We produce reports and briefings, and commission short pieces or provocations to stimulate debate, enable people to air their opinions and suggest solutions.
We also produce a newsletter for interested people worldwide, bringing together our latest work and providing wider information and international examples.
In order to influence ongoing decision-making, FDSD produces submissions and letters in response to national and international consultations, and raises issues directly, either by ourselves or with partners. We also produce event summaries of some of our most important activities.
Found 72 Results
FDSD submitted a response to Sarah Boyack MSP on the proposed Wellbeing and Sustainable Development (Scotland) Bill. We highlighted the importance of adopting a long-term perspective in policymaking to ensure the wellbeing of current and future generations.
FDSD made a collective submission to the Labour Policy Forum on 17 March 2023 together with Involve, Demos, the Sortition Foundation, IsWe and Shared Future. In it we argued that since our current democracy is failing to tackle the big challenges of our time, we need to engage many more people from different backgrounds in all aspects of our political and policy decision-making
This briefing paper explores a range of tensions between existing liberal democracies and sustainable development, whose recognition, negotiation and potential resolution, may better enable long-lasting and beneficial solutions to be developed and implemented.
Regional disparities have haunted policy makers in the UK for generations – regional economic agencies have come and gone, motorways were built to reconnect economic centres, subsidies were tried and then more market forces. But, as we emerge from the pandemic, ‘levelling up’ has come to be ‘the defining mission of this government’, according to Michael Gove. In this provocation, John Lotherington questions the leveling up strategy.
As we move ever closer to 2030 – the arbitrary endpoint for the collectively agreed UN Sustainable Development Goals – and in a year when the commitments of the climate negotiations at the 2021 UN Climate Change Conference, COP26 will need to be further strengthened, we do not have the luxury to stay in our comfort zones, or just comment from the side-lines. Agreeing and negotiating how we go forward, in a fair way, will be tough. It requires us to roll up our sleeves, banish any presumption of easy ‘win-wins’, and engage with people with whom we may not easily get on.
If the recent COP26 tells us anything, it’s that different ways of making hard decisions about our shared futures are needed. Too often critical decisions are made through last minute compromises, hammered out amongst small groups of negotiators behind closed doors, with the voices of those who are most vulnerable to the ravages of the climate crisis excluded.
The Wellbeing for Future Generations (Wales) Act became law in 2015. It is now 6 years since the Act became law and we are entering a critical period with transition from key leaders, local authority elections and with enough time passed to judge whether the Act has actually made any difference to how Wales is governed – although not enough to see whether it has made a difference for future generations. So, has the Act achieved what we hoped for Wales?
In 2008, Sara Parkin wrote a ‘provocation’ for the Foundation for Democracy and Sustainable Development: “Are Political Parties getting in the way of the sort of collaborative democracy we need to tackle sustainability? If so, what can we do about it?” Ten years later, she revisits her thinking "in the light", she says "of the corruption of our current democratic systems".
FDSD sees the ongoing review of House of Lords committees as an opportunity to try to strengthen long-term thinking in the UK Parliament. Backed by more than 30 peers, we are proposing a new Committee for Future Generations in the second chamber.
FDSD responded to the consultation by the Office of National Statistics (ONS) on their proposed approach to measuring and reporting on the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) within the UK.
In response to the provocations by Peter Davies and Sándor Fülöp at the FDSD event 'A Future Generations Commissioner for the UK', Andrea Westall argues that we need to think beyond institutions in isolation. While Commissioners may have an important role to play, we need to be creative in developing governance structures that promote long-term thinking at all levels.
In this provocation, Peter Davies offers personal reflections on his role in the development of the Future Generations Commissioner for Wales within the broader story of the journey of devolution – a journey that started with the duty to promote sustainable development in the initial Government of Wales Act. His role in this story begins in 2006 when he was appointed to the UK Sustainable Development Commission as Commissioner for Wales.
The imminent ecological crises and our consumer society's lack of receptivity to this bad news mean that an independent, authentic voice is needed to represent the interests of future generations. In this provocation, Sándor Fülöp draws on his experience as Hungarian Ombudsman to explain the necessity and powers of a future generations organisation.
Does the United Kingdom need a Commissioner for Future Generations? What would that role look like and how could we set it up? Participants at an event in April 2017, hosted by FDSD in in partnership with the Centre for the Understanding of Sustainable Prosperity and the Centre for the Study of Democracy suggest there is room for an ombudsman-type role to represent the interests of unborn generations, and identify three possible roads towards it.
In response to the provocations by Peter Davies and Sándor Fülöp at the FDSD event ‘A Future Generations Commissioner for the UK‘, Victor Anderson reminds us that there are a variety of approaches to safeguarding the interests of future generations. Our focus can be on any of the three different traditional branches of government in the UK: the executive, legislature, and judiciary.
The theme of the Budapest Water Summit 2016 was that Water Connects across all of sustainable development and across geographies. But to ensure against future conflict and scarcity, the messages and recommendations from the event also highlighted how we need to rethink and create governance models within and across countries.
It is increasingly argued that involving stakeholders and the wider public in planning and decision making leads to more effective environmental governance. But the impact of such participatory planning in practice remains unclear. In this report, the authors compare the impact of different approaches to participatory planning under the European Water Framework Directive (WFD) using […]
The economy is an area of decision-making fiercely protected by experts and politicians from public participation. But public confidence in this closed policy community is waning and arguments for democratic participation in an area that so profoundly shapes all our lives are growing. Against this backdrop, the Royal Society of Arts (RSA) has launched an exciting project in 2016: the Citizens’ Economic Council (CEC). T
In September 2016, we responded to the Environmental Audit Committee’s inquiry: The sustainable development goals in the UK. You can find our submission on the EAC website. We argued that currently Whitehall is not publicly stating, acknowledging or realising the potential of the SDGs to address the UK’s future and current challenges. The EU Referendum […]
Charlotte Burns and Viviane Gravey argue that the EU Referendum debate in the UK has been "surprisingly quiet on the issue of the environment". They look at three options for the UK from the point of view of their impacts on participatory democracy, as well as point to the tension between participation and stable long term rules for environmental protection.
They believe that the terms of the current debate are far too narrow. "National sovereignty is essentially a red herring that offers little in the way of genuine democratisation of environmental (or any other) policy area."
John Lotherington reflects on the ongoing debate about the impact of the community-led flood defences in Pickering after the town was sparred the flooding that hit large parts of northern England in late 2015.
Bronwyn Hayward argues that despite the New Zealand Government's attempts to reduce democracy after the 2010-2012 earthquakes, by suspending the Constitution and excluding local voices in decision-making, innovative citizen actions showed alternative, more imaginative and democratic responses to disaster recovery. One example is the Student Volunteer 'Army' who cleared mud and silt, and organised through Facebook.
Akiko Nanami argues that after the Fukushima tragedy, many women defied cultural expectations to protect their children, creating a women's collective movement through social media, the internet, workshops and petitions
Lori Peek draws on her work following Hurricane Katrina in 2005 where she interviewed disaster-affected children and youth across the United States. She found: "that by helping others, children and youth are able to contribute to their own recovery, as well as the recovery of those around them."
Marion Walker draws on research into the 2007 UK floods to argue that "by understanding their perspectives and capacities" children and young people "could inform more effective policy, enhance resilience and reduce the impact of future emergencies."
This report summarises and updates the analysis and practical implications of previous FDSD work on the The Future of Democracy in the Face of Climate Change. It investigates the links between democracy and climate change, as well as the drivers of change that might impact on that relationship over time. The result of that analysis is a series of […]
This report suggests that deliberative democracy is a collaborative and effective way to develop the concerted, ambitious and creative action needed to respond to climate change. Drawing on the work of Alberta Climate Dialogue (ABCD) in organizing mini-publics, it argues, however, that in order to achieve these aims, deliberative approaches need to adopt the tools of system design and thinking to enable people to better understand complex problems and implement action through experimentation and learning.
Simon Burall argues that in relation to climate change, "the public debate is almost exclusively framed in scientific terms". In order to "take the comprehensive action needed" government needs to recognise other forms of evidence and give them equal weight, particularly since technical arguments from science and economics cannot resolve complex trade-offs between communities; investment and mitigation, and different visions of the future. Simon believes, that by taking this necessary approach, "the business of government" will have to be done very differently.
Cat Tully argues that two elements of SDG 16: "responsive, inclusive, participatory and representative decision-making" as well as "effective, accountable and inclusive institutions" are essential for the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals.
There is an opportunity now for the Government to learn from the comprehensive Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act and establish an early form of a Future Generations Commissioner for the whole UK by October’s Budget. The danger is that in the forthcoming spending cuts, short-term decisions will be made to the detriment of the long-term and future generations. If we want a political system that is open and engaged with citizens, and is future-focused and strategic, we can learn a lot by looking outside London.
