Social Visions of Future Sustainable Societies 397Despite its substantial shortcomings, formal futurism points to the importance
of envisioning alternative futures. ‘Visions’ may be defined as stories of possible
alternative futures (Anderberg, 1989; Nagpal and Foltz, 1995; Stokke et al, 1991).
The process of forming them may be viewed as a purposeful strategic choice, as a
tactic for moral suasion, or as an innate propensity of the human psyche.
The first posture is exemplified by Gordon (1989, p26), who states that ‘with-
out thinking about the future, we abandon our destinies to chance and the deci-
sions of others’. Simmonds (1989) shares this view, arguing that, in order for
institutions to get where they want to go, they must have a sense of where they are
going and an ability to institutionalize problem solving. This is, perhaps, the inspi-
ration behind the global modelling efforts of the 1970s (see below) and the various
scenario-development and integrated-assessment efforts of the 1980s and 1990s
(Morgan and Dowlatabadi, 1996; Rotmans and Dowlatabadi, 1998; Timmerman
and Munn, 1997; Toth, 1995). Giddens takes a broader approach, denying that
humans are condemned to be swept along by inevitable social forces and calling for
the exercise of sociological imagination – being ‘conscious of the alternative futures
potentially open to us’ (Giddens, 1987, p22).
The second position generally appears in the context of empowering a specific
social movement or project. Caldwell (1985, 1990), for example, adopts it in refer-
ence to environmental politics, arguing that scientific knowledge alone is ineffective
in changing behaviour, because it provide[s] no comprehensive view of the future –
or a route-map to reach it – that most people find plausible and persuasive. Rather,
scientific knowledge must be converted into ‘a vision of the possible’, to be realized
through a programme of action that enlists belief, a popular, political movement
with ‘a vision of the possible that possesses a quasi-religious quality’ (Caldwell, 1985,
pp195–196). Similarly, Malone (1988, p289) calls for ‘unleash[ing] the creative
power of human reason’ to develop alternatives to nuclear annihilation and planetary
environmental collapse; this may be ‘an unrealistic dream ... but surely at least a
vision – and from Proverbs we know “Where there is no vision, the people perish”’.
The third position is an essentialist one, held by many futurists. The claim is
that each person carries around a view of the world, built from everyday observa-
tion and interpretation, that is projected into the future (e.g. Stokke et al, 1991).
According to Adelson (1989, p28), implicit ‘images of futures within which ...
intentions take shape and make sense’ are an inherent part of the human psyche
which help form our view of the present and are necessary to purposive action.
Therefore, neither individual nor group behaviour, culture nor politics can be
entirely understood without understanding those images. A better understanding
of human behaviour, and particularly its purposive aspects, entails dealing with the
key role that images of futures play in shaping it (Adelson, 1989, p33). These
images also have a pragmatic role, since they are essential to the ability of indi-
viduals, organizations or communities to compose actions, strategies and policies;
to fit them into their context; and to give them meaning (Adelson, 1989, p32).
Similarly, Elise Boulding (1983) argues that, from the individual to the soci-
etal level, images about ‘the not-yet’ are constantly generated. This imagery inspires