From Foresight to Action: How International Organisations Can Benefit from Anticipatory Planning

Imagine looking through binoculars and spotting smoke on the horizon. A fire is approaching, but it is unclear when or if it will reach you. Do you wait, or start preparing?

International organisations (IOs), many operating in Geneva, face similar challenges. From rapid AI adoption to geopolitical tensions, disruptive “fires” are putting the organisations’ operations and the future of international cooperation into question. Since IOs must manage more crises with fewer resources, they need to be prepared.

This blog argues that IOs need more than just strategic foresight, that is, spotting a fire through binoculars. They also need anticipatory planning, which refers to preparing to manage the fire.

Strategic foresight, the method of identifying and analysing possible disruptions, has gained prominence. Many international organisations now invest more heavily in foresight capabilities: establishing dedicated teams, running horizon scans, and fleshing out future scenarios. For example, the OECD’s Strategic Foresight Unit identifies global trends and developments. The United Nations, for its part, has made strengthening strategic foresight a cornerstone of its UN 2.0 initiative.

But foresight alone is not enough in times of increasing uncertainty. Many IOs do not struggle to generate insights about the future, but to act on them. Too often, decision-makers receive reports full of possible futures, but little advice on what actions to take today. As a result, foresight insights rarely influence today’s choices on investments, staffing, or strategy.

This is where anticipatory planning can make a difference.

Anticipatory planning refers to preparing proactive measures and concrete responses to future scenarios, forming a bridge between thinking about the future and acting on it today. This solves two limitations of foresight:

1. It makes foresight concrete. Strategic foresight often identifies broad issues such as “fragmented global governance.” Anticipatory planning translates them into concrete scenarios. What specific situation might result from this trend? How would it affect our agenda, field operations, or workforce? For instance, instead of broadly discussing “fragmented global governance,” an IO might confidentially explore a scenario where a specific country leaves the United Nations.
2. It links foresight to today’s decisions. The “tyranny of the now”, which is the tendency for people to focus on urgent issues rather than the future, often crowds out long-term planning and investments. Anticipatory planning can help overcome this problem by forcing organisations to determine what responses to potential futures could look like and what actions can be taken now. This approach enables decision-makers to reallocate funding, hire specific experts, or rethink existing strategies. For example, the United Nations works with states to anticipate areas susceptible to flooding and put critical infrastructure adaptations on their policy agenda.

What can IOs do to put anticipatory planning into practice?

A practical approach could follow three steps:

1. Prioritise key issues. Not every possible future is worth preparing for. IOs should assess foresight insights and prioritize scenarios based on their potential impact and probability. This helps focus resources where they matter most.
2. Prepare plans. For the highest-priority scenarios, develop detailed plans outlining who should do what, when, and how, if possible, with pre-agreed triggers and protocols. Even if the scenario never materialises, having relevant stakeholders think it through makes the organisation more resilient.
3. Integrate with decision-making. The real value of planning comes when it shapes decisions: how budgets are allocated, where staff are deployed, and how strategies are adjusted. This includes sharing foresight results with decision-makers at the right time while securing their ongoing support.

An example of effective anticipatory planning comes from Finland. Finnish authorities run joint simulations involving the immigration service, police, and border guards to test their response to a sudden influx of asylum seekers. These exercises exposed gaps in coordination, which were then addressed by revising the contingency plans. This has improved the country’s preparedness for migration challenges, preventing coordination gaps that would create costs for Finland and the migrants in a real crisis. While this example comes from a national context, it offers transferable lessons that IOs can adapt to their unique institutional realities.

In a world facing increasing volatility and disruption, anticipatory planning helps organisations mitigate risks and seize emerging opportunities. This approach is especially relevant for the international organisations in Geneva, where early action can shape global outcomes. An IO cannot foresee and plan for every future, but by preparing for a range of scenarios, it can act early and respond effectively when the flames reach its door.