Why do we need to shape a responsible future?

At our inaugural panel on March 11, 2025, we were joined by our distinguished guests G. Edward DeSeve, Coordinator of the Agile Government Center at the National Academy of Public Administration and Prof. David Wilson, Dean and Professor of Public Policy and Political Science at the Richard and Rhoda Goldman School of Public Policy, University of California, Berkeley.

The one-hour conversation was fast paced and explored the definition of anticipatory governance, its relevance and some of the challenges the public sector faced in an uncertain future.

Definition of Anticipatory Governance

The editors of the book, Anticipatory Governance: Shaping a Responsible Future, defined anticipatory governance as “more than foresight; it is the process responsible for shaping the future and creating intergenerational impact, both on humanity and the planet.” Ed highlighted that as government employees our responsibility went beyond ourselves, our families and our nations as we needed to understand the context of the world.

There has been a rapid decline in critical thinking skills. Studies find this at an education level (see one study here), and also being highlighted in a recent study conducted by Microsoft on knowledge workers and the use of Gen AI (Lee et al, 2025). Critical thinking comes from a study of broad subjects (not just STEM). It is the developed through the contexual understanding, not through delegating to tools like AI. When we delegate abilities like search, analysis, synthesis and evalution of information to tools, we diminish our critical thinking abilities. Now we are seeing that AI decreases effort (see Figure below) which decreases critical thinking.

Source: Lee et al (2025)

This process of thinking is cyclical according to Ed, as it is a continuing discussion of how to make things better, how to improve life for our own citizens, and for people around the globe. David highlighted that we need to design governance not just for government but for all kinds of institutions including those like higher education.

What do we need building Anticipatory Governance?

First of all, all our panellist were clear that we needed more than foresight.

David said that for anticipatory governance you need to design the infrastructure and systems to allow it to work – things like good data and good methods to measure or understand the world and issues as it arises, and to triangulate and triage the problem as it rises. Ed explained by we need to look at the questions of indices being used to assess metrics to get a better sense if it was contextually relevant and measuring the right thing. Too often policy makers accept an indice at face value, even if it is not relevant.

Ed highlighted that we needed talented people who are nurtured in various institutions and through learning and education platforms (academic, home or work). For good governance, it needed to be a continuous learning platform.

You need feedback systems, and you need to engage in how people are thinking or engaging with issues – both psychologically or behaviourally. [Remember public value is a perception].

David also highlighted the need for expertise and wisdom (see article here). People who were continuously trying to get better in learning in the tough times and when they retire out or move to other organizations are able to codify that expertise and channelize it in some way so others can benefit.

Anticipatory Governance is not about Business as Usual but as Disruption As Usual

The example David looked at was the state of California. Though it has wealthy tech companies, the state itself suffers from huge budget deficits. One of the reasons is the cap on the government to raise taxes and hence often an inability to use the wealth to help others. This leads to a bandaid effect or adhoc attempts to solving problems. We need to move to anticipatory, adaptive and agile government – to build a model of governing, that is not about business as usual but about disruption as usual. That the solution will never be perfect but incremental as things evolve. These are examples of wicked problems and the world faces many like unemployment.

Global Perceptions of Uncertainty and Trust

Worldwide, based on a study of 143 countries, we are reaching levels of uncertainty similar to the COVID pandemic levels. This level of complexity needs systems thinking and at the public policy level we seem to be always getting it wrong. We will need to understand “how people feel about the state of the world”. The key is really knowing how you embed good public feedback into anything you are trying to do (or human-centered design).

2025 is highlighted by the Edelman Trust Survey as the year of grievance and we see trust declining globally on governments, private sector, NGOs and media. Trust has layers according to David and its not a single construct. It needs to be detangled. The challenge we have is that the public looks at government as one enterprise (not as Ministries, or departments) and yet sees different private sector companies as multiple enterprises. Often one small part of the government gets a disproportionate focus. So when there is a transaction focus, how can government have a conversation to repair the situation where this is mistrust or a sense of misjustice and unfairness or help the user understand how the system works to engage with it better. A government official, his public service hence has to be willing to differ their opinions and ideas to allow others to flourish.

Ed highlighted some factors from the OECD Trust survey – where the definition of trust in governments revolves around competence (reliability, responsiveness), and values (openness, fairness and integrity).

Future Predictions need an Agile Government

While we are able to predict and see things in the future with foresight, we often get the timing wrong. Ed quoted Walt Disney – “Prediction is very difficult, especially in regard to the future”.  Data is messy so when collecting data, we need to be understood the relevance and the models behind how good it is in measuring and predicting outcomes. Yet probabilities mean we will not get future predictions correct highlighting the need for agile governments.

Many people can be agile despite the fact they don’t practice agility – Ed went on the explain that during COVID the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach were congested disrupting the supply chain. It handles 60% of the west coast supply chain. John D. Porcari, port envoy to the Biden-Harris Administration Supply Chain Disruptions Task Force. He worked on restructuring the problem to share data better among the parties and build trust between the commercial sector and the government sector. The idea was to serve the customers and the public better using teams and networks. Agile government is a competency and a new way of thinking  of the design and implementation of policies, regulations and programs through the increase of trust by respecting public values.

Agile regulations are not about speed, it is about the mission of the organization and how it uses regulation as a tool but using a wide-aperture lens to look the context (eg. economy). You need to ask agile questions like – why you are putting it in, what is it designed to achieve, how will we know if it is successful, and what do people think about it.

Role of technology

The catalysts government leaders and employees can use for anticipatory governance can be technology.  Ed highlighted that tools like zoom allowed him to meet with people he did not have the opportunity to do so in his early career and present ideas to them that would be interesting to them and hopefully that they could use. Technology is a tool but there is generation gap between policy makers where we need to understand how the younger generation uses these tools and how they communicate.

To get trust we need a better integration of technology and relationships.  David stated that the tool is not about doing things faster and more efficiently – it about how you are being more fair. How can you help people feel like they are being heard as the grievance people feel is really resentment (when you feel the benefits distribution is unfair).

David also highlighted the role of technology in helping policy makers collect data on wicked problems, understand the problem and the next wave of disruption, and share the information to help with communication across systems for better integrated results. And with the speed of technology adoption and its convenience, there is a reluctance to dial back usage for governance reasons. Public universities have to have a mission around the public good (and human rights) so we eductators should train our students for this world. We need to balance out the problem and the use of technology. So all Ministries of Education - please listen, technology alone is not the answer.

CRITICAL SKILLS FOR ANTICIPATORY GOVERNANCE

We went through critical skills for policy makers and the public sector. Here are some, not necessarily in order of presenting.

Leadership

Since anticipatory governance and agile government are related, I thought I would put this first (see our skills associated with agile government here).

Ed highlighted that to achieve an agile government we need to start with empowered leadership who understands the nature of the problem they are dealing with, based on evidence and have a sense of mission and vision for the organization. They have strong metrics that allow the organization to constantly refine what it is doing. Feedback loops should be designed to create a network of relationships that we can rely on. This needs cross functional teams that have a diverse skill sets, ability and thinking to operate in an rapid, innovative and persistent way to get things done while respecting values. The catalysts they can use can be for example technology. A leader will know if they have succeeded when they meet the benchmark of improved competence and trust.

Ability to Listen

Leaders, functional specialists, every government employee, including those mandated to provide the service, need to be able to listen. Ed stated that they must be able to listen in the context of the objectives for fulfilling the mission, and hear what their customer and public are saying about how that mission is being fulfilled. I do not think there are exceptions - all leaders must have a ear to the ground. In UAE for example, our leaders use the majlis system.

Forbearance

Forbearance is the ability to basically lose something. David highlighted the importance of this skill. As a public servant, while you are listening, people are usually critiquing what you have done and why it is not working. They usually don’t have all the information, but they have all the emotions. The public servant as a recipient should be able to NOT put their facts in front and prove their poitn of view, as the real goal is to build trust in the relationship.

Willingness to Engage in Foresight

Ed stated that you need the desire and the willingness to have foresight discussions if you are going to do anticipatory governance. You need future public value and this is really the heart of all skills (see article here).

Open-Mind

As a public servant, you have to figure out how to be open to possibilities and not be bounded by what you think you know or what has been done. David explained that the status quo mindset gets in the way of dealing with today’s most wicked problems. This may mean you need to start over, or give up something you have invested a lot of time and money in, or trust someone you have historically not felt comfortable with – this openness is risky for people.

Innovativeness: Willingness to try new thinks, risk failure and learn from failures

This skill allows you to be agile and build governance frameworks that are better for the evolving context. Ed said it was like "Flying the plane as we build it". Considering that this year will be a year of polycrises, this is a good skill Ed and very much part of the innovation skill set.

Patience

Sometimes things cannot be rushed as we are dealing with people and planet, and it takes time. Most policies are intergenerational so impact will take time and it is so important that policy makers do not "throw the baby out with the bathwater". This happened when you do not build sufficient foresight and metrics into program evaluation and design.

Systems Thinking: You cannot separate policy development from policy implementation

Systems thinking is the ability to connect different things and look at problems across various domains even if you worked for a particular ministry or department or location. You cannot design a policy in isolation without being responsible for its implementation. Ed gave the example of the Affordable. Care Act and how the website system crashed the first day as the policy makers did not think to invite the technical people to the table to design the solution. You cannot sit in an ivory tower and make policy – you need to get down to the nuts and bolts as policy needs to be translated into successful action. Policy often takes a long time to see the results so it needs to be monitored as the context might change. Systems thinking needs a feedback loop - development, implementation, evaluation, redevelopment, reimplementation and reevaluation. See my blog post on policy coordination.

Empathy and Human-Centered Design Thinking

We need to have faith in our government employees and a love for them as well  as others, and this is based on human-centered design thinking (Ed recommended we read Power to the Public: The Promise of Public Interest Technology). Empathy mean that the officials talk to the people who are affected and then design the solutions around their needs.  Without empathy, David felt it would become an Us vs Them thinking.

Human centered design thinking needs tools (like AI) but we need the heart to adapt the tools. This means a clear understanding of the purpose, spirituality, values and  the love for others – our fellow man and the planet in the design and implementation stage, It is about having a better attitude for using those tools.  David highlighted the importance of thinking about the customer we are serving, collecting the feedback and putting it back into the design of the process – that works for them as they are the users. He noted this process is not just about citizens or the business, but to be used for the people working in the government, who are doing the work. He highlighted the importance of employee engagement and satisfaction surveys to put leaders and experts in the right roles. Ed stated that a human centered approach does not mean more knowledge but better knowledge on the problems.

Social Relations and Networking

A focus to sciences and vocation to get a job to earn a living has pushed people away from the ability to see people as different. This means they are spending more time on the transaction of what they get rather than the development of the relationship itself.  We need to impress (at least at university) the skill of relationship creation and development. This translates into how the government interacts with the public – every individual working in the government should be able to explain how what they are doing improves the lives of individuals in the public. David stressed, you should be able to make this connection and tell that story so that you can talk of the relationship that the government should have with the public. 

Governance needs coalitions and at times at a global level. It is tough to build these coalitions beyond profit and at an international level without having a conversation around values. Governments have to lead this discussion with the society, businesses and other nation states,.

Communication and Framing

The best designed policies don’t work sometime because we do not communicate or frame it well to our stakeholders or beneficiaries. You can frame it half empty or half full. In USA there were different perceptions of “Obamacare” and the “Affordable Care Act” though they were the same thing. In framing you do not tell people what to think but give them something to think about. Governance is not just an institution, it is everyone – the public, the private sector…those who help sustain the social contract and the common good. Policy officials should be able to see beyond the narrative (and hence the importance of education and learning platforms). When dealing with opinions – you need to tease out people’s inherent biases and preferences to understand the problem and to be able communicate it better. This is a significant training piece missing for future thinking of government officials.

Stay tuned for the next webinar!