Futurevision describes four alternative scenarios for how the world might look in 2040 and provides a methodology for dealing with change.

The first future envisages a society transformed by science and technology, where geoengineering has fixed climate change and nanotechnology has transformed manufacturing. If you need a new dinner plate set, the Personal Manufacturing Unit (PMU) in your home will assemble it for you and then reverse-manufacture it when you’re finished with it.

The second is one of greed, where most people are materially well-off but the bourgeoning popularity of ‘cuddle parties’ and ‘90-second divorce kiosks’ suggests a growing unhappiness.

The third is a world of sustainability, where nearly everyone has taken personal responsibility for the changing climate and there has been a cultural shift away from consumerism. On the whole, society is pretty pessimistic about the future but generally people are happier than they were in 2012.

The final world is one ruled by fear. Everyone worries about economic collapse and there is growing anxiety about the deterioration of the environment, high food prices and increasing cyber crime. Many people in this world now live in gated communities with private security.

Futurevision is filled with literary, philosophical and cinematic references, from Shakespeare to Nietzsche to Fritz Lang (to name just a few). There’s a lot of tongue in cheek and intelligent humour that intentionally prevents the reader from taking some of the details too seriously.

The authors are professional ‘scenario-planners’ and they have developed a methodology to assist organisations to see into the future and create a framework for innovation and resilience. The second half of the book is filled with graphs, diagrams and tables. It reads likes a corporate strategic planning agenda (which I guess it is) – lots of meaningless lists and diagrams that don’t seem to say anything at all.

Futurevision doesn’t quite marry the two halves convincingly. For me, the book was most successful when it was reflecting critically on human behaviour in the presence of change. The authors emphasise that the point of writing the book was ‘not to predict accurately everything that will happen in the future, but rather engage in deeper conversations about what’s happening right now’.

[[kara-thumb]] Kara Nicholson