Facing the Future: Scanning, Synthesizing
and Sense-Making in Horizon Scanning
Ahti Salo1,
Totti Könnölä2, Cristiano Cagnin3,
Vicente Carabias3, and Eeva Vilkkumaa1
1Aalto
University School of Science, Espoo (Finland)
2Impetu Solutions, Madrid (Spain)
3JRC-IPTS, Seville (Spain)
Homepage
http://sal.aalto.fi/ahti
“By Portfolio Decision Analysis (PDA) we
mean a body of theory, methods, and
practice which seeks to help decision
makers make informed multiple
selections from a discrete set of
alternatives through mathematical
modeling that accounts for relevant
constraints, preferences, and
uncertainties.”
Facing the Future
What is Horizon Scanning?
Horizon Scanning …
• … is regarded here as a creative process of collective sense-making by way
of collecting and synthesizing observations that hold potential for the
formulation of pertinent future developments and the derivation of actionable
implications on decision-making
• Sense-making builds on the actor’s ability to perceive, interpret and
construct meaning of the emerging landscape
Key Questions in Horizon Scanning Activities
• How to facilitate the recognition of signals?
• How to facilitate the elaboration of corresponding policy issues?
• How to synthesize such signals and issues into meaningful theme clusters?
• How to facilitate collective sense-making in the analysis of theme clusters?
• How to clarify the “big picture” of societal change?
• How to develop well-founded policy recommendations?
Facing the Future
Outline
Sense-making in Horizon Scanning
• Scoping the Scanning Exercise
• Sense-making: Inseparable from Scanning
• Stakeholders: Crucial for Scanning and Synthesizing
• Building Ground for Cross-Cutting Policy Coordination
Case: Facing the Future
• Identification of Issues
• Assessment of Issues
• Synthesizing Issues
• Reflecions on the Exercise
Discussion
Conclusions
Facing the Future
Sense-making in Horizon Scanning
Scoping the Scanning Exercise
• Involves decisions about what signals are worth scanning
 Across a comprehensive spectrum
 Focused on specific fields such as energy, health and cognitive enhancement
Sense-making: Inseparable from Scanning
• Drivers of change, emerging issues, trends, weak signals, wild cards/shocks
• Presence of scattered or no historical evidence
• Defining units of analysis that facilitate the collection of individual
observations and, moreover, the creative combination thereof to permit the
creation of new entities and meanings
• Whatever the methods, sense-making lies at the heart of well-founded
support for policy making.
Facing the Future
Sense-making in Horizon Scanning
Stakeholders: Crucial for Scanning and Synthesizing
• Horizon scanning should engage diverse stakeholders
• Diversity of  coverage of different fields of expertise,  types of
affiliations,  cultural backgrounds,  organizational functions or 
personal values
• Resulting in a richer set of interesting observations to be synthesized
through shared development of cross-cutting challenges
Building Ground for Cross-Cutting Policy Coordination
• Participatory workshop activities offer policy makers an inspiring
environment
• Exposing them to concrete issues, synthesized into meaningful clusters that
exhibit some logical structure and link to existing decision-making
structures
• Collaborative development of cross-cutting challenges may help reframe
the Bigger Picture the exploration of which paves way for policy
coordination and the attainment of systemic policy objectives
Facing the Future
Case: Facing the Future (Boden et al., 2010)
Facing the Future
Case: Facing the Future (Boden et al., 2010)
Identification of 381 Issues in 6 areas
(i) 73 demography, migration and health issues
(ii) 44 economy, trade and financial flows issues
(iii) 90 environment, energy, climate change and agriculture issues
(iv) 80 research, innovation and (e)-education issues
(v) 52 (e)-governance and (e)-social cohesion issues
(vi) 42 defence and security issues
Generated by analyzing in each area 25 recent forward-looking reports and
policy documents,  published by international organisations or the business
sector,  covered more than one of six areas being analysed,  exhibited
global scope, and  had been developed using a participatory approach
Assessment of 381 issues on a seven-point Likert-scale
• Relevance to EU policy making
• Novelty in comparison with earlier policy debates
• Probability of occurrence by 2025
Facing the Future
Case: Facing the Future (Boden et al., 2010)
Analysis of Issues
Expert assessments were synthesized with Robust Portfolio Modelling (RPM).
• Mean-oriented analysis helped identify issues that were considered
relevant, novel and probable by the majority respondents
• Variance-oriented analysis was conducted in order to recognize issues on
which the respondents had different viewpoints
• Rare event-oriented analysis was carried out to identify those issues that
the respondents considered improbable but still novel and relevant
The three complementary RPM analyses helped highlight issues which were
seen to merit attention from different perspectives and thus paved way for the
formulation of cross-cutting challenges.
Expert evaluations
7
Evaluations for
Issue 1
Expert 3
6
Expert 4
5
Expert 1
Expert 2
Mean
Relevance
Expert Nov. Rel.
1
4
5
2
7
5
3
3
7
4
6
6
5
1
4
6
6
4
7
7
3
8
2
5
Expert 8
4
Expert 5
Expert 6
Standard
deviation
3
Expert 7
2
1
0
Mean 4.5 4.9
Std
dev 2.3 1.2
0
1
2
3
4
Novelty
Ahti Salo
5
6
7
Evaluations of multiple issues
7
6
Relevance
5
Issue 1
Issue 2
Issue 3
Issue 4
Issue 5
4
3
2
1
0
0
1
2
3
4
Novelty
Ahti Salo
5
6
7
Mean-oriented analysis
10
9
Relevance
8
7
6
5
1
3
4
5
4
3
Issues
2
2
1
0
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
Novelty
Ahti Salo
7
8
9
10
Combining issues into portfolios
10
9
Relevance
8
7
4&5
1&2
6
5
1
3
4
5
4
3
Issues
2
2
1
0
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
Novelty
Ahti Salo
7
8
9
10
Portfolios of issues
All portfolios of
two issues
10
9
Relevance
8
1&4
3&4
1&3
1&5
3&5
7
4&5
1&2
2&3
6
5
1
3
2&5
2&4
4
5
4
3
Issues
2
2
1
0
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
Novelty
Ahti Salo
7
8
9
10
Portfolio dominance
10
Is 3&4 a good portfolio?
1&3
9
Relevance
8
1&4
3&4
Every
Portfolios
portfolio
thatinare
the
shaded
Similar
analysis
for not
all
No
–1
&
3
yields
more
area
dominated
yields yields….
more of bothof
portfolios
both relevance
and novelty
relevance
and novelty
1&5
3&5
7
4&5
1&2
2&3
6
5
1
3
2&5
2&4
4
5
4
3
Issues
2
2
1
0
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
Novelty
Ahti Salo
7
8
9
10
Non-dominated portfolios (ND portfolios)
The selected
portfolio should be
non-dominated
10
9
Relevance
8
1&3
1&4
3&4
1&5
3&5
7
4&5
1&2
2&3
6
5
1
3
2&5
2&4
4
5
4
3
Non-dominated portfolios
Dominated portfolios (inferior
to some ND portfolios)
Issues
2
2
1
0
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
Novelty
Ahti Salo
7
8
9
10
Comparing issues
If
issue
4
is
selected
Therefore,
no
Therefore
itis
is
If
issue
12
is
not
selected
All
issues
be
IfIssue
issue
selected,
there
Therefore
itcan
is
2
is
in
some
Issue
4
is
in
no
Issue
1
is
in
all
Which
issues
to
the
resulting
portfolio
definitive
recommended
that
the
resulting
portfolio
categorized
remain
both with
dominated
and
recommended
that
ND
portfolios
ND
portfolio
ND
portfolios
pursue
further?
will
be14three
dominated
recommendation
can
issue
should
be
is
dominated
these
cases
non-dominated
portfolios,
issue
should
not
be 1 & 4
&4
be
giveninto
regarding
selected
depending
on3 which
other
selected
to
issue
2 are in the portfolio
the
portfolio
issues
the
portfolio
4&5
10
9
Relevance
8
7
1&3
1&5
3&5
1&2
2&3
6
5
1
3
2&5
2&4
4
5
4
3
In all ND portfolios (Core)
In some ND portfolios (Borderline
In no ND portfolios (Exterior)
Issues
2
2
1
0
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
Novelty
Ahti Salo
7
8
9
10
Comparing issues with stated preference information
Knowing
that
Dominated
The set of
ND
novelty
more
…from
this…
portfolios
remain
portfolios
changes
…to is
this.
important
than
dominated
but
which also
effects
the
3&4
relevance
changes 45°
some
ND portfolios
decision
the
dominance
become
dominated
recommendations
region…
10
9
Relevance
8
7
6
5
1&3
1&4
4&5
1&2
2&3
1
3
1&5
3&5
2&5
2&4
4
5
4
3
In all ND portfolios (Core)
In some ND portfolios (Borderline
In no ND portfolios (Exterior)
Issues
2
2
1
0
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
Novelty
Ahti Salo
7
8
9
10
Facing the Future
Case: Facing the Future
Analysis of Issues
Mean-oriented analysis
Relevance > Novelty >
Probability (means)
Rare event oriented analysis
Inverse probability > Novelty >
Relevance (means)
Variance-oriented analysis
Novelty > Relevance >
Probability (variance)
 100% issues score best independent of the used criteria preferences
 50% issues that score well, but are sensitive to criteria preferences
Facing the Future
Case: Facing the Future
Synthesizing Issues
Experts and policy-makers grouped in a workshop the identified issues into
cross-cutting challenges and examined their policy implications for the EU.
Save natural resources (water, food) to prevent conflicts over their scarcity and other impacts such
as migration
Area
No.
Issue
code
Key words from the issue description (optional)
1
DI04
Massive migration due to climate change
3
ENV03
Global under-pricing and overconsumption of water
3
ENV68
Global decline of freshwater availability leading to an increase in water scarcity
3
ENV70
Global decline in biodiversity and loss of ecosystems services
6
DS13
Attacks on infrastructure facilities
6
DS15
A major war by 2020
6
DS81
Pervasive sensors for real-time surveillance widely diffused
Table 2 Example of a cross-cutting challenge consisting of issues from all three analyses and from
different thematic areas (Demography, Environment, and Defence & Security); font styles of issue codes
refer to the results obtained in the different RPM analyses
(http://foresight.jrc.ec.europa.eu/survey_issues.pdf, visited 01/04/2011).
Facing the Future
Case: Facing the Future
Synthesizing Issues
Participants generated collectively 22 cross-cutting challenges, which were
prioritized by discussing in the light of three solution-oriented criteria related to
their importance at the EU level:
- Urgency: Is the challenge likely to provoke impacts that require urgent
actions at EU level?
- Tractability: Can solutions to the challenge be identified and implemented?
Does the EU have the institutional capacity to act upon this challenge?
- Impact: Are the actions to be taken by the EU expected to have a major
global positive impact?
By the end of the workshop, a workable agreement was reached on the
definition of the following three overarching challenges:
(i) The need to change ways in which essential natural resources are used.
(ii) The need to anticipate and adapt to societal changes.
(iii) The need for more effective and transparent governance for the EU and the world.
Facing the Future
Case: Facing the Future
Synthesizing Issues
These challenges were the basis for the three broad recommendations which,
according to the workshop participants, had so far not received sufficient
attention in policy and decision processes (Boden et al., 2010):
(i) The need to change uses of essential natural resources by aligning all
policy realms towards sustainability, extending from policy design through
implementation to evaluation;
(ii) The need to anticipate and adapt to societal challenges by building on
social diversity and ICTs to enable citizens' empowerment;
(iii) The need for more effective and transparent governance that allows
institutions to anticipate future challenges and to turn these into
opportunities by embedding FTA in their decision making processes
Reflections on the Exercise
• Collective sense-making process where emerging issues were first
identified and then synthesized into challenges to be dealt with at EU level
• Traceability of cross-cutting challenges and recommendations was
supported by the appropriate coding of issues and challenges
Facing the Future
Case: Facing the Future
Policy recommendations
(i) Policy alignment towards sustainability:
• Reform in the agri-system
• Reduction in the EU's dependency on resources
• Increase in levels of education and social awareness
• Appropriate and effective management of migration flows caused by from
climate change, improving the quality of life, and recognition of labour
market needs in ageing societies
• Change in the policy paradigm based on GDP to an updated system which
also considers ecological flows and stocksfs
Facing the Future
Case: Facing the Future
Policy recommendations
(ii) Social diversity and ICTs for citizen empowerment:
• Build new incentives to facilitate and strengthen relationships between
different social systems
• Develop the necessary means to enhance education on the use of ICTs in
conjunction with other technologies
• Improve the quality of education by fostering, for example, competition
within and between EU national education systems
• Regulate the healthcare system, harnessing new technologies to provide
equal access for all
• Develop radically new and far more efficient forms of social protection
• Enhance regional specialisation through the formation of regional RTDI
clusters
Facing the Future
Case: Facing the Future
Policy recommendations
(iii) Anticipating future challenges and turning these into opportunities:
• Embed forward looking techniques in EU policy making
• Foster mutual understanding through ongoing/inclusive dialogue both within
the EU and worldwide to build shared values, common visions, actions, and
smart regulations
• Enable effective and adaptive international organisations to become a
reality
• Establish partnerships between industry-government-society
• Clarify the role and status of the EU in global fora and balance its
representation in international organisations
• Foster (e)participation and (e)democracy through the use of web 2.0 and
advanced technologies
Facing the Future
Case: Facing the Future
Reflections on the Exercise
• Recommendations used in discussions within the European Commission,
the report was referenced in the Communication on the Innovation Union…
Facing the Future
Discussion
A distinctive and defining feature of horizon scanning is that there are no
strong a priori constraints on what signals could count as relevant
Horizon Scanning …
• Is inherently a bottom-up process where results from individual sensemaking activities are followed by collective processes where the scanners
take stock of and learn from each others’ signals
• Activities contribute to the design of systemic policies which – far from
being monolithic and inflexible – contribute to the attainment of systemic
policy objectives by supporting the timely recognition of the
interconnectedness of actions
Facing the Future
Conclusions
Horizon scanning need not be limited to the collection of future-oriented
observations; rather, the scope of these activities can be extended to include
creative and collective sense-making processes for synthesizing observations
into cross-cutting challenges and also for exploring the policy implications of
these challenges in collaborative workshops.
This methodological approach – which had well-defined phases for the
systematic ‘bottom-up’ scanning of issues and for the prioritization and
clustering thereof – is viable even in other contexts where there is a need to
build shared understandings about the prospects of cross-cutting coordination
in support of systemic policy objectives.
Action portfolio analysis
Decision & Action
13.4.2015
35
Dates
Jun
Task
Result
7 shock environments
(scenarios). For
additional depth, 3
opposite environments
were also described.
Selecting the 7 most
interesting shocks from
14 candidates
Early
Oct
Web-questionnaire create
ideas for actions that
would help to build
success in each
environment
Late
Oct
Web-questionnaire to
assess utility of the 25
actions in each of the 7
environments
Decision & Action
13.4.2015
36
(Opposite environment:
European federalism gains
strength)
Storms of the century
Nokia leaves Finland
China is in trouble
Forest industry leaves
Finland
(Opposite environment:
Booming modern
biorefineries)
Price of energy drops 90%
Most interresting
Internet crashes
EMU dissolves
(Opposite environment: Price of
energy goes up 300%)
Decision & Action
13.4.2015
37
Dates
Jun
Task
Result
Selecting the 7 most
interesting shocks from
14 candidates
Early
Oct
Web interview to create
ideas for actions that
would help to build
success in each
environment
Late
Oct
Web-questionnaire to
assess utility of the 25
actions in each of the 7
environments
7 shock environments
(scenarios)
Visited 128 times,
median time spent on
site 18 minutes
245 ideas, from which
the 25 final actions
were chosen
Decision & Action
13.4.2015
38
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
(Backlight = themes with one question page)
Decision & Action
13.4.2015
39













1. Invest in maintaining trust in the society
2. Security and resilience requirements for information networks
3. Take care of small networked production
4. Prepare to increase self-sufficiency in food production
5. Increase respect for every type of work
6. Promote innovation for a rainy-day
7. Tax incentives for energy self-sufficient housing
8. Tax incentives for urban local food
9. Create an ICT-ecosystem
10. Develop services that require little energy
11. Invest in sustainable well-being know-how
12. Finland a global IT-service center for public authorities
13. Invest in new rapidly exploitable knowledge combinations
Decision & Action
13.4.2015
40












14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
Let the forest industry disappear
Build more nuclear power to hedge against price shocks
Commercialize forest into an investment product
Manage a single global service
Train workforce as the reserve for global companies
Switch to exchange economy with no currency
Establish a Nordic monetary union
Make Finland the center for Asian and Russian connections
Specialize in fast piloting
Exploit Finland's neutral and apolitical reputation
Create Finnish Mittelstand to replace Nokia
Invest in trade outside the EU
Decision & Action
13.4.2015
41





1. Invest in maintaining trust in the society. Even internet failure does not cause as
much problems in Finland as it does elsewhere. We can mutually agree that
suppliers dispatch goods to stores, trusting that they will eventually be paid.
Likewise, stores will advance store credit to consumers.
2. Security and resilience requirements for information networks. Let's build
systems that consist of several smaller systems - local networks and separated
cloud services which are connected by an integrating layer in order to keep the
whole system from crashing in case one part of it goes down. All routing is
implemented in such a way that these networks can be connected to alternate
cloud services if some part collapses,
3. Take care of small networked production. The bigger the systems, the more
far-reaching the consequences of failures. Cell-like production of goods and
services is also dependent on global networks, but its resilience is better. The first
player to restore services gets an advantage over slower competitors.
4. Prepare to increase self-sufficiency in food production. As the crisis lengthens,
local food production would become increasingly vital. Seasonal radio shows, that
give tips for fishing and gathering berries and mushrooms. Small, currently
worthless fish should be caught and turned into fish-fingers.
5. Increase respect for every type of work. Start a major PR campaign to promote
the idea that any form of self-employment is beneficial, and unemployment is
damaging.
Decision & Action
13.4.2015
42





6. Promote innovation for a rainy days. National "Google time", in which
every (employed) citizen can use maybe a fifth of their time to work on
resilience-improving ideas for extreme environments.
7. Tax incentives for energy self-sufficient housing. Direct support or tax
deductions for micro production equipment. For example, miniature wind
generators on all yards and balconies.
8. Tax incentives for urban local food. Local food production should be
encouraged with taxation. For example, using your balcony as a greenhouse
should be tax deductible according to its production.
9. Create an ICT-ecosystem. In an ecosystem individual knowledge workers
can network globally and sell their expertise to anywhere in the world.
10. Develop services that require little energy. Investment in companies
offering expert services. These are not as dependent on energy prices, and
are able to continue their business more or less as usual, even when faced
with higher energy prices.
Decision & Action
13.4.2015
43





11. Invest in sustainable well-being know-how. The whole world badly needs
a new vision and societal model based on sustainable well-being. Finland
could be the forerunner of this trend, based on our strong social model.
12. Finland a global IT-service center for public authorities. Finland has the
world's most efficient tax collection system, medical administrative systems
and other public sector IT systems. These could be sold as cloud services to
the whole world, producing cashflow without having to shift large amounts
of physical matter.
13. Invest in new rapidly exploitable knowledge combinations. Let's combine
old and new, but already existing, knowledge, and cut back on developing
longer-term development with higher expertise requirements.
14. Let the forest industry disappear. We should allow forest industry to
wither away in Finland, and develop service-based and other timber-sector
jobs. These are less cyclical.
15. Build more nuclear power to hedge against price shocks. Building
additional nuclear capacity offers protection from price shocks. Price of
uranium fuel is a small fraction of the cost of electricity generation.
Decision & Action
13.4.2015
44





16. Commercialize forest into an investment product. Land area does not
grow, forest area is declining, and forest are good carbon sinks. Based on
this, Finnish forests are productized as an investment opportunity and sold
by the hectare to international investors.
17. Manage a single global service. Finland could control any market or a
globally used service that is not currency-dependent, but in which other
countries would be connected to our systems. For example tax collection.
18. Train workforce as the reserve for global companies. We should make
sure that our global companies have the necessary employee resources when
market growth picks up. If they are the only operating companies, their
demand goes up and they need more people. Let's train reserves in advance.
19. Switch to exchange economy with no currency. Golden era for small
producers. Back to barter economy.
20. Establish a Nordic monetary union. Nordic countries start collaborating
on the same export markets, in order to compete with other countries more
effectively. The possibilities for a Nordic free trade area and currency union
are investigated.
Decision & Action
13.4.2015
45





21. Make Finland the center for Asian and Russian connections. Creating a
new kind of hotspot for growing start-ups together with Russian
entrepreneurs could turn Finland into an European innovation hub.
22. Specialize in fast piloting. We'll specialize in piloting. When market
conditions change, new pilot projects take off. They are started with those
companies and countries that are most advanced in their development work
at that point.
23. Exploit Finland's neutral and apolitical reputation. Finland's image as an
apolitical and neutral country needs to be utilized. For Chinese (as well as
others) it is safe to trade with Finns, to work for a Finnish company, or to buy
Finnish products.
24. Create Finnish Mittelstand to replace Nokia. Building a sufficient network
of globally operating slightly smaller companies that get a boost to their
activities if Nokia leaves Finland.
25. Invest in trade outside the EU. Government encourages strongly
companies to diversify their exports to countries outside the EU, such as
Russia, Asia and Africa.
Decision & Action
13.4.2015
46
Dates
Jun
Early
Oct
Late
Oct
Task
Result
Selecting the 7 most
interesting shocks from
14 candidates
7 shock environments
(scenarios)
Visited 128 times,
median time spent on
site 19 minutes
Web-questionnaire create
ideas for actions that
would help to build
success in each
environment
245 ideas, from which
the 25 final actions
were chosen
Visited 59 times, median
time 18 minutes
Web-questionnaire to
assess utility of the 25
actions in each of the 7
environments
Identification of action
combinations
(=portfolios) that
maximize utility
Decision & Action
13.4.2015
47
Decision & Action
13.4.2015
48
Forest industry
leaves Finland
Price of Energy
drops 90%
EMU collapse
Nokia leaves
Finland
China is in trouble
87
86
71
65
59
64
55
67
60
59
59
50
54
29
28
33
30
35
35
31
39
41
48
37
38
63
48
72
46
62
81
43
38
58
61
73
60
81
64
41
66
54
48
30
48
68
74
61
80
65
63
48
49
37
58
77
35
29
52
41
75
51
83
38
34
37
51
56
20
33
69
75
61
65
61
80
48
70
57
53
67
50
47
55
53
72
53
71
31
48
41
53
51
36
70
80
60
68
60
74
71
46
71
32
70
84
30
21
79
57
83
68
85
30
48
29
60
65
16
23
78
85
62
76
67
67
56
63
56
74
81
37
46
62
58
78
42
73
31
44
28
50
42
22
35
53
82
65
71
58
Storms of the
century
Internet crashes
1. Invest in maintaining trust in the society
2. Security and resilience requirements for information networks
3. Take care of small networked production
4. Prepare to increase self-sufficiency in food production
5. Increase respect for every type of work
6. Promote innovation for a rainy-day
7. Tax incentives for energy self-sufficient housing
8. Tax incentives for urban local food
9. Create an ICT-ecosystem
10. Develop services that require little energy
11. Invest in sustainable well-being know-how
12. Finland a global IT-service center for public authorities
13. Invest in new rapidly exploitable knowledge combinations
14. Let the forest industry disappear
15. Build more nuclear power to hedge against price shocks
16. Commercialize forest into an investment product
17. Manage a single global service
18. Train workforce as the reserve for global companies
19. Switch to exchange economy with no currency
20. Establish a Nordic monetary union
21. Make Finland the center for Asian and Russian connections
22. Specialize in fast piloting
23. Exploit Finland's neutral and apolitical reputation
24. Create Finnish Mittelstand to replace Nokia
25. Invest in trade outside the EU
68
76
80
74
62
69
48
60
45
57
68
42
62
25
39
39
37
35
28
26
54
59
44
48
52 49
Dates
Jun
Early
Oct
Late
Oct
Task
Result
Selecting the 7 most
interesting shocks from
14 candidates
7 shock environments
(scenarios)
Visited 128 times,
median time spent on
site 19 minutes
Web-questionnaire create
ideas for actions that
would help to build
success in each
environment
245 ideas, from which
the 25 final actions
were chosen
Visited 59 times, median
time 18 minutes
Web-questionnaire to
assess utility of the 25
actions in each of the 7
environments
Identification of action
combinations
(=portfolios) that
maximize utility
Decision & Action
13.4.2015
50
51
Action #11 is in all eff.
portfolios that include
more than 8 actions
1. Invest in maintaining trust in the society
2. Security and resilience requirements for information networks
3. Take care of small networked production
4. Prepare to increase self-sufficiency in food production
5. Increase respect for every type of work
6. Promote innovation for a rainy-day
7. Tax incentives for energy self-sufficient housing
8. Tax incentives for urban local food
9. Create an ICT-ecosystem
10. Develop services that require little energy
11. Invest in sustainable well-being know-how
12. Finland a global IT-service center for public authorities
13. Invest in new rapidly exploitable knowledge combinations
14. Let the forest industry disappear
15. Build more nuclear power to hedge against price shocks
16. Commercialize forest into an investment product
17. Manage a single global service
18. Train workforce as the reserve for global companies
19. Switch to exchange economy with no currency
20. Establish a Nordic monetary union
21. Make Finland the center for Asian and Russian connections
22. Specialize in fast piloting
23. Exploit our neutral and apolitical reputation
24. Create Finnish Mittelstand to replace Nokia
25. Invest in trade outside the EU
Action #15 is not in any
efficient portfolio that
includes less than 20 actions
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
Portfolio size
Decision & Action
13.4.2015
52
Conclusions

There are many ways to facilitate the shaping of policy
agendas

Yet it is important to have a clear process structure

Not all details can be modelled (time, effort, data, validity…)
 Informal discussions remain crucial
Ahti Salo