This article is written by Laurie Smith, Head of Foresight Research, Nesta.

  • The problem: From the war in Gaza to inflation, governments seem increasingly stuck in crisis-response mode.
  • Why it matters: Too often our current system of policymaking seems built to kick the ball into the long grass.
  • The solution: Systems shape our decisions — this article maps some of the ways government systems can help decision makers think and act in the interests of the long-term.

On 20 September 2023 UK Prime Minister Rishi Sunak stood in front of a podium emblazoned with the slogan “Long-term decisions for a brighter future”. While commentators were quick to jump on the apparent contradiction between his tagline and the content of the accompanying speech (which axed elements of the UK’s climate commitments), he was by no means the first prominent politician to call for long-termism in public life.

💬 Let the author know what you think about reshaping government policymaking for long-term impact by leaving a comment below

In his 2007 speech at the Labour Party conference, then Prime Minister Gordon Brown declared that he stood for a Britain where “...this earth is on loan to us from future generations.” Even Margaret Thatcher was concerned with thinking about the future. In her famous 1980 ‘The lady’s not for turning’ speech she emphasised how her then new government “…thinks about the future” (even if she didn’t want to make predictions).

Why long-termism doesn’t happen in practice

If political leaders are so keen on long-termism why doesn’t this always happen in practice? Part of the problem is that so much of our system of government pushes in the opposite direction. Decision-makers get stuck in “firefighting traps”, a symptom of which includes focusing on the urgent instead of the important.

In a world where governments often feel like they are caught in a tailspin caused by a seemingly endless series of crises, we need to reshape our system of policymaking.

Rather than simply indulge in well-intentioned hand waving about the need for greater long-termism in government, we need practical ways of encouraging future thinking that are hardwired into the system. Fortunately across the globe there are pockets of government innovation where we can find just that.

Three categories of innovation visualised

To help showcase these ideas we have created a visualisation of a few of them. Building on our previous work imagining a Minister for the Future and identifying and organising future-focused policies, we have identified three overlapping categories.

First we have enfranchisement and representation where polities hand more power to younger people who have a greater stake in the future or seek to more actively represent generations who haven’t been born yet. Cambridge don Professor David Runciman has made a surprisingly persuasive case in favour of votes for six year olds. While in Japan, Professor Tatsuyoshi Saijo has pioneered ways of representing future generations in decision-making — such as by inviting particular individuals to serve as representatives and wear distinctive clothing to indicate their role. These approaches have been adopted by cities and towns such as Uji, Kyoto and Matsumoto.

Our next category encompasses mechanisms where the systems and processes of government are designed with long-termism in mind. Wales has its 2015 Well-being of Future Generations Act that requires public bodies in the nation to think about the long-term impact of their decisions. Targets such as the Millennium Development Goals on international development or the Lisbon Strategy for European investment in science and technology offer commitment devices that help lock in long-term thinking. While Long-term Insight Briefings such as those undertaken by department chief executives in New Zealand provide information and analysis about medium and long-term trends, risks and opportunities.

Finally there are organisations and bodies explicitly tasked with safeguarding the future. Many places such as Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates and Norway have organisations that manage sovereign wealth funds with long-term goals. And there are already first class futures and foresight teams embedded in the civil services of the UK, Canada and Singapore.

Of course we shouldn’t simply replace a bias toward short-termism with a bias toward the long-term — we need both types of thinking. And long-termism has its downsides such as the risk of neglecting people’s immediate needs and the potential for inflexibility in a rapidly changing world.

While we have yet to evaluate which of these instruments are most effective and in what circumstances, we think that presenting a menu of options is a useful start. In a world where governments often feel like they are caught in a tailspin caused by a seemingly endless series of crises, we need to reshape our system of policymaking so that it encourages long-term thinking. We hope that our visualisation offers some examples of practical measures that might help.

_The visualisation is a work in progress so please send any suggestions for improvements to laurie.smith@nesta.org.uk _

Thanks to Siobhan Chan, Mark Byrne, Sarah Davies, Celia Hannon, Lucy Makinson, Lauren Orso and James Plunkett for their help and advice in preparing this article and visualisation.

Done reading? Make sure to share your own thoughts on playing the long game in government by leaving a comment below ⬇️

(Image credit: Unsplash)