Whose future?: Epistemic challenges to the collective ‘we’ in long-term governance

Martin Böhnert

doi:10.14512/tatup.7205

Authors

Martin Böhnert Institute of Philosophy, University of Kassel, Kassel (DE) https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4533-6857 m.boehnert@uni-kassel.de

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.14512/tatup.7205

Keywords:

future making, diversifying futures, epistemic plurality, knowledge and power, thought styles

Abstract

Building on insights from Science & Technology Studies and epistemology, this article critically examines the epistemic underpinnings of long-term governance (LTG), particularly its implicit assumptions about temporality, collective agency, and the perception of issues that shape governance practices. I identify three key challenges: (i) the tendency to conceive of futures as discrete endpoints rather than relational processes, (ii) the epistemic and political implications of an anticipatory ‘we’ that privileges dominant narratives while marginalizing others, and (iii) the largely unconsidered epistemic structures that implicitly determine what is perceived as imaginable futures. Addressing these challenges, I conclude by considering whether alternative conceptual frameworks that foreground contextuality and plurality might offer a more differentiated approach to LTG.

References

Appadurai, Arjun (1996): Modernity at large. Cultural dimensions of globalization. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.

Appadurai, Arjun (2013): The future as cultural fact. Essays on the global condition. London: Verso.

Barad, Karen (2019): After the end of the world. Entangled nuclear colonialisms, matters of force, and the material force of justice. In: Theory & Event 22 (3), pp. 524–550.

Felt, Ulrike (2016): Of timescapes and knowledgescapes. Re-timing research and higher education. In: Peter Scott, Jim Gallacher and Gareth Parry (eds.): New languages and landscapes of higher education. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 129–148. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198787082.003.0006

Fleck, Ludwik (1980): Entstehung und Entwicklung einer wissenschaftlichen Tatsache. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.

Ford, James et al. (2016): Including indigenous knowledge and experience in IPCC assessment reports. In: Nature Climate Change 6 (4), pp. 349–353. https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2954

Gross, Lawrence (2014): Anishinaabe ways of knowing and being. Farnham: Ashgate.

Grunwald, Armin (2012): Technikzukünfte als Medium von Zukunftsdebatten und Technikgestaltung. Karlsruhe: KIT Scientific Publishing.

Hajer, Maarten; Pelzer, Peter (2018): 2050—An energetic odyssey. Understanding ‘Techniques of Futuring’ in the transition towards renewable energy. In: Energy Research & Social Science 44, pp. 222–231. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2018.01.013

Haraway, Donna (1988): Situated knowledges. The science question in feminism and the privilege of partial perspective. In: Feminist Studies 14 (3), pp. 575–599. https://doi.org/10.2307/3178066

Harding, Sandra (1995): ‘Strong objectivity’. A response to the new objectivity question. In: Synthese 104 (3), pp. 331–349. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01064504

Jasanoff, Sheila (2016): The ethics of invention. Technology and the human future. New York, NY: W. W. Norton & Company.

Klepp, Silja (2018): Framing climate change adaption from a pacific island perspective. The anthropology of emerging legal orders. In: Sociologus 68 (2), pp. 149–170. https://doi.org/10.3790/soc.68.2.149

Koselleck, Reinhart (2003): Zeitschichten. Studien zur Historik. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.

Macnaghten, Phil (2010): Researching technoscientific concerns in the making. Narrative structures, public responses, and emerging nanotechnologies. In: Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space 42 (1), pp. 23–37. https://doi.org/10.1068/a41349

McCray, William (2017): Futures perfect and visioneering. A re-assessment. In: NanoEthics 11 (2), pp. 203–207. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11569-017-0303-8

Mische, Ann (2009): Projects and possibilities. Researching futures in action. In: Sociological Forum 24 (3), pp. 694–704. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1573-7861.2009.01127.x

Mustonen, Tero et al. (eds.) (2021): 2021 compendium of indigenous knowledge and local knowledge. Towards inclusion of indigenous knowledge and local knowledge in global reports on climate change. Kontiolahti: Snowchange. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.14498.76485

Nordblad, Julia (2021): On the difference between anthropocene and climate change temporalities. In: Critical Inquiry 47 (2), pp. 328–348. https://doi.org/10.1086/712123

Ojanen, Atte (2025): Comparative analysis of long-term governance problems. Risks of climate change and artificial intelligence. In: Futures & Foresight Science 7 (1). https://doi.org/10.1002/ffo2.203

Oomen, Jeroen; Hoffman, Jesse; Hajer, Maarten (2022): Techniques of futuring. On how imagined futures become socially performative. In: European Journal of Social Theory 25 (2), pp. 252–270. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368431020988826

Orlove, Ben et al. (2023): Placing diverse knowledge systems at the core of transformative climate research. In: Ambio 52 (9), pp. 1431–1447. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-023-01857-w

Sand, Martin (2019): On ‘not having a future’. In: Futures 107, pp. 98–106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2019.01.002

Scheer, Dirk et al. (2025): No easy way out. Towards a framework concept of long-term governance. In: Energy, Sustainability and Society 15 (9), pp. 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13705-025-00513-3

Spivak, Gayatri (1988): Can the subaltern speak? In: Cary Nelson and Lawrence Grossberg (eds.): Marxism and the interpretation of culture. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press, pp. 271–313.

Sprinz, Detlef (2009): Long-term environmental policy. Definition, knowledge, future research. In: Global Environmental Politics 9 (3), pp. 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1162/glep.2009.9.3.1

Swyngedouw, Erik (2010): Apocalypse forever? Post-political populism and the spectre of climate change. In: Theory, Culture & Society 27 (2-3), pp. 213–232. https://doi.org/10.1177/0263276409358728

Tsing, Anna (2015): The mushroom at the end of the world. On the possibility of life in capitalist ruins. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Tutton, Richard (2017): Wicked futures. Meaning, matter and the sociology of the future. In: The Sociological Review 65 (3), pp. 478–492. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-954X.12443

Vergès, Françoise (2017): Racial capitalocene. In: Gaye Theresa Johnson and Alex Lubin (eds.): Futures of Black Radicalism. London: Verso, pp. 72–82.

van Assche, Kristof; Verschraegen, Gert; Gruezmacher, Monica (2021): Strategy for collectives and common goods. Coordinating strategy, long-term perspectives and policy domains in governance. In: Futures 128, p. 102716. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2021.102716

Warren, Karen (1990): The power and promise of ecological feminism. In: Environmental Ethics 12 (2), pp. 125–146. https://doi.org/10.5840/enviroethics199012221

Wood, Dan; Doan, Alesha (2003): The politics of problem definition. Applying and testing threshold models. In: American Journal of Political Science 47 (4), pp. 640–653. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-5907.00045