Whether you work in sustainability or simply take an interest, it can be hard to envisage what a more sustainable world might actually look like. We know what we want to avoid, but looking decades into the future and imagining an alternate reality can be a challenge for even the most imaginative amongst us. It can be even harder to describe what technologies, actions and events might get us to this point.

Jonathon Porritt's latest book 'The World we Made' takes on this challenge. The seasoned environmentalist and founder of Forum for the Future writes from the perspective of Alex McKay, a teacher in 2050 looking back on recent decades and reflecting on the changes he has seen. With the help of a research team of students, he describes the social, technological, ecological and financial events and trends that shape the years 2020-50. The world in 2050 is by no means one without problems, but it is by and large more stable and more content. 

Porritt uses an entertaining mix of sketches, photos and mocked up covers of magazines from the future to paint his picture. The result is an accessible 'future-history' book (if that wasn't already a word, I've just invented it.) 

Alex McKay's reality is quite different from our own, and it is far from being a utopia. There is still a gap between the rich and the poor, for example, but it is not as yawning as it once was. Empathy is far more central to society and competition co-exists with collaboration. As I suspect Porritt intends, you are left feeling heartened and excited by some developments (Malaria is beaten! Coral reefs recover! 90% renewable power!) and decidedly uncomfortable, nay freaked out by others. He describes how governments still haven't really got a handle on regulating biotech, and the threat of cyber-terrorism looms large. Personal genome sequencing is the norm leading to huge advances in preventative healthcare, but ethical concerns relating to brain enhancing 'implants' divide opinion. Personal 'home' robots, with processing power far superior to our own brains look after the elderly and provide companionship. The debate rages over what constitutes a human. 

There are deft, heart-warming little touches too- we learn that Detroit, once an industrial powerhouse and centre of the US car industry, sank first to industrial wasteland, then emerged gradually as a shining example of urban farming used as a case study worldwide. In fact, it seems we're now so good at urban food-growing- using everything from traditional allotments to vertical farms, that 40% of our food comes from our cities.

There is an attempt to describe how the international community finally got its act together on reducing carbon emissions, and you may not be surprised to learn that China leads, followed somewhat tardily by the US. I won't spoil the rest for you- but suffice to say coal is consigned to the history books and wind, solar and in the interim, natural gas play a huge part.

Alex McKay's research students are part of the generation still clearing up after their grandparents' excesses, but it is their parents who first begin to put civil pressure on governments. The book describes pivotal, and peaceful popular uprisings calling for a fairer and more sustainable world- the 'Enough!' demonstrations of 2018 and the intergenerational justice movement led by school children in the late 2020s. These events, Alex recalls, were pivotal moments. I read this section as the People's Climate March set off in New York and around the world. As the Guardian's Jo Confino observed, this was the first time socialists have marched alongside big business heads, alongside NGOs and ordinary citizens. It made me think that Alex McKay's experience of popular movements creating real change may not be so far off.

I suspect that some readers may be disappointed not to find more detail on technological solutions, but I don't think that's the purpose of this book. In any case, if you are hungry for more, there is a helpful bibliography at the back pointing to further resources. For me, it served as an accessible and thought-provoking window on a possible future- you may not find all the scenarios plausible, but it's a great way to prompt your own thinking and kick-start your imagination. 

Overall, the tone is upbeat- and goodness knows we need more of that- 'a world that works for the majority of people, if we play our cards right.' I'd love to see this book used in schools as in inspiring textbook. And I can certainly see 'The World We Made' making excellent fodder for vision and future planning workshops- whatever sector you work in. 

by Jenny Ekelund

I have just returned from Berlin where I attended a 'Future Shapers' workshop, run by Forum for the Future as part of a three year EU funded project, EUInnovatE.  I met a fascinating array of innovators, entrepreneurs and sustainability thinkers from all over Europe and the diverse perspectives made for a great workshop.

The exam question of the three year project is how we catalyse citizen driven innovation to create a more sustainable Europe. To start the process off, Forum ran this immersive futures workshop looking at four distinct plausible scenarios for 2050 (but at the edge of our imagination, as a good scenario should be!) which had all found ways of of achieving the goal of using 75% less resource than we do today. The scenarios sat in four quadrants, defined by the extent of their collective vs. individualistic culture on one hand and the extent to which we shape technology or vice versa on the other. They were all thought provoking, disturbing in parts but also exciting and inspirational in others.

It is early days in this three year project, but here are some of the key things I took out of the day:

• Technology enables anyone to influence our sustainable future - from eBay to Landshare, there is evidence that a good idea coupled with determination and the power of technology allows citizens to drive sustainable change.
  
• Empathy is an increasingly important concept in our quest to change behaviour - we have talked about Roman Krznaric's thinking on empathy in this blog before (here and here) and it was amazing how many times the concept  came up during the day, including as the title of one of the scenarios ('Empathetic Communities')
• Sharing economy - not a new phenomenon any more, but our discussions confirmed just how big and important a trend it is for sustainability
• Big data and the internet of things will be key to enabling large scale citizen driven change - in my opinion, we can't let privacy protection lobbies (who undoubtedly also do good work) stop us from collecting data at all. Ultimately, it will enable innovation for a more sustainable future.
• Initiatives around food (waste) came up during discussions time and again- it is clear that this is an area where citizen led innovation is already thriving.
  
• Finally, and potentially driven by who was attending, there was a distinct lack of discussion of energy issues, which somewhat surprised me.  Great community energy initiatives notwithstanding, perhaps this is a reflection of where we feel citizens can have the most influence - government and large energy companies will still have to do their bit! 

All in all it was a great day and I look forward to continuing to support the project. I will continue to update on the outputs and findings of the project through this blog so do check back regularly.

by Jesper Ekelund

With the 70th anniversary of the D-Day landings approaching, I was reminded of the famous Kohima memorial inscription. Commemorating the thousands of Indian, African and Commonwealth soldiers who fought in the Burma campaign, it reads:

“When you go home, tell them of us and say: ‘For your tomorrow, we gave our today’” 

In the context of climate change and, in particular, international governments’ inability to respond decisively- it strikes me that a more appropriate and rather less heroic epitaph for our generation may be “For our today, we gave your tomorrow.’ For whatever reason, our society seems less able, or less willing, to act in the best interests of its descendants.

The topic of intergenerational justice and environmental protection is not a new concept. The Stuttgart based think-tank Foundation for the Rights of Future Generations seeks to ensure that “today’s youth and future generations…have at least the same opportunities to meet their own needs as the generation governing today.” An echo of the Brundtland definition of sustainable development, it is familiar to everyone working in the field. So what are we missing? Where is the willingness to make changes for the sake of our great-great-grandchildren?

My hunch is that we lack the imagination, or the advanced empathy skills to feel sufficiently responsible for future generations. We are too far removed temporally and emotionally, and we lack the urgency, courage and immediate mortal danger felt by soldiers fighting in the world wars. This may be why the case for sustainability has taken several decades to gain traction. The philosopher Roman Krznaric outlines some creative strategies for closing the empathy gap across generations, including the establishment of experiential 'climate futures museums.' In the meantime, perhaps we need to emphasise the opportunity to improve well-being and prosperity for today’s global citizens. By maximising environmental, financial and social justice in our own lifetimes, we may leave better systems in place for future generations. 

By Jenny Ekelund