From ‘White Swans’ to ‘Democratic AI’: Foresight-Centre hosted International Symposium ‘Foresight in a Rapidly Changing World’ as Part of XXVI April International Academic Conference named after Evgeny Yasin

On April 17, 2026, the session dedicated to foresight role in managing transformational change at social, research, cultural, value, and economic levels was held as part of International Symposium ‘Foresight in a Rapidly Changing World’ organized by HSE Institute for Statistical Studies and Economics of Knowledge  within XXVI April Conference. Prof. Alexander Sokolov, Deputy Director of HSE ISSEK, moderated session ‘The Role of Foresight in Transformation Era’.

Attila Havas (University of Debrecen, Centre for Economic and Regional Studies, Hungary) discussed the role of foresight in guiding Goal Oriented Transformative Change (GOTC) processes.

GOTC concept does not examine random or incremental improvements, but rather deep, systemic changes consciously initiated to achieve a specific, larger goal, such as climate neutrality or a green energy transition. To initiate such transformative changes, a willingness to act and the involvement of policy-makers, businesspeople, scientists, and society are required. In the GOTC context, foresight remains one of few comprehensive methods that combines functions of identifying and assessing global goals, monitoring social transformations, and motivating stakeholders to take action, the expert believes.
The speaker formulated three questions that researchers of the future need to address in order to use foresight in GOTC more effectively.

1. At what stages of GOTCs can (should) foresight (and other FLAs) play a role (and what roles)?

2. What types of (extant, known) foresight (and other FLAs) are relevant at what stages of GOTCs (for what roles)?

3. Do we need to devise (pilot) new types of foresight (and other FLAs) or combine extant types of foresight (and other FLAs) in a novel way?

Attila Havas acknowledged that foresight is inferior to other types of FLA in terms of timeliness due to its longer duration, resource-intensive nature, and rigid methodological framework. However, alternative futures study methods do not provide process benefits and are not substitute for foresight over long-term horizons.

The speaker proposed a solution by combining foresight and FLA processes to ensure productive communication across all levels and domains, creating platforms for stakeholder dialogue within foresight centers, developing cost-effective foresight methods, and organizing GOTC monitoring (in real time and ex post).

Attila Havas identified immediate tasks for foresight as construction of 2–3 standard models of multi-level foresight with elements of ambidexterity and FLA evaluation criteria development.

Norsam Tasli’s (Malaysian Industry-Government Group for High Technology) presentation ‘AI Scenario: Shaping RDI Ecosystem in the Age of AI,’ focused on applied aspect of foresight, particularly its role in shaping Malaysia's national Research and Development, and Innovation (RDI) ecosystem.

Characterizing current context through VUCA (volatility, uncertainty, complexity, ambiguity), the speaker noted that new systemic vulnerabilities have emerged in the world, triggered by AI active implementation. According to the speaker, driver of this uncertainty is increasing AI convergence with new technologies. Foresight allows to identify and assess nature and consequences of current integrations and potential convergences of AI with breakthrough technologies.

The expert emphasized influence of technological singularity concept, a hypothetical point in the future when AI surpasses human intelligence in every aspect, on Malaysia's national RDI strategy development. This compels Malaysian futures researchers to pay particular attention to regulation, security, and trust in AI governance in their forecasts.

The second part of presentation was devoted to scenario analysis of AI development.

Scenario 1  ‘Dependent AI’ describes a world governed by a few large players (multinational corporations, state champions, or integrated consortia) that set the pace of innovation, control critical infrastructure, and influence development and access rules. If this scenario realizes, country becomes dependent on foreign AI models, remaining a user, not a producer of generative products. This limits country's domestic scientific potential, weakens strategic control, and reduces long-term competitiveness of RDI ecosystem.

Scenario 2 ‘Democratic AI’ supposes wide accessibility, openness and cooperation between all economic and even political agents.  Open source models, shared data platforms, and inclusive governance mechanisms will enable startups, researchers, and small countries to participate in AI ​​race on equal terms with leaders. Under this scenario, country can build a more inclusive and dynamic RDI ecosystem by expanding access and accelerating growth through partnerships.

Scenario 3  ‘Regulated AI’ describes the future where AI is shaped by strong national and international regulation, strict safety, ethics, and accountability rules. Innovation may slow, but AI systems are designed with public interest in mind. Country can lead by creating strong institutions and robust regulatory systems to ensure RDI safe growth.

Scenario 4  ‘Sovereign AI’ supposes technological independence through creation of own AI ecosystems, national data repositories, and reliable computing infrastructure. Governments prioritize strategic autonomy by protecting data flows and algorithms from external control. In this case, country aims for strategic autonomy by investing in sovereign data, domestic models, and localized computing power.

In each scenario, the speaker identified "opportunities and threats" block, including new markets, partnerships, risks of dependence, fragmentation, and exclusion, and "strategic measures" block for mobilizing research funding, regulatory initiatives, developing digital skills and talent among young people, and forming national, regional, and global partnerships.

In conclusion, the expert expressed confidence that long-term competitiveness of RDI ecosystems will depend on strengthening sovereignty over data, computing resources, talent, and governance.

Natalia Garber(Institute for Economics & Peace, Australia) proposed a fundamentally new perspective on foresight, which combines sustainable development methodology, intuitive knowledge, poetry, and artificial intelligence in her speech ‘Creative Foresight Methods for Biosphere-Centric Development of Earth in the Age of Artificial Intelligence: From Traditions to Innovations.’ The key thesis was that humanity must move from anthropocentric to biosphere-centric development of the Earth in the era of AI, using creative methods of retropolation and the "white swan." According to the speaker, traditional approaches to forecasting are insufficient for preserving the biosphere. The author's proposed creative foresight method is based on a synthesis of scientific analysis, intuition, and artistic perception. The main goal of such foresight studies is biosphere-centric development of technology, taking into account interests of all living beings species, not just humans. A special place in the presentation was devoted to discussion of poetry and intuition role in foresight. Natalia Garber used the metaphor of a poet not knowing how a poem will end. The fact that sometimes a poem written is better than the intended one is an image of how the future of language intrudes into its present. The speaker proposed introducing the concept of "white swan foresight" as a counterpoint to Taleb's "black swan" theories. With this term, she attempted to describe transition from traditional cycle of foresight thinking ("strategy - pilots - replication - brand") to retrospection logic, which, in her view, lies in "chance - transition - chaos - trend" algorithm.

The true challenge of the modern era, Garber concluded, lies in overcoming apathy and techno-apocalypse, not confronting AI.

Yury Dranev’s and Mikhail Miriakov’s (ISSEK of HSE University) report ‘Modeling the Economic Effects of Diversification in Scientific and Technological Development’ presented an empirical analysis of Russia's scientific and technological portfolio in comparison with 43 countries with the greatest scientific potential. According to the authors, in recent years, the Russian economy has found itself in a unique macroeconomic situation, where priority is given to achieving technological sovereignty even at expense of structural transformation. Given limited access to global technology markets and established supply chains disruption, Russia is forced to deviate from its previous development trajectory, shifting from importing ready-made technologies model to accelerating own competencies development model. In this context, the state and expert community face a strategic question: How to manage limited resources more effectively? The speakers have analyzed the two most popular strategies. The first involves focusing efforts and resources on developing and supporting the most promising technologies, while the second involves developing a broad range of in-demand technologies. Both "specialization" and "diversification" strategies have significant drawbacks.

Narrow specialization in the economy ensures its efficiency in stable conditions, but makes it extremely vulnerable in the face of high turbulence. Diversification strategy, whereby an attempt is made to develop “everything at once” with limited budgets, inevitably leads to funding fragmentation and resources dissipation. This leads the economy to a situation where no area achieves critical mass of competencies necessary for global competitiveness.

The authors hypothesized that the concept of "related variety" proposed by Boschma and Frenken could become evolutionary compromise capable of balancing "specialization" and "diversification" in the economy. According to the expert opinion, economic growth is stimulated not only by diversity as an element of risk hedging, but also by “linked diversity,” in which related industries feed each other with innovation.

On one hand, resources concentration in areas with a demonstrated comparative advantage increases R&D efficiency; on other hand, new knowledge is generated at disciplines intersection, and diversity facilitates knowledge flow and ensures the system's resilience to technological shifts.

To prove ‘linked diversity’ productivity the speakers built and tested a statistical model on data from patent (WIPO) and publication (Web of Science) databases. Despite scientific schools isolation and knowledge exchange decline observed after 2021, patent diversification in Russia remains high, sometimes even exceeding benchmark countries in patenting. The study confirmed the researchers' initial assumption that technological sovereignty built on a ‘linked diversity’ strategy in Russia is viable construct, forming the basis for GDP growth and competencies creation in key technological areas.

PRESENTATIONS

Attila Havas (Centre for Economic and Regional Studies, Hungary)

The Role of Foresight in Guiding Goal-oriented Transformative Change Processes (PDF, 632 Kb) 

Norsam Tasli (Malaysian Industry-Government Group for High Technology, Malaysia)

AI Scenario: Shaping RDI Ecosystem in the Age of AI (PDF, 2.81 Mb) 

Natalia Garber (Institute for Economics & Peace, Australia)

Creative Foresight Methods for Biosphere-Centric Development of Earth in the Age of Artificial Intelligence: From Traditions to Innovations (PDF, 2.70 Mb)