You are on page 1of 6




Te future was always the domain of in certain. And that was and is frightening. If from the future coming the Enemy? The Fear is worse than the real risk. The great problem is what will happening? Never the answers was satisfactory for the individuals, peoples or decidents. An unsolved problem. The mankind tries to solve this by a lot of ways. From the shamans, the Delphi oracle, astrologists, to modern methods of prognosis or foresight, answers are seeking again and again. The most difficult is to think on long-therm in the strategic field of national security and defense. We try to respond to the question if the preparation of the future is possible using the methods of strategic prospective (foresight) and prognosis too. For this , it is necessary to compare the methods and domains of prognosis and strategic prospective/foresight and to analyze the differences between the planification of defense and security and the prospective approach of the domain. The decision –making styles and typologies on shorttherm and long therm and the implication of the universe of decisions in the preparation of the future. The clash of different logical thoughts versus the integrated response of the society to threats and risks. The IT impact to the group decision process. Finally, several conclusions of the importance of the preparation of future. 1. The future Some primitive societies and languages haven't at all the future. That concept isn't in their minds. The past is. We can see easy in all languages grammars a lot of past times of verbs comparative with the future time of verbs. That is our mind: the past is often present in our life, more developed. The man have the need of the past, for his emotional stability. The past is secure, the future is not clear, misty or dark. But we need to know what will be. The conflict between our needs and desires and the empty space behind us. Rituals, oracles, sacrifices for the gods to be mercifully, is a long story of the humanity to obtain the desired future. In fact, everyone knows the end of the life-the death. But the moment is

And more. For few decades it worked. airplanes. and few calculations to defeat: how much more no calculation at all! It is by attention to this point that I can foresee who is likely to win or lose. an active diplomacy . for what. the defense system needs adapted structures. or from the future? The general who loses a battle makes but few calculations beforehand. And more. To be prepared. from the seeing and unseeing enemies. God. protect –us from the invasion of other peoples and from the hate and struggle between us. Good neighbors. by a defense system . A prayer said: Oh. prepared peoples. but for what? What kind of guns. and the future can come with the end. or “quinquennium development plans ” the planned economies arises with vigor. how many soldiers.unknown . The victory at the strategic level is closely to the thinker than the field hero. Prognosis methods versus strategic prospective approach After the second world war. The monotheist religions solved this by the other life. laws and alliances. How to protect the state from the out-side and in-side risks? The answer is known. and against who? It must adapt all the system to the most probable enemy. and this was easy translate to defense systems. But the fear still. modern defense systems of armament. Make calculations. the same mechanism. The risk of disappear. good economy and finances. an Achilles' heel. The “Comisariat General du Plan” in France. after death. or tanks. how long. Where it necessary to start? From the past? From the present moment. more and more complex. Is an ancestral fear. in both sides of the Iron courtain in “the golden sixties years”.com/book/1 Laying Plans . then! 2. It must be prepared. For the society and the states. “Development and Planification Ministere” in Romania or “The Planning Agency “ in Japan. 1 Sun Tzu joined the calculations width the strategy from the beginnings! Not only in the mathematic sense but also in the logic one. But it is enough? Always even for the strongest state it can find a weakness. intelligence services. the economies are all the same philosophy – plannification. Strong army. 1 Sun Tzu “The art of war” http://suntzusaid. And prognosis methods started to rule. The need to know is the great pressure to the decidents. friends and alliances. Thus do many calculations lead to victory. for the most dangerous risk or threat.

The French school was competed by US Rand Corporation with Hermann Kahn and George Friedmann or Kaplan . Johann Galtung and many others. foresight. difficulty to translate the terms and the domains of these terms often can make confusions. Preparation of the future – the strategic surprise can be avoided? 2 Michel Godet “ Strategic foresight – la prospective” Cahiers du LIPSOR . “Futuribles” (Futur +possibles) is the key concept of the multiple futures launched by Bertrand de Jouvenel. Mircea Malita. “See far. Pierre Masse. Mihai Botez. 3. In France the term “Prospective” is defined by the philosopher Gaston Berger and is used for the studies of the future by Bertrand de Jouvenel. see deep”. where was organised the Third Congress of Sciences of the Future. Bertrand de Jouvenel. but essentially “foresight lacks of pro-activity . forecasting . UK. Johann Galtung or Alvin Toffler. Prospective. the term is used to understand how the future shapes the main decisions.Meanwhile the studies about the future goes to the needs of the economy or the Cold War demands. Club of Rome. futures research. futurology. In the seventeen decade Bucharest was on the map of the prospective studies. The elite of thinkers was also here: Herman Kahn. Sergiu Tamas and others had great contributions to development of prospective and futures studyes in Romania.the mix of terms. SSDC development 4. and the idea of “World Federation of Future Science” was born here. with multiple futures. and an foresight approach deals with the uncertain . an integral aspect of prospective” 2 . see large. Michel Godet and the others. with the popular Alvin Toffler . Rand corporation Despite the apparent paradox of “Strategic foresight” linked with the fact that a strategic decision forces to an irreversible decision. The differences are many.

gapminder. economical and social life can’t be followed by analysts or experts – is one of theories often used to describe the international environment. planning is everything – said the military. that are the religion.Plan is nothing. But under those “boiling” movements. a wide databases for the past and present situation. BIBLIOGRAPHY 3 3 . The amount of information available can’t be managed. and. on his site http://www. In the domain of security and defense it necessary to introduce the concept of “security and defense durable development”. even a prophet wasn’t believed often! To prepare the future for states is to have several ways of evolutions at strategic levels. The tendencies are unpredictable. for keeping the initiative. It needs the decidents to understand that the good immediate measures can often be wrong on long term range and develop making decision process having solutions for this conflict. not ours. like the oceanic currents. have an prospective approach. To prepare the future is not to have the main conclusion is one convergent world. The future can be provoked. no one can understand the accelerated society. the speed of social. Conclusions 6. That means to think to our grandchildren. the future is misty. For example seeing the presentations of Hans Rosling. and pro-active actions. 5. It needs long term analyze using the strategic prospective methods. avoid strategic surprise. to their future. almost “Brownian” are the great trends. but the way of rigid plans goes to communist economic system based on goals that always must be higher than the start point by several percents.

on http://www. -explorative methods used to detect included virtuosities in reality(technical. economic.that go forward to a future of increasingly uncertain path. -normative methods build the road to go for achieving an objective. 2012. -cybernetic-system methods-mechanism models can be developed feed-back who is allowing subsequent simulation operations of behavior in time. cultural). -we can distinguish two stages in the evolution of prospective methodology. classification(taxonomic) are different on prospective/foresight methods one of the first classifications was proposed by Erich Jantsch who grouped them in subsequent classes: -intuitive methods focused on experts knowledge and experience . the normative methods regress tracing the path from the possible future to present. p. accessed March 17. from the analysis of the past with the present conditions and normative type methods who starts form future to present.Currently. scenario method. contextual representations.4 . the method of probabilistic analysis(Bayesian statistics.It allows to open a large scale of "possible future":extrapolations.pdf.nato. analysis system.techniques such as "brainstorming" or Delphi being the most popular. social-political. This approach is possible because of the informational society explosion in this analyzes can be engaged specialists and experts around the world on specialized sites such as… “NATO after Lisbon”.methods of economic analysis . It is possible to unify the various methods of prospective Unlike the explorative methods .game theory. First stage was in 19601980 in which have developed a number of techniques and forecasting methods and the current phase of methodology of redefining and reorientation using combination of methods and known techniques. morphological research. Monte-Carlo method). In this class we meet operational research methods(linear or dynamic programming)theory of decision method."After a explosive stage now witnessing on a process of implosion which is manifested in merging or combining different research predict methods.

China will be the winner. His most recent book. All—and particularly the poor—will live in an increasingly disorderly and climate-damaged world. I don’t believe that the free market. . something that can counter the root problem: Man’s short-term nature. His tendency to disregard the long term consequences of current action.A Global Forecast for the Next Forty Years. BRISE will make progress. is 2052 . we need something stronger. political leadership. published in May 2012. Capitalism is unable to handle this long term challenge. also a report to The Club of Rome. • The world in 2052 will certainly not be uniform or flat—the sentiment and conditions in the five regions will differ dramatically.1 Jorgen Randers Version August 27th 2012 Systematic Short-termism: Capitalism and Democracy Jorgen Randers Professor Norwegian Business School BI I The most surprising loser will be the current global economic elite. particularly the United States (which will experience stagnant per capita consumption for the next generation). 1 1 Jorgen Randers is professor at the Norwegian Business School BI and co-author of The Limits to Growth in 1972. and democratic society is unwilling to modify the market. or public education will solve the climate problem in time. The Rest of the World will remain poor.In sum. regulation. and its two sequels. In my view.