Fiona Lickorish’s recent work has focussed on the use of futures research methods – such as horizon scanning, trend research and scenario planning – to identify, analyse and communicate insights about the future. Fiona’s research has played a major role in providing policy-makers with the knowledge and tools to anticipate new risks and opportunities, and to enhance their foresight capabilities. Fiona has a track record of developing and applying futures analysis techniques for policy impacts including the methods for informing evidence-based policymaking and practice, and an ability to integrate and assess the full impacts of developing policy - social, economic and environmental. She has experience in designing, specifying and leading research programmes, and extensive project and budget management experience, including the development and leading of staff, professional teams and networks. Fiona’s background in building partnerships within and between government departments and their agencies, private companies, local authorities, the ‘third’ sector, and with academics and consultants gives her a broad understanding of the government, local authority, academic and ‘third’ sectors, and the frameworks and constraints they work under. Fiona’s advocacy and conciliation skills have been demonstrated through research for examination in public and judicial review, as well as presentation and report writing skills for a wide variety of audiences.

Can you envision major wild cards (positive or negative) that may occur in the next 20 years?
 
I think both the wild cards identified in the workshop are likely to occur: Wheat Comes a Cropper (i.e. New Crop Disease) and When the Lights Go Off (i.e. For technology to triumph all it takes is for good men to do nothing). Press coverage has made me think of the wildcard developed in the workshop about transhumanism. The press coverage was about someone having a chip inserted in them, that has been infected with a virus. I think these two will take us further into the area of transhumanism. Some nefarious characters may use virus attacks on those people who have transhuman implants. This could link to another wild card we had, about a systems attack. I spoke recently to a researcher at the Ministry of Defence, about research into wireless weaponry. This interferes with people’s pacemakers. The more we integrate ourselves with electronics and robotics, the more chance there is of terrorism attacks that could affect that.
 
Can you envision major wild cards (positive or negative) that may occur in the next 20 years and are particularly relevant to the EU research and/or may dramatically affect the ERA vision?
 
These are relevant globally – not necessarily just European level. It is very relevant, because people are having pacemakers fitted today – it depends on how fast that technology develops. But in the USA and Europe people can afford to have these changes made – therefore they are particularly vulnerable.
 
What will be the dramatic impact of the wild cards you mentioned, and how it should be addressed by future research? In which field?
 
SWOT analysis on what the strengths and weaknesses are on new technologies and social trends. We tend to get fooled by technology as something good. But we have to remember that there are going to be people who will want to use technology for harm – not good. Technologies invented in good faith are sometimes used for harm.
 
 What are the weak signals that (if detected) could hint at a growing likelihood (or imminent realization) of the wild cards that you mentioned?
 
We need to look at weak signals around all sorts of trends. We use STEEPV analysis – we add the V for values because people’s values are very important. We need to be constantly scanning for weak signals in all of these dimensions. We need to think about what the impact of these could be. Sometimes we identify the primary impact quickly but we don’t always think about what the secondary, tertiary, etc. impacts could be. We often look for positive impact, so we miss negative impacts that could happen further down the way. We need to liaise with other groups that do that kind of scanning – these are, however, not always open about what they do. They are often more security linked than we are – intelligence etc. People in defence labs look at new technologies – but they will not tell you. They do not want to promote ways to use technologies for harm.
 
If you mentioned more than one wild card or weak signal, can you identify any causal relationships between them?
 
Transhumanism and the two we identified in the workshop. Certainly the transhumanism and the systems blackout – the more we are integrated, the more vulnerable we are to attack. Standard protocol response also makes us much more vulnerable to attack. Also, if we were to further the transhumanism thing, I imagine a system would be running it – if that system got attacked, it would be disastrous.
 
Looking ahead to the future of European research – which of the Wi/We that you mentioned should be given top priority in the EU research?
 
The wheat crisis, because that is what we have less control over. We have the ability to put systems in place and protect them in technological terms. If a new crop disease comes and climate change accelerates that disease, how long it would take us to deal with that disease is totally unknown. Security issues could become serious within less than 12 months. It could be any sort of crop crisis. We could have some serious problems. When lights go off – this would have a huge impact economically, but we could adjust to it and would find ways of dealing with it. When it is a major food source, this is more serious – it could take a long time to recover from it. This would have a huge impact on the ERA, due to how global the system is. The less developed countries that are less technologically dependent would be OK during the systems crisis. The food crisis is a completely different thing – it would be a global issue and would be awful.
 
What are the most pressing emerging issues/ problems in the EU that are insufficiently (or not at all) addressed by current research?
 
I don’t know enough about IT systems and don’t know how we could prepare for ‘when the lights go out’ – I am sure we have ways but I don’t know the system well enough. Food security is my area and therefore I would place the wheat wild card first. In the UK we are not used to having food shortages – we would not cope with that at all. If the lights go out, we can carry on living as long as we have food and water. Not having food – I think that would be quite difficult, especially in our economic climate. However, in saying that, when the system goes out – how will you get food to the shops?
 
Do you prefer other definitions of wild card and weak signals? If these concepts are ambiguous in your opinion, how could they be more clarified and better defined?
 
No, this is the definition I use when I explain wild cards to people. High impact–low probability, seeming to come out of nowhere. Definition of weak signals – I think that is a good definition. I usually say an indicator of a wild card could be happening. When you identify a wild card, you would want to identify some indicators as well. We use these terms a lot, but we don’t spend a lot of time wondering what we mean by them. People get caught up in semantics – but if it works for what you are doing in this project, it will work for other people.
 
Are there interesting lessons from previous foresight studies that employed the Wi-We approach?
 
Not specific things to wild cards and weak signals. We have a set of eight essays from when we looked at our programme after several years. We looked at what is useful in futures studies. The need to be multidisciplinary was one lesson, because you need to have someone who can look at other sciences and understand them. It is important to have someone who understands social sciences. Also you need someone who understands the language they use. Chemists and physicist have a different language. A wild card needs to be meaningful for the people who have to use it. If you don’t show them what it means for their area of work, they will disregard it. You need to be open about the impacts and implications for them.
 
What are the best methods to identify Wi-Wes?
 
• You need to be good at horizon scanning. You need to be thinking forward. You need to be able to make links between the weak signals you see happening and how they might unfold into a wild card. • Also, if you are focused on a particular area of work – you need to be able to sit down and think ‘what could come out of the blue and knock us down? ’ The best way to do that is to work with experts in the field. The wheat wild card came from me working with a security expert and this had been bothering him for a while. • You need to work with people who know stuff and you need to know the questions to ask them. What crop would cause us the most problem if it were to fail?  Some would not say wheat – they would say soya, as it is in so many things and cannot be substituted. • You need to learn enough about the topic so that you can you ask the right questions.