Anticipatory governance

Anticipatory Governance

Anticipatory governance or anticipatory profiling is the practice used by the state to collect information and data about its citizens in order to assess events or behaviours in a predictable manner based on the knowledge gathered. Anticipatory governance is also a method of decision making that uses predictive measures to anticipate possible outcomes to then make decisions based on the data provided. Anticipatory governance is a system of governing that is made up of processes and institutions that rely on foresight and predictions to decrease risk and develop efficient methods to address events in their early conception or prevent them altogether.  

History and applications

Anticipatory governance is a concept that has been derived from terms of similar meaning, like forward engagement and forward deployment, which was a primary focus for decisions made by the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). More recently, anticipatory governance has become data oriented practice which allows citizens and governments to utilize data as contributions and evidence for decision making regarding various matters within society. For example, Finland has a Finnish parliamentary Committee for the Future, which takes advantage of foresight to predict and evaluate the impact of developments to the country.

Since 2001, the Millennium Project has initiated a project entitled the State of the Future Index, has been using a predictive methodology to foresee the future for global countries based on historical data, variables and indicators, such as GDP, annual population, literacy rates, population, and unemployment.

Methodology

Four part system

Anticipatory governance is a system that is comprised of four components that allow the system to: use a foresight, have a networked system that integrates foresight and policy procedures, receive feedback in order to improve efficiency and knowledge, and allow for flexibility. By allowing for feedback, anticipatory governance can detect and assess the development of future programs and policy. Feedback can be done trough audits, and assessments of performance. The anticipatory system must adapt to consider possibilities that result from he data and may appear to be untraditional to allow the system to be effective and depend on pragmatic data.

Indicators

Anticipatory governance utilizes various techniques to assess society which can evaluate the continuous information from knowledge based technologies, such as machine learning. Anticipatory governance also takes into consideration that the concept cannot predict the future certainly, however, it can account for several possible future avenues. In order to determine these possible avenues the following list of indicators are required: "aggregated averages, risk assessment, sensitivity analysis of factors or decisions driving the scenarios, identification of unacceptable scenarios or worst cases, and assessment of common and different impacts among the scenarios."

Big data

Anticipatory governance allows the state to use collected public information in order to determine predictive practices and draw conclusions based on this data. Data that is gathered by governments in large volumes can be considered Big data. Governments utilize predictive analytics to examine what kinds of behaviour and events that may occur as a result of this collected of data. Anticipatory governance can be used by enforcement agencies in order to proactively protect the public, for instance by estimating where future crimes may occur and identifying areas of improvement for law enforcement.

*Anticipatory governance can also be applicable in similar instances by private companies. For example, Hewlett Packard can determine which employees will leave the company and they are able to identify ways of preventing this turnover.

Anticipatory governance is not always focused on finding solution, rather it can be focused on a preventative method altogether. As a result of this methodology, anticipatory governance, can be an alternative to having the bureaucracy form specific teams to address issues, whereby, the issue can be avoided due to precise foresight. Furthermore, anticipatory governance can also be considered a precaution, in the sense that it is a practice for preparing for the possible future.

Actors

As a result of anticipatory governance involving a governing body to implement its practice, the leading actor is the government's institutions, and it's policy. For example, education governance utilizes policy instrumentation in order to gather data about students as a means of creating predictions to improve future education.

Anticipatory governance relies on data in order to derive predictive analytic, therefore, it is necessary to have an infrastructure that supports the produced data, such as databases, coding, and algorithms. These infrastructures can be provided by private companies that have the resources and technologies to acquire and create them.

Ethics

Anticipatory governance can be seen as controversial because its measures can be perceived as unethical. This type of ethical analysis in terms of anticipatory governance can be known as nano ethics (see Impact of nanotechnology). Under the category of nano ethics anticipatory governance falls under anticipatory ethics, which originated in the 1960's. Anticipatory ethics and governance addresses the ethical repercussions associated with technologies in their beginning stages. It assesses the risks that the technology might present and therefore can affect future decision making of such technology.

Shortcomings

Due to the fact that anticipatory governance is hypothetical and cannot for certain predict the future, there is caution associated with the practice is alway handled with the possibility of doubt. For example, following the Great Depression, measures were taken within the United States economy to prevent a depression from ever occurring again, however, the market crash in 2008 still occurred.

Anticipatory governance is that can target certain groups and individuals that do not warrant being targeted with this type of governance.

Moreover, anticipatory governance also supersedes information about people that may never happen in actual reality. By drawing conclusions based on anticipatory governance certain groups in society face the consequences of this practice and are subject to prejudices by others within society. For example, predictive policing cane argued to target specific individuals because the information provided by such analytics and technology, supports recidivism. The concept that people that have committed crimes are likely to recommit offences, thus becoming individuals of interest in predictive policing data (see Predictive policing).

Another, controversy concerning anticipatory governance is regarding the need for traditional governments. If anticipatory governance and its associated technologies, information, and data are used to govern nation states, it can replace and reshape the need for government. However, without the use of anticipatory governance the alternative is to utilize a reactive form of governance, which results in a decision making process that can take longer and lead to implications that are difficult to predict and prevent.

Anticipatory government allows the secondary use of information by governments, which in some cases can impede on citizen liberties.

See also

• Predictive policing
• Big data
• Predictive analytics