Futurology, commonly called futures studies, systematically explores how the future could develop. It examines changes, uncertainties and alternative possibilities, rather than promising one correct prediction.
Strategic foresight is a related practice that uses this thinking to inform decisions. The OECD describes foresight as exploring multiple plausible futures and their implications for the present.
How does it differ from forecasting?
A forecast estimates what may happen under stated assumptions, sometimes with a numerical range or probabilities. Futures studies can also examine less expected developments, different assumptions and outcomes people might prefer.
The distinction is not a contest in which one method is always deeper or better. Forecasting, modelling and scenario work can contribute different information to the same analysis.
Policy Horizons Canada stresses that foresight explores a range of plausible futures rather than predicting the future. Plausible means consistent with a reasoned account of how events could develop. It does not mean certain, or necessarily most likely.
What methods are used?
The UK Government Office for Science’s Futures Toolkit describes methods including horizon scanning, Delphi exercises and scenarios. Horizon scanning looks for emerging changes and weak signals. Scenario work develops different accounts of how a future could unfold.
A Delphi exercise gathers expert judgements through repeated questionnaires and controlled feedback. Responses are kept anonymous to reduce some forms of bias. Participants can reconsider their views after seeing a summary of others’ responses.
That is different from requiring everyone to debate face to face. Expert agreement can be informative, but it does not prove that an outcome will occur. Who is included and how questions are framed can affect the result.
A business scenario example
Consider a fictional business using electric delivery vehicles. Two uncertainties are future delivery demand and electricity prices. Combining a lower and higher setting for each gives four starting conditions.
High demand with high electricity prices is different from high demand with low prices. The business’s operating context could differ even though demand is the same.
The matrix does not assign a probability to any cell. It also does not say that demand and energy prices are independent. A full scenario needs a coherent account of how the conditions develop and how other factors interact.
What can the analysis reveal?
Comparing scenarios can expose assumptions that otherwise remain hidden. A plan that depends on one particular combination of demand, costs and regulation may look different under another set of conditions.
The analysis can also distinguish an outcome considered possible from one preferred by the participants. Preference is a statement about aims or values; it is not evidence that the outcome is likely.
What are its limits?
Future developments can surprise both experts and models. Scenarios can be incomplete, inconsistent or shaped by the views of those constructing them. A detailed narrative can still rest on weak assumptions.
The useful output is a clearer account of alternatives, uncertainties and consequences. It is not advance knowledge of what must happen.
Last checked and updated on November 3, 2026 by the MBN editorial team.