A Letter from Professor Richard Slaughter

To Students and Alumni of the AFI

March 2005

Dear Friends and Colleagues,

I've recently been informed that Swinburne has decided to 'de-establish', ie, close down, the AFI after nearly six years of operation. The teaching program, however, will continue – at least for the time being.

The reasons for the closure have little or nothing to do with the way AFI was created and run or with its objective outcomes and achievements that are there for anyone to see. They are one result of a decision to re-orient the university under a new VC and, as part of that process, to re-structure the Higher Education Division. You might say that the AFI – as well as many of the immediate aspirations of its staff and students – have been sacrificed to this end.

From a non-AFI point of view the restructure makes some sense. It is arguably not a completely irrational act, but one that has been carefully considered, planned and executed by the university hierarchy for reasons of its own, and that only it can explain. In an age of so-called 'economic rationalism' such events are not unusual. Whether the results will bear the intended fruit will only become clear in hindsight. Meanwhile, it's clear that foresight, once seen as a distinctive feature of this university, and something the previous VC supported wholeheartedly, has been relegated to the sidelines and may not be a significant part of its future.

From an AFI point of view the decision to downgrade a small, but successful, institute to a mere teaching program is not necessarily a disaster, but it certainly poses a huge challenge to all concerned. Having proved its worth once and achieved international recognition, the clock is about to be re-set, by institutional edict, back close to zero.

How should we respond? Some will feel angry, abused and let down. Such responses are entirely understandable and should not be repressed or denied. Yet once these feelings have passed the question remains: how should we respond? Here are some broad suggestions. The details will emerge over time. The key point, however, is to act decisively in ways that are both integrally informed and in the 'highest best interests' of everyone.

1. Perhaps the first thing we might do is to affirm that the AFI has been an outstanding success, and something we all can continue to be proud of. The letters of support that came in from around the world clearly showed that our work is valued by many of the leading figures in the futures/foresight profession. This is a rare achievement.
2. The next question is: how can we build on this success? The fact that the university is no longer interested is of little relevance in a wider view. What matters here is that the work that we started at the AFI continues. To this end we can undertake a variety of strategies to build on the reputation and momentum that we have collectively created. I'll have more to say on this another time.
3. We need to support the teaching and ancilliary staff who are working to sustain the teaching program and to extend it (eg, by putting more units on line and by opening up the program to more international students).
4. The student and alumni group now have a major responsibility to put what they've learned to good use. In part this means seeking out the nexus between serving their own legitimate interests as foresight professionals and, at the same time, working to maintain and serve their professional community, both here and overseas.
5. I personally think that it's time to look around for models of how other professional groups have handled this kind of circumstance. In particular, we should be looking for successful models where professional groups have taken responsibility for the further development of their profession and created the kind of organisation that makes sense ethically and works on a pragmatic level in the still-developing market place for the kind of high quality applied foresight work that the name 'AFI' stands for and symbolises. If SUT has, by its own free choice, elected to throw away this unique branding then that translates into a fresh set of opportunities for other people in other places.

In time I think the decision to close the AFI will come to be seen as a serious mistake. It is a mistake for the university because such entities are not easy to come by. They are hard to create and, as a result, extremely rare. What they offer is something unique, something that lights up the otherwise drab and depressing functional landscape of academia and provides it with a sense of genuine social mission, of higher purpose. Its lack of heart, of spirit, pervades the mega-businesses that universities in Australia have now become. The university also loses because it chose to invest in an area that is only just coming into its own. Had it had the heart and the good sense to stay with it, sustain it and help to continue to build it, then I have no doubt that the benefits would have been huge. There are all-too-few places in the world, let alone Australia, where long term foresight work in the public interest is even on the agenda, let alone developed as it has been here. This social 'plus', and the benefits that go with it, have been squandered.

Whether this mistake is the end of AFI or a stimulus for new beginnings is, however, no longer the business of the university. It is really up to us – the Australian foresight community – to decide. I'm certainly here to support and take an active interest in what is decided. AFI is, or I should now say, was, 'my baby', as it were. It represents the very best that I could offer after spending many years immersed in this fascinating field. I am very happy with what we have achieved together.

Like so many changes, this one is painful. It hurts to be subjected to the cold equations of bureaucratic rationality. But let us not demonise those who, apparently, think that they, not we, are doing the right thing.

Let us take heart, understand that without some form of social foresight our civilisation may well collapse within a very few generations. Let us take this signal that, while not everyone is convinced of the value of foresight, part of the burden of being 'advanced practitioners' is that we are better equipped than many to deal with the multiple contradictions of our day, even when they are dressed up in the language of innovation and improvement.

Richard.

Brisbane

March 2005