Independent report

Executive summary

Published 17 September 2026

Applies to England and Wales

Introduction

The Building Safety Regulator (BSR) established a horizon scanning team in autumn 2024 to develop an in-house horizon scanning process that:

• builds intelligence about emerging signals of change in the market
• develops insight into the possible impact of changes on the safety and standards of buildings
• systematically stress tests the work of BSR to ensure that policy and regulatory development is fit for future purpose

BSR’s definition of horizon scanning matches that of the Government Office for Science (GO-Science).

Horizon scanning is the systematic collection of insights on emerging trends and weak signals of change to identify potential threats, risks and opportunities.

BSR is open to adapting the technique by drawing on a wider range of approaches than those set out in the GO-Science Futures Toolkit. This will ensure its horizon scanning outputs feed into and influence policy and strategy development.

The review

This practical review examines the strengths and weaknesses of different horizon scanning approaches and identifies the tools and techniques most suited to meeting BSR’s requirements.

The review was conducted through a combination of interviews and desk research.

Waverley carried out 15 interviews with futures leads across government and the public sector and conducted desk research to identify the range and nature of futures toolkits available.

The purpose of futures work

The research found a hierarchy of purpose for futures work with 6 levels:

• raising awareness of emerging change
• helping people think strategically
• providing early warning of systemic change and building resilience to risk
• informing strategy
• protecting an organisation’s reputation
• driving transformational change

The report makes 4 key conclusions.

1. Not all horizon scanning activity needs to achieve every level of purpose.
2. Progression towards higher levels comes with experience and requires a degree of process maturity.
3. Progression also requires a mix of skills. The skills needed for the lower levels are primarily technical, including research and foresight skills.
4. As organisations move towards the higher levels, horizon scanning teams also need strategic skills such as operational insight, strategic influencing and strategic leadership.

Tools and techniques

Most interviewees in the study use the GO-Science Futures Toolkit as their principal source of tools.

The GO-Science Futures Toolkit organises futures tools into 3 categories.

Category	Description
What is changing?	These are tools for identifying current trends, uncertainties and emerging possibilities.
So what does that mean for our futures?	These are tools for exploring potential future scenarios and their implications.
Now what do we do?	These are tools for deciding how to act within the current policy environment and build resilience to a range of possible futures.

Most commonly used futures tools

In general, the most commonly used futures tools are those categorised in the GO-Science Futures Toolkit as tools for analysing ‘what is changing’. This includes tools for looking at what is happening now to identify emerging trends, uncertainties and possibilities. These are ‘7 questions’, ‘horizon scanning’, ‘3 horizons’ and ‘driver mapping’.

The next most commonly used tools are those in the ‘so what does this mean for our futures’ category. This includes SWOT analysis, scenarios, visioning and ‘futures wheels’. These are used to explore different potential futures and their implications.

The least commonly used tools are those in the ‘now what do we do’ category: policy stress testing, ‘backcasting’ and ‘roadmapping’. These are used for deciding how to act within the current policy environment in order to be resilient to a range of possible futures.

Some interviewees, mainly those with several years’ experience working in futures, use a wider range of tools and techniques than those in the GO-Science Toolkit. These include:

• the futures triangle
• McLuhan’s tetrad
• red teaming
• wargaming
• systems thinking
• fiction and narrative development
• issues radar

Futures tools used by interviewees

Category	Futures tools
What is changing?	Delphi, 7 questions, horizon scanning, 3 horizons, driver mapping
So what does that mean for our futures?	SWOT, scenarios, visioning, futures wheels
Now what do we do?	Policy stress testing, roadmapping, backcasting

Landing futures

Securing engagement and influencing policy, known as ‘landing futures’, is not a given outcome. While some people may be interested in the value of futures thinking, others may need to be convinced.

This, combined with the time pressures that most people are under, means that demonstrating the value of futures thinking is key to securing engagement in the process.

One way to strengthen the connection between futures and policy making is to involve as wide a group of policy makers as possible in horizon scanning. This not only raises awareness of futures, but also helps to build the bridge between looking for weak signals of change and formulating policy by identifying what is changing, describing what this means for the future and determining what action to take now.

Getting this right means that the ideas and insights emerging from futures work will feed directly into policy development and decision making. Scanning teams should not expect to achieve this bridge immediately, but should keep it firmly in focus as they design and begin to deliver their approach.

Based on their experiences, interviewees collectively provided ten insights for landing futures effectively:

• do not be afraid to do futures
• have a senior champion who has the ear of decision makers
• do not rush it, walk before you run
• encourage the scanning team to be enthusiastic, curious and brave
• build a clear picture of where your organisation is
• trust your intuition about what matters
• build a community of practice
• facilitate conversations
• do not overcomplicate things
• embed scanning in decision making from the start

The role of artificial intelligence in horizon scanning

The majority of interviewees have explored using artificial intelligence (AI) in their futures work. There are 2 principal uses for it: conducting horizon scanning and summarising reports (either from workshops or published sources).

Interviewees with experience of AI were almost unanimous in their view that it is not yet a mature enough technology to be used for conducting horizon scanning. One concern is the trustworthiness of outputs, with interviewees highlighting difficulties in verifying information and the sources used to generate it. Another concern was that “futures research is subjective and nuanced creative thinking [and] current AI tools don’t have the capability to be subjective or creative in that way.”

Interviewees were more positive about the use of AI for processing and summarising text from interviews, reports and workshop discussions. However, one interview noted that AI “picks up sentiment but you don’t always get the nuance”.

Insights from futures practice

Waverley found 2 sources that offer short and informal but meaningful observations on conducting futures work.

The Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, New Zealand offers 5 lessons on the limitations of conducting futures work.

1. There is a learning curve to doing futures work.
2. There is potential for futures work to create tensions. If conducting an in-depth futures exercise in a controversial area, seek appropriate authorisation before proceeding.
3. There can be a great deal of overlap in futures work in terms of the broad themes. Be careful not to reinvent the wheel and instead build on available results and previous knowledge.
4. In areas where there is relative certainty about the direction, nature and speed of change, futures thinking may be of limited value.
5. You’re more likely to be successful if you conduct targeted futures exercises with decision-makers in order to open their minds to new possibilities.

John Carney, Principal Scientist in the systems thinking and consulting group of the Defence Science and Technology Laboratory offered a personal perspective on carrying out horizon scanning on GO-Science’s Futures, Foresight and Horizon scanning blog. His 10 commandments for horizon scanning are based on his team’s experience of scanning and how to achieve impact through it.

John Carney’s 10 commandments for horizon scanning

1. Do not think that horizon scanning is about predicting the future – this is a common misconception. The value of horizon scanning is in using it to change mindsets, challenge assumptions and provide more options.
2. Do not look for ‘what you know or want’ – scanning is not the same as searching. This may seem contradictory, but it is one of the hardest commandments to get your mind around as either a practitioner or a client. Horizon scanning is more about asking the ‘unasked questions’ or identifying the “unknown unknowns” (after Donald Rumsfeld).
3. Do not negate the need for a champion or dedicated client – the major challenge for a horizon scanning analysis is in overcoming cultural resistance. A supportive and influential stakeholder is a great help, but choose wisely (if you can) and manage expectations accordingly.
4. Do not forget to sustain the evidence base – a systematic and comprehensive scanning process provides a degree of (scientific) robustness which is important for credibility.
5. Do not think that there is any consistent understanding of what horizon scanning is about – there is a lack of a common understanding within the horizon scanning and futures community and a common language. The various disciplines that have contributed to horizon scanning have resulted in a variety of views of what it is. Furthermore, the inconsistency of application means the term horizon scanning is widely used and, in many cases, misused. You should define your terms and meanings.
6. Do not be afraid to challenge your own way of doing things – there is no magic or agreed recipe for how to do horizon scanning but watch out for thinking that the way that you do it is the best and only way. Asking other teams to review your work is a great way to introduce new approaches and views to your horizon scanning activities.
7. Do not forget the team – use a dedicated cadre of ‘generalists’, ideally recruited from very different academic backgrounds (including the arts and the sciences). Consider the wider team too. Externals to your own area or consultants can often present an uncomfortable conclusion more effectively.
8. Do not negate the need for impact – focus on describing the implications of your analysis (the ‘so what’) rather than the process or detailed content. Also remember that uncertainty and risk (or opportunity) are not the same thing.
9. Do not expect to be thanked or enjoy it too much – horizon scanning is a challenge function and at times you may feel like you are in the front-line of a war zone. The most important contribution a futures project makes is likely to be an invisible one.
10. Do not give up the day job – for some, horizon scanning may become a full-time or even life-long profession, but for most it can be a useful adjunct to a more mainstream activity. Be wary that horizon scanning can at times seem like a cult but treat it not as a single bullet but one tool useful of many in the Futures armoury.

Further reports on effective foresight in government

Waverley found 2 further reports produced by GO-Science on effective foresight in government.

Features of effective systemic foresight in governments globally was produced by the School of International Futures for GO-Science. It showcases how different governments use foresight and futures techniques.

It looks at the key features of their programmes and the impact they have on the quality and efficacy of policies and strategies. It offers a guiding framework to build and sustain foresight in policy-making in a way that creates long-term impact from futures work.

The key findings are summarised here.

• There is no silver bullet for creating effective sustainable foresight in government. Considering foresight as an ‘ecosystem’ that includes the socio-cultural and political context of that nation is critical to ensure lasting integration into policy.
• Focusing on a unit or department can enhance the value of specific projects or teams.
• There is a common set of features that have helped countries to build future-oriented, resilient and adaptable foresight ecosystems. They include culture and behaviours, systems, processes and people.
• No one nation has all of these features and none on its own is sufficient for a sustainable foresight ecosystem. The best mix will depend on what is already in place, where there is appetite for activity and which aspects of the foresight ecosystem are most in need of development.
• A healthy foresight ecosystem creates demand for futures work, ensures quality supply, and nurtures itself. The research suggests that this requires coordination between all of the actors in a government system. Gaps between parts of the foresight ecosystem undermines its strength and sustainability.
• Developing the ecosystem can, and should be, done in phases. The ecosystems approach allows for policy-makers working across government, or within particular units to make strategic and culturally appropriate choices about where to intervene or invest in what is often a long journey to sustainable, impactful foresight work.

In 2008, the Foresight Horizon Scanning Centre, the Cabinet Office’s Strategy Unit and the National School for Government jointly hosted a meeting of the Futures Analysts Network to explore the role of futures thinking in government strategy and how to improve the connection between the 2 so that futures work better informs policy and strategy development.

Members of both the strategy and futures communities identified 141 barriers to effective take up of futures thinking in strategy development which fell into 7 categories:

• institutional barriers
• political barriers
• cultural barriers
• reputational barriers
• processual barriers
• resourcing barriers
• leadership barriers

The report found the single biggest barrier to the effective take up of futures thinking in strategy development across government to be short termism. Not only was it ranked most highly, but 4 of the top 5 barriers related to short termism. It was also a recurring theme through the lower ranking barriers.

Review of horizon scanning toolkits

Waverley reviewed 4 horizon scanning toolkits to test their suitability for meeting BSR’s requirements:

• The Scottish Environmental Protection Agency’s Horizon Scanning Toolkit
• The European Environment Agency’s Practical Guide to Horizon Scanning
• The UN Global Pulse Horizon Scan User Manual
• The Australian Government Department of Industry’s Practical guide to horizon scanning in the public sector

Waverley assessed each toolkit according to 5 key technical characteristics:

1. The focus on horizon scanning
2. The depth and detail of the tools in the toolkit
3. The degree of sophistication for ranking of scans
4. Whether the toolkit links scanning to policy and action
5. The clarity and usability of the toolkit

Each characteristic was assessed on a scale of one to 4, where one is relatively weak and 4 is relatively strong. The overall score for each toolkit averages these out.

The Scottish Environmental Protection Agency’s horizon scanning

The Scottish Environmental Protection Agency’s (SEPA) horizon scanning toolkit is based around a 9-step approach to horizon scanning.

Stage	Steps
Building intelligence	Gathering, organising and sharing intelligence
Creating insight	Assessing, ranking and deepening insights
Delivering action	Determining the scope and locus for action, informing the institutional response, responding to issues identified in the scanning process.

Like the GO-Science Futures Toolkit, each step in the model is described in practical detail. The toolkit provides sample scans, worksheets, sample outputs and a scanning project planning flow chart.

The European Environment Agency’s Practical Guide to horizon scanning

This guide to horizon scanning has 4 steps.

Step	Activities
Signal spotting	Establish a focal issue and identify online and offline sources for exploration.
Signal scanning	Use a scanning framework to collect information and weak signals, then review and refine findings.
Sense making	Identify patterns and explore the long-term impacts and significance of signals.
Communication	Share findings through newsletters, surveys and workshops.

The UN Global Pulse Horizon Scan User Manual

This manual sets out a 5-step process.

Step 1: getting started

• determining the scanning frame: the key future learning questions
• understanding your scanning needs: what you aim to achieve with the scan and which policy or strategy-making process you are trying to influence
• establishing a diverse scanning team: to consist of a core organising team and a group of scanners. Scanners do not need previous experience
• organising how participants collect the data: ensure you have the logistics in place before you start
• focus on weak signals: identify weak signals and emerging issues that are likely to have an impact on the future

Step 2: scanning and collecting data

• scanning a wide variety of sources to look for developments that could potentially alter the future landscape
• consulting a balanced list of sources and resources to avoid biases
• having conversations with stakeholders to get their perspectives
• thinking outside the box and looking beyond traditional sources and perspectives

Step 3: interpretation and filtering

• assessing the quality of the inputs
• prioritising scans using a suitable framework such as the impact vs probability matrix

Step 4: sensemaking

• running a validation workshop to prioritise the scan findings, discuss the potential consequences of scans and consider if any relevant emerging issues are missing
• running a policy implications workshop to identify emerging needs and possible implications for policy making

Step 5: reporting

• providing a scanning hits report
• providing a drivers or trends report
• providing a future implications report

Australian Government Department of Industry’s practical guide to horizon scanning in the public sector

This guide, produced in 2014, notes that there is ‘no one size fits all’ approach to horizon scanning for public sector bodies, but that most processes have a variation of 5 to 6 basic steps.

Step	Description
Identify scanning needs	This involves finding the overall purpose of the scanning, participants in the process, and the time and resources available to it.
Participation	This offers the view that public sector scanning be developed by a small, dedicated team representing a wide range of expertise, drawn from different backgrounds in the public sector.
Collect	Scanners should look beyond the usual sources of information and consider emerging change drivers, trends, forces and developments, rather than focusing only on those that are already well understood and monitored by organisations.
Analyse	Value comes from reviewing scans, bringing related findings together to identify meaningful themes, and understanding what those themes mean for policy and strategy development.
Communicate	One of the challenges of horizon scanning is communicating findings effectively to the people who need to be aware of them.
Influence decisions	A critical issue for horizon scanning is ensuring access to decision making processes, both at the early stages and when final decisions are made. Securing management attention and action is often the most difficult challenge for any organisational horizon scanning system.

Assessment of the toolkits

Waverley’s assessment highlights the distinctive features of each toolkit and lists the strengths and weaknesses of each.

It’s worth emphasising that individual strengths and weaknesses do not all carry the same weight in the assessment. As such, the strength of the European Environment Agency toolkit that it “includes a fantastic piece of advice on what to look for: let the clicking take you to strange places” does not carry the same weight as the strength of the SEPA toolkit that sets out how to link scanning to policy planning and delivery.

The overall ranking is therefore a combination of the number of strengths and weaknesses and each one’s strategic weight.

The table summarises Waverley’s assessment of horizon scanning toolkits against a range of criteria, including their focus on horizon scanning, depth and detail, sophistication of ranking scans, links to policy and action, and usability.

Toolkit	Focus on horizon scanning	Depth and detail of the tools	Sophistication of ranking scans	Linking scanning outputs to policy and action	Clarity and usability
Horizon Scanning Toolkit (SEPA)	Very strong	Strong	Very strong	Very strong	Very strong
Horizon Scan User Manual (UN Global Pulse)	Very strong	Very strong	Strong	Moderate	Very strong
The GO Science Futures Toolkit	Strong	Moderate	Strong	Strong	Very strong
Practical Guide to Horizon Scanning (European Environment Agency)	Very strong	Very strong	Strong	Moderate	Moderate
Practical Guide to Horizon Scanning in the Public Sector (Australian Government Department of Industry)	Very strong	Strong	Moderate	Strong	Limited

Based on this, the ranking of the toolkits (from most to least suitable for BSR) is:

1. The Scottish Environmental Protection Agency’s Horizon Scanning Toolkit
2. The UN Global Pulse Horizon Scan User Manual
3. GO-Science’s Futures Toolkit
4. The European Environment Agency’s Practical Guide to Horizon Scanning
5. The Australian Government’s Practical guide to horizon scanning in the public sector

Review of futures toolkits

The Go-Science Futures Toolkit

The GO-Science Futures Toolkit provides a set of tools to help embed long-term strategic thinking within the policy process and explains how to ensure they have real impact. It is intended for policy officials and analysts across government.

It takes users through 12 different futures thinking tools, with advice on how to implement them. It also pulls the tools together into a number of pathways to meet specific objectives.

The ‘futures tools at a glance’ page provides a short definition of each tool and what it does, giving users an overview that helps them decide which tools to use.

Tools are ordered in 3 categories.

What is changing?

Futures tool	Description
Delphi	A structured questioning tool, used to gather opinion from a panel of subject matter experts by using multiple rounds of questionnaires.
7 Questions	A structured interview technique for gathering the strategic insights of a range of internal and external stakeholders.
Horizon Scanning	The systematic collection of insights on emerging trends and weak signals of change to identify potential threats, risks and opportunities.
3 Horizons	Helps you explore both the present and its limitations, and different potential futures.
Driver Mapping	Charts the trends and maps what you have found to see which are the most important for you to address.

So what for our futures?

Futures tool	Description
SWOT Analysis	Identifies the relevant strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats of a policy, issue or event.
Scenarios	Compelling stories about a range of different possible futures that helps people understand what it feels like to live there and what this will mean for you, your stakeholders and your policy or strategy.
Visioning	Can be used to create a positive common vision for the future, a set of common aims for a project and to describe what the future would be like if these aims were achieved.
Futures wheels	A structured brainstorming method that helps you identify and map connections, causalities and impacts.

Now what do we do?

Futures tool	Description
Policy stress testing	A method for testing policy, strategy or project options against a set of scenarios, trends or future events to see how well they stand up to a range of possible external conditions.
Roadmapping	Structured representations of the stages leading to a strategic goal or preferred future.
Backcasting	A tool for determining the steps that need to be taken to deliver a preferred future. It is a way of overcoming “present bias” in the way that we plan.

Each tool contains an overview of what it is used for and sets out detailed instructions on how to use it.

There is a resource bank that contains worksheets, examples and workshop facilitation templates. There is a case studies bank with examples of how each tool has been used in practice. These resources are all available on GOV.UK.

Save the Children’s The Future is Ours toolkit

The Future is Ours toolkit was developed as part of the strategic foresight programme at Save the Children UK. There are 12 tools, adjusted and refined to tailor them to the needs of Save the Children and partner organisations. The toolkit is engaging and easy to navigate and the tools can be easily adapted for others’ needs.

There is a very high overlap with the GO-Science Futures Toolkit, making this is a complementary resource that offers a slightly different perspective on the tools.

Foresight tools, Sitra

Sitra, the Finnish Innovation Fund, is an independent public foundation which operates directly under the supervision of the Finnish Parliament. Its vision is to create a fair, sustainable, and inspiring future that ensures people’s well-being within the limits of the earth’s carrying capacity.

Sitra produces long-term foresight data to support its vision and aims to support Finish society – decision makers, companies, communities and individuals – to engage with those data and prepare for the future.

Sitra publishes a range of studies and other information that anticipate future trends and that are designed to strengthen people’s thinking about the future and their ability to influence it.

The megatrends review gives an overview of the trends affecting the future to facilitate different ways of thinking about, discussing and influencing it. Megatrends 2023 – the latest edition – focusses on 5 themes: nature, people, power, technology and the economy and examines their future development from the perspective of Finland. The report also outlines different possible futures scenarios.

Sitra’s website also contains a growing, and largely hidden, number of interesting and well-presented tools to support futures thinking.

One example is the future makers toolbox, which sets out a range of tools for working with the megatrend cards, including:

• weak signals explorer
• getting to grips with a trend – a tool for using the megatrend cards
• first symptoms of change
• the insight and foresight zoo – a tool for taking a deep dive beneath the surface of individuals trends
• speculate on the future – what if some weak signals were mainstream

Sitra has also published ‘Futures Frequency’, a workshop method for building a vision of success. The method seeks the same outcome as more commonly used visioning exercises but involves a much stronger use of creative thinking tools, such as:

• short audio drama pieces
• writing headlines for news of the future
• building a backwards timeline as well as a forwards one

Danish Design Centre’s Living Futures toolkit

The Danish Design Center (DDC) is Denmark’s national centre for design. Its role is to promote the use of design in business and industry, help professionalise the design industry, and document, promote and brand Danish design in Denmark and abroad.

DDC’s Living Futures: Scenario Kit is a design tool for understanding, discussing, and shaping the future. It consists of 4 alternative versions of year 2050 explored through narrated stories from future citizens, themed analyses, and other media files, as well as a set of tools that help users explore the narratives. The kit is designed to be used to future proof business models, develop new strategies and understand and discuss important trends and developments in the present.

The scenarios are framed around 2 dimensions of uncertainty:

• distributed vs centralised holders of power
• societal vs market driven values and structure

The scenarios are presented as high level narratives and more detailed stories about 10 characters, ranging from Dominic (who works in manufacturing) through Hitomi (who leads production of welfare) to Rita (who lives with her family in a small community and works remotely as a surveyor). Their stories and experiences vary according to the different scenarios.

The website offers 3 pathways for using the scenarios in different situations. Each pathway gives users instructions for what to do before, during, and after visiting the futures.

Users can download methodologies and worksheets that guide them through discussions about:

• identifying new opportunities in the future
• testing current plans and strategies in a future windtunnel (the same technique as policy stress testing)
• discussing diverse perspectives on what future success could look like

Comparison of the toolkits

We have not carried out a comparative analysis of these toolkits for 2 reasons.

Firstly, BSR wishes to focus on horizon scanning rather than wider futures tools at present. Secondly, that GO Science’s Futures Toolkit is, we believe, the only sensible candidate for widening BSR’s futures work when it is ready to do so.

This belief is based on several factors. The Futures Toolkit is used by the vast majority of interviewees, and GO-Science runs an extensive training programme across government and the public sector based on the toolkit. As a result, it has become the main ‘lingua franca’ for futures thinking in the UK.

Having reviewed a number of toolkits, Waverley considers the Futures Toolkit to be the clearest and most well-resourced toolkit available. Its popularity in the public sector is not solely due to its ease of use and the resources that support it, but also its design focus on supporting futures thinking in the context of public policy development.

The Futures Toolkit is also highly regarded beyond the UK and by the private sector.

The role of data

Futures looks forward and recognises the possibility, even the likelihood, of fundamental change in the system itself. It steps out of the present, and present constraints, to consider a wide range of possible futures, their consequences and potential responses.

Data gathered in horizon scanning is largely qualitative. By definition, horizon scanning looks for weak signals of change rather than identifiable trends. These weak signals tend to be isolated events that are off most observers’ radar and are early indicators of how the future might develop.

This is in contrast with forecasting models which look at historical trends and, with various degrees of sophistication, attempt to project them forward. Key assumptions can often be flexed within these models to give a range of high, medium or low outcomes. But fundamentally the models are based on a fixed view of how the overall system operates, so their reliability starts to break down over the longer term as the world changes.

While scanning may include quantitative trends such as demographics, it is important to remember that, as one interviewee noted:

…evidence-based futures is a problem. We’re projecting forwards from historic data so the range of future possibility is subjective.

Models are approximations based on historic trends, not on future possibilities, discontinuities or systemic change.

The role of horizon scanning is to look for possible discontinuities and to provide early warning of that systemic change, which is why qualitative data analysis is central to the activity.