents the application of foresight in EUROPOL’s European Innovation Lab to support law enforcement agencies around the EU.

This is the first edition of Horizon Futures Watch, a newsletter showcasing the latest findings from foresight in the EU Framework Programme and the futures4europe.eu platform. It is aimed at a growing community of decision-makers, experts, practicioners and other people interested in foresight, R&I policy and european affairs promoting the wealth of thinking generated in the context of different projects financed through Horizon Europe as well as other foresight-related activities and exercises conducted by the European Commission.

The newsletter is written by the Foresight on Demand Consortium, which provides support to the European Commission of foresight in the area of research and innovation, and is connected to the Horizon Europe Foresight Network – a network of Commission staff connecting all policy departments involved in the Horizon Europe R&I programme.

This issue features articles on foresight in R&I projects covering two themes: Land and Sea Use and the Future of Social Confrontations. The theme of Land and Sea Use looks at Horizon projects that explore issues of increasing demand for land-and-sea resources for human activities such as agriculture, housing, transport, and industry, and the complications associated with climate change. The theme of Social Confrontations explores social dilemmas like inequality, discrimination, and ideological divisions.  

Considering prevalent trends, such as population growth, increasing demand for animal protein, land use change, and resource scarcity, a blueprint for future crops may help prioritise sustainable and efficient agriculture practices, as well as improved food systems. CropBooster-P, funded under the Horizon 2020 Programme, is a project that aimed to find a solution to this question by looking into innovative crop-breeding technologies for improving climate adaptability, resource use efficiency, yield, and quality.

With the rise of new digital technologies, crime is evolving in new and unpredictable directions. To re-duce their impact, it is becoming increasingly vital to anticipate their course.

ALIGNER aspires to rally European stakeholders anxious about AI's role in law enforcement. The project's goal is to create a unified front to identify strategies that will not only bolster the strength of law enforcement agencies through AI but also ensure public benefit. But how far into the future is it useful to look?

This is the summary of the dissemination event held for the 'Futures of using nature in rural and marine Europe in 2050' project. 

The 14th of June marked the second Deep Dives Dissemination Workshop, focusing on the future of land and sea use. The workshop started with the presentation of The Deep Dive report on Rural and Marine areas in Europe. The report approached the topic from the perspective of using land and sea for restoring biodiversity, involving issues of governance and ownership of land, as well as access and use rights. Four dimensions were used as the basis for scenarios: the economic model, focusing on growth and global trade versus a self-sufficient Europe; environment and production, showing, on one extreme, Europe undertaking intensive mass production of food and a regenerative multifunctional production on the other; low versus high trust in society; and an autocratic versus a deliberative governance model. 

Amongst the 16 different possible futures along these dimensions, four alternative scenarios were developed: 

European civic eco-village: Based on a post-growth and autonomous Europe, much of the food chains are local and short, featuring many cooperative practices. There is a strong focus on nature rights and care for the environment. 

Sustainable high-tech Europe in the World Trade: With a strong focus on regenerative production, honing a high trust society but a weak democracy, the EU no longer exists and is replaced by strong local leaders that re-establish the trust of the people in the local level. On a greater scale, the UN regulates global trade instead of the EU. The management of rural, coastal and marine areas is aligned with national plans and Europe is well aligned with the rest of the world. 

United States of Europe: This growth scenario for global trade centers around mass and intensive food production processes with weak democracy and high trust. Furthermore, there is a need for unified autocratic decision-making. Europe is a powerful global player in terms of global trade and its sustainability agenda. 

European permacrisis: This scenario paints a picture of a post-growth, autonomous Europe, reminiscent of the first scenario but with a twist: it's marked by intensive mass food production. The political landscape is fragmented, dominated by niche single-issue protest parties. Innovation stagnates, and the legal framework suffers from low quality and poor execution. Corporate giants hold significant sway over decisions. Coordination in land use is scant, making nature conservation zones a rare sight. This environment breeds intense competition, making scalability a challenging endeavor. 

The scenarios’ implications for policy 

When it comes to the policy dimension, the scenarios have interconnected effects on various areas like energy, transportation, farming, and fishing. The scenarios highlight a strong focus on making gradual improvements that support a diverse approach to utilising both land and sea resources. These gradual improvements to both land and sea resources usage were further discusssed in the subsequent presentations of the IFOAM and FLOW initiatives, which both aim to enhance production systems and the integrity of supply chain or one’s relationship to ocean and water and coastal resources. 

When we shift our gaze to demographics, lifestyles, and values, the narrative centers around bolstering civic resilience and readiness. This is particularly poignant for rural regions, which need to diversify and foster shared practices that bridge the urban-rural divide. On the governance front, the discourse underscores the pivotal role of citizen engagement in decision-making processes. It also spotlights the intertwined nature of societal and economic resilience, drawing attention to the harmonious relationship between nature restoration and economic activities. The MOVING project resonated vividly with these principles, as it seeks to strengthen value chains that enhance the resilience and sustainability of mountain regions in the face of climate change and other drivers. It was also exhibited in a later part of the workshop as a real case example of how innovative approaches can be practically applied to address pressing environmental challenges, demonstrating the tangible impact of aligning principles with action in safeguarding vulnerable ecosystems. 

Another related point was raised about the importance of the interaction between land and sea, as marine special planning is a comprehensive approach to managing human activities in marine and coastal areas. It is about balancing competing demands while preserving the ecological integrity of marine ecosystems. 

As discussions unfolded, apprehensions arose regarding the "United States of Europe" scenario, particularly its emphasis on autocratic decision-making. Many participants felt that, given Europe's historical and cultural backdrop, autocracy seemed improbable. Instead, they pinpointed misinformation and the misuse of social media as the most pressing threats to modern democracy. In their perspective, a more plausible scenario would be a fragile democracy, undermined by the pervasive spread of misinformation. However, the deep dive team clarified that their intention wasn't to rank scenarios based on likelihood but to explore a spectrum of possibilities, including the extremes. They posited that the scenario in question juxtaposed autocracy with high public trust, suggesting that even in a crisis, a well-functioning democracy could resort to top-down decision-making. 

Other comments surrounded implications for research and development as well as sustainable management of land and water. An imperative is to look for solutions limiting potential conflicts in competitive use of land and sea, especially between food and nonfood uses. 

The considerations posed by the audience on this topic generated a wide array of thought-provoking discussions and paved the way for a deeper exploration into the intricacies of the subject. These dialogues not only highlighted the complexities and nuances inherent to the future of land and sea use but also underscored the importance of diverse perspectives in shaping a comprehensive understanding. 

This blog post summarizes the dissemination event held for the 'Future of Social Confrontations' project.

On 31 May, the Foresight on Demand Consortium hosted the inaugural Horizon Futures Watch Workshop, a deep dive into the future of social confrontations from the perspective of European Research and Innovation Policy. One of the highlights was the 'Deep Dives' segment, which explored the risks future social confrontations might pose to European R&I policies. Findings from a Horizon Scanning exercise were showcased. This exercise aimed at explaining major trends in social confrontations and the factors driving change. Using a model contrasting dimensions like democratisation versus authoritarianism and private economy influence against the significance of public goods, these four potential scenarios, each a possible future for Europe, ignited a spirited discussion among participants.  

• The scenario “European Democracy Rhizome” envisions grassroots networks playing an important role in political participation. Civil society actively engages to enhance its impact on policy-making processes, striving for greater influence and embracing new forms of structured dialogue. The concept is further explored by the Musae Starts project, which was also presented later on in the workshop. it introduces an innovative Human-Centred Factory model that integrates artistic collaboration within Digital Innovation Hubs. It aims adopt a strategic approach to exponential technologies for the future of food, aiming to improve human and planetary well-being by reducing carbon footprint and rethinking the food chain. 
• In contrast, one of two scenarios outlining a shift towards authoritarianism, “Defending Itself Against Totalitarian Tendencies”, depicts a situation where extremists attempt to seize control within the EU, leading to an escalation of social confrontations in countries where civil rights are violated. 
• The other one, “The European Fortress Defending Its Borders”, portrays the EU as safeguarding itself against external infiltration attempts and striving for self-sufficiency. However, it still contends with numerous internal and external forces and groups that fuel social confrontations within European society. 
• The final scenario describes a development toward more consumerism and control by large tech companies. In this scenario, “Cultural hegemony through global capitalism”, almost all types of social confrontations have ended. What is more, it implies a diminishing trust between society and science. During the workshop, PROSPER Network, which unites foresight practitioners from French public research institutions and ministries, examined what could be the drivers of reciprocal trust between society and science and how trust could evolve by 2040. 

Throughout the session, the audience‘s keen interest was evident as they posed insightful questions, diving deep into the nuances of social confrontations for the Green Transition. One notable intervention brought to light a pressing concern: There's a potential for the escalation of social confrontations and unrest if the green transition doesn't incorporate substantial redistributive measures. In contrast to this concern, a project that was presented, Critical Making Project, examined innovation processes in the marker movement with regards to social responsibility, especially in relation to gender, openness, recruitment of young people and more generally, their social responsibility. 

Another question emphasized the significance of "nature justice" in conjunction with climate justice. It's essential to recognize that some nature-based solutions might have unintended consequences, disproportionately affecting marginalized communities. The workshop provided a platform for further exploration of these considerations. Presentations showcased EU-funded projects that specifically addressed these concerns, offering a comprehensive understanding of the challenges and potential solutions in the green transition journey. 

The inaugural Horizon Futures Watch Workshop proved to be an insightful and engaging event. The audience’s active participation particularly underscored the urgency and complexity of addressing social confrontations in the context of the green transition. The workshop highlighted the multidimensional nature of social confrontations and the complex relationship between policies and social dynamics. 

In the fast-moving realm of mobility, one fact stands out: the road to success requires new skills. To meet evolving customer needs, embrace cutting-edge technologies, and fulfil environmental commit-ments, the transport sector is turning to automation for sustainable, cost-effective, and inclusive mobility solutions. However, the interplay between automation, reskilling, and sustainability is more complex than meets the eye.

A successful shift to a circular economy requires multidisciplinary skillsets that integrate both business and technology aspects. However, circular economy or sustainability practices are not often seen as competitive advantages for companies. The ConnectedFactories project focussed on devising potential pathways to digital manufacturing, including circular economy from a broader perspective.

In a world pervaded by the rapid entrance and development of new technologies, the pace at which ethical concerns are addressed is not always in sync. TechEthos, a Horizon 2020 project, wants to facilitate “ethics-by-design” in order to push forward ethical and societal values into the design and development of new and emerging technologies at the very beginning of the process.

Project INNOPATHS explores different forward-looking scenarios leading to a completely decarbonised Europe by 2050. How attainable are these pathways and what are the skills in demand?

The fifth online event in the series of Horizon Futures Watch dissemination workshops eas held on October 25th 2023 and delved into the theme of the future of green skills and jobs. The importance of this topic and its relevance for the green transition was underlined by its many interpretations. Its definition is often difficult to grasp, as the meaning of ‘green’ is comparative and constantly reconfigured. The urgency of meeting the need for green skills, through workforce up-skilling and reskilling, in order to thrive in greener jobs in the future guided the workshop. A broad definition of green jobs was shared early on, taking into account (i) new and emerging green occupations; (ii) green and enhanced skills and knowledge occupations and (iii) green increased-demand occupations.

The green transition’s potential to lead to important implications for reskilling was a key concept running throughout the workshop. In many places, the lack of green skills may in fact be a barrier to the green transition, but there is also ambiguity on what the green transition actually is and which skills it depends on. This uncertainty set the scene for an exploration of the future and for understanding how research policy can approach green skills and jobs. The relevance of green skills spans beyond research and innovation, touching on education, industry, and environmental policy.

The policy brief introduced by the expert team assessed what the green jobs landscape might look like in 2050 and pointed to the existence of 571 skills and knowledge concepts labelled as ‘green’ which cut across all sectors of the economy, ranging from information to communication and management roles. These include new and emerging green occupations, green and enhanced skills and knowledge occupations, and positions in high demand due to green practices.

The proposed scenarios considered dimensions such as environmental pressures, EU leadership in green technologies, along with demand and supply of green workforce, to generate 16 alternative futures. Four of these were examined in more depth:

A – Green, technology-intensive Europe – struggling to fill all the green jobs

B – Apocalypse soon – fighting skills mismatches in a degraded environment

C – Feeling the pain – a workforce left behind in a non-green world

D – Green leapfrogging – old, mismatched Europe surrounded by new green giants

In response to the above scenarios, the workshop discussed overarching themes concerning the interaction between humans and the environment, as well as between humans and technology. The discussion also explored what defines a 'quality' green job and considered the integration of these concepts into R&I policy and the management of related uncertainties. One participant proposed taking into account the fluctuating numbers of incoming and outgoing workers from the EU.For example, if expertise in carbon capture is not locally available, it may be necessary to source this specialized knowledge outside and draw it into the EU. Therefore, green skills and jobs could be viewed as workforce flows, rather than as static sectors and fixed competencies.

Another participant identified the need to harvest the necessary ability to accompany change processes across all sectors. For example, farmers would need guidance to adopt less chemical-intensive methods and must possess the adaptability to frequently reassess their practices.

In their foresight exercise, the experts concluded that a circular economy would likely result from either intense, crisis-driven pressure, or unprecedented cooperation among current industry players. A major requirement is, therefore, cross-sectoral collaboration, thinking in terms of value chains instead of single products. Additionally, the real challenge lies not just in identifying the necessary skills but in determining who will ensure the training and development of these required skills. This would call for an investment in specialised education, making a compelling case for employers to invest in reskilling their workforce. Thus, a synergy between innovation and educational institutions is essential to equip the workforce with future-oriented skills, including AI and data science expertise.

In the second part of the workshop, perspectives on the scenarios were shared by various foresight project representatives. WE TRANSFORM, a project researching the skills needed for the transition to automated mobility, suggested that the scenarios could have depicted not only probable futures but also aspirational ones. Thus, illustrating pathways and actions necessary to achieve those preferred futures would have enriched the scenarios. This point was also echoed by the Connected Factories Project, whose aim was to identify the enablers and cross-cutting factors of sustainability and manufacturing through specific pathways. According to this project, the scenarios presented were valuable not just for road mapping, but also for potential risk analysis. The assessment of AI’s potential impact on the scenarios was considered a relevant addition to make, considering the topic’s prevalence in the discussions.

Consequently, the MLE project pondered on how the EU could maintain control amid growing environmental vulnerability, appreciating the scenarios’ consideration of the relationship between humans and machines, and the implications these dynamics have for the relationship between digitalization and sustainability. A similar point was also made by Strategic Foresight for Sustainabilit project representatives, emphasizing the need for continuous learning and stressing the importance of narrative skills for highlighting transformation points across industries.

The workshop underlined the potential complexity of green skills agendas, acknowledging that while technology will certainly play a key role in the future of green skills, our ‘solution’ lies in our ability to innovate responsibly and integrate technology with sustainable practices.

In a world where the future often seems uncertain, how do local communities navigate the complexities of European policies to build a more resilient and equitable tomorrow? This is the intriguing question at the heart of RELOCAL, an EU -funded Horizon 2020 research project that ran between 2016 - 2021.

How can individuals practice critical thinking and effectively evaluate the credibility of sources in an age where information abounds but is not always accurate or truthful? Project CO-INFORM applied co-creation methods to develop verification tools with and for stakeholders such as journalists, policymak-ers, and citizens, to better prepare for situations in which the distinction between fact and fiction is not always evident.

The sixth Horizon Futures Watch Dissemination Workshop held on November 8 2023 explored futures of Big Tech in Europe. Contemporary societies increasingly rely on Big Tech for different functions, such as work, communication, consumption, and self-expression.

"Big tech" companies, often referred to as the giants in the technology industry, have a significant impact on the global market, economy, and society. Decision makers, regulators and stakeholders grapple with the challenges of uneven competition and the political and ethical implications arising from the actions of these major players, as well as their data usage practices. In addition, the majority of large high-tech corporations are not headquartered in Europe.

Questions regarding the challenges posed by the future of Big Tech abound: Should Europe try to develop its own Big Tech as well? Should Big Tech be left free to carry on unimpeded? Should governments impose detailed standards of conduct? Foresight experts investigated what the situation could look like in 2040 and the implications for the future of Big Tech in research and innovation policy.

Based on the discussions stemming from the foresight experts, 4 scenarios were conceived:  

• Winner techs all – The economy depends on infrastructures owned and honed by Big Tech. This growing reliance is balanced by benefit sharing arrangements and empowerment of businesses. Stability is underpinned by the existing framework of Globalisation, supported by both informal (G7, G20) and formal institutions (IMF, World Bank). The US continues as the dominant superpower, setting the global agenda, while the EU's role is more constrained, fitting into the international labour division. 
• Pax technologica – The economy balances between pro-global business interests and pro-local political constraints, where 'local' refers to cooperative yet competitive groups of countries. Despite the drive for economies of scale and scope, increased regulation and stricter borders have led to more fragmented supply chains focused on suppliers within mega-regions of preferential partners, prioritizing stability over efficiency. The EU acts as a nexus for these external and internal pressures, embodying the "Brussels Consensus." 
• Re-match – The development of nations and regions is shaped by their unique paths in a diverse international landscape, where proactive and coordinated policies are increasingly relevant. After a period of rapid expansion, Big Tech's growth has slowed, giving way to innovative cross-regional and trans-sectoral entities that thrive in a complex economy with active public sector involvement. The EU plays a key role in fostering network building and protecting vital components of the modern economy, balancing citizen engagement and global fragmentation. 
• Closet liberalism – In this scenario, commercial and financial integration advances, with power increasingly crossing national borders and impacting state sovereignty. Large multinationals, particularly tech monopolies, influence public governance, though their maturity leads to higher costs and poorer quality. This environment, characterized by a network of competition authorities, presents opportunities for decentralization, particularly at local and city levels, while the US prioritizes its interests and the EU advocates for market order, with internal members reinterpreting rules for their benefit. 

Overall, the experts concluded that Europe needs its own leading actors in the digital world. The key question remains how compatible they would be in an existing market and what they would mean for competition and equality in Europe. EU-based research and development startups receive a lot of offers from bigger tech giants, calling for closer monitoring of the global connectivity of ecosystems to avoid the gobbling up of in-house expertise.

Grappling with Big Tech scenarios raised issues tied to ethics, for which project TechEthos provided feedback. This project, which seeks to create ethical guidelines for emerging technologies, aims to define potential ethical implications of future technologies. They believed the scenarios were well defined but lacked a focus on societal and ethical implications. When examining technological risks, the scenarios focused on whether specific technologies prioritised the achievement of their intended functions, rather than considering the ethical implications and transformations these technologies might undergo. Their pointers turned toward copyright issues and the ways in which creative generative companies are restructuring their human labour. They asked scenario experts how a responsible innovative model for Big Tech might look so that new narratives can be strived towards.

Project PLUS offered a step in that direction by analysing how the platform economy affects work, welfare, and social protection, employing an innovative approach that spans multiple cities. From drone deliveries to automated driving systems, from the artificial intelligence of home assistant devices to the digitization of agriculture, they stressed that today it is the major platform economy players like Amazon, rather than the public sector, which develop patents for new technologies. This could be a feature of scenarios with a prominent role for the EU.

One participant argued in favour of building the capacity for data analysis for public purposes. While the business sector can do this efficiently, the public sector lags behind. They argued that the public sector should be empowered with the capacity to exploit data this way. At the same time, a greater effort is needed to use data repositories in Europe. However, large companies already have a big head start, thus increasing the competition with existing big data infrastructures.

The capability to exploit data proves as important as the technologies themselves, indicating that the future of Big Tech will not only be shaped by technological advancements but also by the mastery of data utilisation. This intertwining of data exploitation and technology underscores the potential for even greater influence and innovation in the years ahead.

The seventh Horizon Futures Watch online dissemination workshop took place on November 15 2023 and explored possible futures of innovation and IP regulation. The topic proved rich in discussion points, challenges, and questions related to the future.

Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) are typically viewed as a cornerstone for innovation, because they facilitate knowledge transactions that might otherwise be hindered due to the public good nature of knowledge. Thus IPR are seen as crucial in promoting creative and inventive activities. However, some critics argue that IPR can be a costly market distortion, inhibiting rather than encouraging innovation. IPR institutions are increasingly under scrutiny amidst evolving innovation trends and changes. IPR, known for their technical complexity and variability across legal jurisdictions, are facing diverse challenges, reflecting the dynamic nature of modern innovation and innovation policy. Amongst the important shifts are trends towards more inclusive, open innovation processes involving various stakeholders and the growing influence of digitalization.

The presentation of scenarios relating to the future of intellectual property was the cue for participants, speakers, and experts alike to begin teasing out the underlying implications of IP for innovation and patenting. The scenarios evolved along important emerging trends and were mapped along two dimensions: private versus public use of IP, and concentration of power versus distribution of power. These dimensions, along with a definition of key drivers and main actors, yielded the following five scenarios:  

• End of IP as we know it – Key actors are large cloud-based giants and trade secrets are a prevalent form of IP. Europe loses value as tech giants are not based in Europe. Unitary patent loses meaning. Policy implications: anti-trust and ex-ante regulation are of utmost importance to avoid obscured private governance of IP. 
• ‘Creative destruction’ of the IP regime – Drivers include the speed of technological change, increasing technological complexity, and disruptive technologies. Europe faces regulatory challenges. Regarding policy implications, the aim is to maintain the quality of IPR and IP authorities are encouraged to operate in the public interest. 
• IP a battlefield of geopolitics – EU hands out strong security patents within a harmonized IPR regime. In regulation, mandatory mediation is paramount and the mediator has access to agreements from patent owner. 
• Global and balanced IP for open innovation – IP is lean toward access. Drivers include public interest, global IP, and the movement of public goods. AI and digitalization play a role in ensuring transparency, monitoring, and innovation. Science has become the solution to address extreme weather events. Public funding ensures that there is open access to public research results. 
• Open-source collaboration globalized innovation – Innovation is driven by collaborative communities and startups. There is capacity to regulate access to EU internal market and influence global supply chains.

The audience offered commentary and discussed the individual scenarios. One participant noted that several scenarios focused primarily on IP and innovation from a techno-centric perspective, suggesting a need for greater emphasis on the social context of innovation. A point was made about how the fourth scenario, which dealt with global and balanced IP, better addressed this aspect by highlighting the implications of patents for public good in the context of COVID. One of the projects presented subsequently, Creative IPR, further touched upon these implications for the creative industries, namely pointing to the impact of the COVID crisis on revenue generated from copyrights, particularly for the music sector. The project coordinator argued that the pandemic highlighted the vulnerability of the music industry due to a heavier reliance on copyright for revenue compared to a more resilient sector, such as fashion design and textiles. This raised questions about how to best support the music industry through IP in times of crisis.

Touching upon the technological implications for IP, a representative from the World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO), argued that human contribution to innovation will not be replaced by AI, but that a lot of AI applications rely on training data, which still makes use of human creativity. He argued that in Europe, one area that has seen the strongest progress is digital technology, at the expense of more traditional technologies such as mechanical, chemical, and technical engineering, which have witnessed a reduced number of patent filings. On the other hand, he stressed how the fastest growth in patent development in East Asia questions how European companies should prepare for a changing landscape in innovation reflected in intellectual property.

One remark in reaction to this was a caution not to forget traditional technologies, and not to assume that these would be overshadowed by aspects such as digitalization, but to continue fostering this strength in traditional technologies. While Europe is a follower in the area of digitalisation, AI-generated products are still driven by human creativity and engineering, highlighting the importance for regulators not to forget about this link.

Referencing the fourth scenario, another participant argued that countries in East Asia, such as India, which advocate for more access, may contribute to a changing geopolitical landscape towards access, fostered by national trade interests. Focusing more on production and less on usage could lead to duplicating many existing patents. At the same time, this approach might also entail increased international collaboration and bilateral relations, pooling resources to accelerate innovation.

The overall discussion highlighted the need to strike a balance between innovation incentives and the right to access. It is essential to find a middle ground that encourages creative and scientific advancement while ensuring information and educational resources remain accessible to all.

The FUTURESILIENCE project has set out to strengthen European economic and social resilience through an enhanced ability to adapt and respond quickly to future crises. To reach this goal, the project sees Research and Innovation (R&I) playing a key role in building the capacity to anticipate, better prepare and be more flexible in crisis periods.

Paulo Carvalho has been working in the field of futures and foresight for more than 25 years. On one hand, he is a professor in foresight, strategy and innovation at the Faculty of Economics and Management at the University of Lisbon. On the other hand, he founded a foresight company five years ago, IF Insight Foresight, focussing on consulting, horizon scanning and strategic intelligence, as well as other strategy and innovation projects. He talked to Futures4Europe about Insight Foresight’s recently developed tool ORION and how it could revolutionise foresight practices.

Futures4Europe interviewed Eye of Europe’s Coordinator, Radu Gheorghiu, foresight expert at UEFISCDI, the Romanian Research & Innovation funding agency. What does the future look like for R&I in Europe? How does foresight play a role? Radu provides a glimpse into these questions and Eye of Europe’s central role in them.

Following the publishing of the Fourth Global Trends ESPAS report in April 2024, Futures4Europe had the pleasure of interviewing the editor and two co-authors of the report about their reflections and key trend insights throughout the foresight research and writing process. ESPAS, or the European Strategy and Policy Analysis System, unites nine EU institutions and bodies to collaboratively identify and analyze medium- and long-term trends affecting the EU, informing policy-makers about their implications.

Established by the European Commission, Foresight-on-Demand is a mechanism to respond to the demand for quick inputs to policy-making by drawing on the best available foresight knowledge.

FoD aims at offering the European Commission services with timely and effective support related to crisis situations, emerging risks, and policy challenges.

This project aims at:

i) providing timely foresight intelligence and forward-looking policy briefs to the European Commission for purposes of R&I policy on the following topics:

• Futures of interpenetration of criminal and lawful economic activities 
• Futures of Science for Policy in Europe 
• Futures of using nature in rural and marine contexts in Europe
• Futures of Social Confrontations
• Futures of Green Skills and Jobs
• Futures of Big Tech
• Futures of innovation and IP regulation

ii) providing a hub for Europe’s R&I foresight community and a space in which foresight agencies and researchers can share knowledge and tools;

iii) networking EU supported R&I projects with important foresight elements and promoting their results to policymakers, including via Horizon Futures Watch quarterly newsletters;

iv) promoting broad public engagement with foresight for R&I policy, including stakeholders as well as the public and covering all sections of society, from scientists and engineers to policy-makers, artists, intellectuals and engaged citizens.

As a Coordination and Support Action, project “Eye of Europe” aims to enhance the integration of foresight practices into Research and Innovation (R&I) policy making across Europe. Ultimately, the project envisions a more cohesive and influential R&I foresight community that contributes significantly, as a collective intelligence, to shaping and guiding policy decisions.

To this end, Eye of Europe builds on existing initiatives and experiences to foster knowledge-sharing between foresight practitioners and policy makers, attract domain experts in foresight endeavours, and engage a broader audience in futures thinking. Nurturing futures4europe.eu as the online home for the community and running various face-to-face events with different stakeholders will underpin these ambitions.
Methodologically, the project relies on the following building blocks:

• futures4europe.eu as the online hub for the R&I foresight community in Europe: The platform accommodates the interests of various stakeholders such as foresight experts, beneficiaries, domain experts, and an active audience. It operates on multiple integration levels, from mapping organizations and experts to sharing foresight results and capabilities. Moreover, it acts as the communication gateway for ongoing foresight activities, events, educational and inspirational materials.
  
  
• Sharing of practices: This entails mapping institutions engaged in R&I foresight activities, promoting mutual learning through interactive formats, developing shared visions for the future of foresight in R&I policy within the European Research Area (ERA), fostering exchanges among the foresight in R&I policy community through conferences, encouraging dialogues between futurist/expert communities, academics and policy practitioners.
  Key figures: 5 mutual learning events (MLE): 2 online, 3 face-to-face events; 1 vision building event for the Future of R&I Foresight in ERA; 2 conferences
  
  
• Running foresight pilots: Conducting a series of pilot workshops and online consultations with diverse formats, methodologies, and participants. This involves identifying topics of common interest within the European Research Area (ERA), where foresight perspectives offer added value, designing and implementing tailored pilot foresight activities involving various stakeholders, harnessing lessons learnt and feeding them into the platform and other dissemination channels.
  Key figures: 11 Foresight pilot processes: 3 exclusively with citizens, 4 mainly with experts and researchers tackling specific R&I topics, 4 involving a bespoke group of participants. Out of the 11 events, 8 will be face-to-face events, and 3 pilots will take place online
  
  
• Boosting futures literacy: The project encourages meaningful engagement with diverse audiences, from foresight professionals, researchers, policy-makers to various futures sensitive profiles (e.g. entrepreneurs, journalists, artists) and the wider civil society. The project will provide guides, methodology toolboxes, and training modules for R&I foresight and futures literacy, incorporating written and multimedia content.
  Key figures: 5-10 short training sets for participants in foresight exercises; 1 training module for foresight beneficiaries; 1 foresight training for early career researchers, 1 Massive Open Online Course (MOOC) on R&I foresight; 12 conversational podcasts; 6-8 Short videos and/or animated materials showcasing foresight processes and outcomes
  
  
• Fueling the public discourse around futures: Promoting the project and fostering the foresight community via the online platform futures4europe.eu and complementary channels such as social media and a dedicated newsletter. In addition to highlighting the project's own initiatives, Eye of Europe will also aim to promote foresight content developed in other projects, showcasing a diverse range of perspectives and insights within the foresight field. The quarterly newsletter will feature various content types like interviews, project updates, and foresight-related articles. Social media, particularly Futures4Europe's LinkedIn page, will be used to engage professional communities and wider audiences, with a focus on sharing project activities and fostering discussions.