{"id":540,"date":"2023-04-26T11:28:00","date_gmt":"2023-04-26T11:28:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/simoninstitute.ch\/?p=540"},"modified":"2025-11-12T19:13:10","modified_gmt":"2025-11-12T19:13:10","slug":"the-fair-framework-a-future-proofing-methodology","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/simoninstitute.ch\/blog\/post\/the-fair-framework-a-future-proofing-methodology","title":{"rendered":"The FAIR Framework – A Future-Proofing Methodology"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Why future proofing?<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

In the words of Ant\u00f3nio Guterres, Secretary General of the United Nations, \u201cmany of today\u2019s multilateral frameworks are outdated and no longer fit for purpose.\u201d As the world becomes more complex and globalized, local policy decisions can become highly consequential. It is therefore becoming increasingly apparent that we need to consider the long-term impacts of our policies and decisions. Care for future generations is common across cultures and has been for centuries. However, our institutions lack the tools to systematically design future-proof policies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Future-proofing is the process of designing policies with a lasting positive impact on future generations while not harming current people. It is a systematic approach to considering the long-term effects of our decisions, based on the assumption that future generations are moral beings and that current generations should preserve their choices and quality of life. Future-proofing is essential as it ensures that policies consider future generations and helps to hold policymakers accountable if they fail to implement the resulting recommendations.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A specific political context prompts the reflection on future-proofing policies. An increasing number of states are considering the needs of future generations in their constitutions, and the UN Secretary-General\u2019s Common Agenda<\/a> is asking for tools that go beyond \u201cstrong rhetoric, which is not backed by practical means of implementation.\u201d Additionally, the mid-term review of the Sendai Framework and considerations of global catastrophic risks necessitate policymakers to consider their decisions\u2019 long-term impact.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The absence of future-proofing policies can lead to unintended negative consequences and the calcification of institutions, unable to adapt to the pace of change.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Aral Sea disaster<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Aral Sea disaster is a prime example of the absence of future-proofing. In the 1960s, the Soviet Union began diverting the rivers that fed the Aral Sea to irrigate cotton fields in the desert. This decision had a catastrophic impact on the lake, which predictably shrunk by over 90%. As the lake\u2019s salinity levels increased, most of the fish died. The remaining water is heavily polluted, causing significant health issues for the local population. Additionally, the drying up of the Aral Sea has led to a rise in dust storms, which have increased respiratory diseases. This failure to consider the long-term impacts, involve local communities in the planning process, and anticipate unintended consequences led to irreversible environmental damage and significant human suffering.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

UNAIDS\u2019 lack of flexibility<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Joint United Nations Programme on HIV and AIDS (UNAIDS) is a prominent example of institutional calcification. Established in 1996 to tackle the HIV\/AIDS pandemic, it has since been criticized for its failure to adapt to new challenges. While UNAIDS has successfully lowered HIV infection rates, it has been criticized for its lack of focus on other major health crises, such as diabetes. Indeed, despite causing twice as many deaths per year as HIV\/AIDS, diabetes receives only a fraction of the funding UNAIDS does. The lack of institutional changes and failure to future-proof its policies has led to a misallocation of resources and a misalignment with the current global health challenges. UNAIDS is an example of how an organization can lose sight of its purpose and fail to adapt to changing needs. It highlights the importance of future-proofing to ensure institutions adapt and remain effective.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

How future-proofing works<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Our \u201cFuture-proofing Adaptability, Impact, and Representation framework\u201d (FAIR framework) comprises three elements of classic policymaking: design, assessment, and participation. The framework provides a list of questions that policymakers must consider when designing policies that are inclusive of the future. It also includes different examples of how to implement these considerations.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The framework is flexible and should be adapted to the need and specificity of each policy. It is a helpful structure that policymakers can build upon and use in the most efficient and practical way.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Finally, it is essential to note that while this future-proofing framework is necessary to build policies that account for future impact, it does not claim to be sufficient or exhaustive in achieving ideal policymaking.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/a>The FAIR Framework<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Our future-proofing design framework relies on three interconnected principles: adaptability<\/strong> over time, assessment of the impact<\/strong> over a long time frame, and representation<\/strong> of future generations.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/a>Adaptability<\/h4>\n\n\n\n

What does it mean?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Adaptability<\/strong> means ensuring the design offers sufficient flexibility to change over time. Future-proofing is about ensuring that policies stay relevant over a long period of time or come to an end. It is essential to consider how to allow for policies to change depending on evolving needs, contexts, and knowledge.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Why is it important?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Context, needs and knowledge evolve over time. Policies tend to operate only within a specific context, which quickly renders them obsolete or leads to unintended or perverse impacts. It is therefore essential for policies to have built-in mechanisms which can respond to change and adapt to a range of anticipated and unanticipated factors. Additionally, designing policies flexibly is likely more efficient than attempting to predict all possible futures.<\/p>\n\n\n\n


Key questions<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n