Finland Scenarios 2035: Navigating Four Future Paths

In 2017, the Finnish National Agency for Education's Future Skills Anticipation Forum conducted an extensive Delphi panel of over 300 experts, based on whose arguments four Finland scenarios extending to 2035 were created: Inner-Finland, Power-Finland, Environment-Finland, and City-Finland. This document summarizes and updates the scenarios to the situation seven years later. In the summary, generative artificial intelligence is used to help rename the scenarios to be simpler and clearer than the originals.

The original future manuscripts have been described in their own publication (OEF scenarios 2035) and have evolved gradually through the Delphi process. The scenarios do not compete with each other; each has its role in pluralizing the future. Each scenario can be evaluated regarding the extent and distance along the different scenario paths traveled. The aim is to understand how the decisions and actions of the past seven years and the present have been influencing which paths and what futures have been pursued in recent years.

Inner-Finland: The Nordic Fortress

Global instability and the slowdown of globalization led to an inward-turning Finland in the 2030s. Immigration pressures and security threats guided decisions, and people favored familiar and safe solutions. The EU weakened, and protectionism increased. Finland also closed its borders and strengthened its defense. The nation managed to maintain its independent status and reasonable stability, but in seeking security, the nation has fallen behind comparator countries in economic indicators.

Dall-E's vision of Inner-Finland under a yellow sunset, which could also be called Safe-Finland. Connections to the world decreased and own institutions strengthened, except in the economy, where Finland has become a branch office economy.

Global Trends

The 2020s started globally with a slowdown of globalization and progress in combating climate change. Despite the advancement in climate change discussions, the world still struggled with population issues, uneven distribution of resources, and social tensions. The imbalance led to mass migrations and deepened the gap between different regions, thereby increasing global development disparities and insecurity.

Situation in Finland

Like the rest of the world, Finland experienced the consequences of technological change and political tensions. However, unlike many other countries, Finland held on to its traditional institutions and inward-facing political direction. As globalization slowed and the EU's influence weakened, Finland maintained its status as a sovereign nation-state, focusing more on the security and well-being of its own citizens.

Social Changes

In the scenario, Finland responded to the challenges of the time cautiously, deliberately, and defensively. Immigration pressures and security threats guided social choices, where the sense of security gained importance. Due to the unstable environment, people leaned towards choosing familiar and safe solutions, which was also reflected in the structures of the economy and business dynamics. Businesses were divided into two: globally operating large companies and local small businesses focused on surviving in a changing world through the means of resisting changes.

Development of Business and Education

Changes in the business world led to a reduction in the role of the public sector, while the private sector, especially large international companies, strengthened their positions. The development was paradoxical, as Finland, at the same time, closed its doors to immigration. In education, the focus shifted to vocational and higher-level skills development, but the former institutions and educational systems still maintained their roles in training the future workforce.

Along a Renewing Path

The development of Finland in the 2020s and 2030s progressed along a renewing path, meaning that changes occurred mostly within the framework of established operational models. Towards the end of the period, there was increased pressure to change social structures, leading to the beginning of a transformation phase. This change was not rapid, but it still caused tensions for societal cohesion and economic dynamics. The development led to a thinning of democratic institutions towards majority rule.

Future Prospects

The "Inner-Finland" scenario does not offer bold or radical solutions, but aims to maintain conservative stability in a changing world. The development of Finland is seen as an adaptation, where the country's success and survival are based more on cautious decisions and adherence to established practices than on innovative leadership or innovations. In this scenario, Finland succeeds best in maintaining social cohesion and economic stability, although it continuously lags behind comparators with greater development dynamics.

Scenario Evaluation Update

The yellow scenario is the future that is to be avoided. Yet, recent years' developments show trend-like features leading to the blue path. Development trends are global, but opportunities for influence are local. Concentration and population movement megatrends shape the socio-technological-economic environment in a way that increases unrest. Visions promising a return to better control are in growing demand.

The first seven years of the scenario have been navigated towards the Power-Finland path, but continuously forced to recognize that circumstances twist towards the yellow path. It doesn't help that half of the actors seek a better and faster path from the “east” and the other half from the “west”.

Power-Finland: Soft Capitalism

The EU's integration deepened towards a federation in the 30s, favoring Finland. Finland flourished through economic reforms and gradually developed Nordic alliance. The evolution of technology and climate change shaped society and economy, characterized by Finland emerging as a pioneer in sustainable development. Despite its soft features, the society's central driver is the market economy and competition.

Description of blue, energetically dynamic Power-Finland enjoying the EU markets as part of the potent North

European Union's Transformation

During the 2020s, the European Union underwent significant adversities, reshaping its political and economic landscape profoundly. The turmoil caused by populist movements and Brexit generated counterforces, but failed to halt the deepening of EU integration. The decision made in 2026 to transition towards a political and defensive federation, over a ten-year period, marked a milestone in the union's history. Although the Commission's power increased, narrowing the democratic space, economic strengthening followed, albeit not evenly across all member states. This development led to a permanent division: EU's core states and peripheral regions, especially Eastern Europe, were left on the fringe.

The Decade of Change

Finland's fate was different. In 2024, the economy dipped, but the country responded by reforming its labor market mechanisms in the "spirit of the Winter War." Finland not only survived but rose among the EU's successes, strengthening its position through the Nordic Union, which began from inter-capital cooperation. By 2035, the distinction between industry and service sectors had vanished; trade was conducted with services providing holistic lifecycle-based solutions. Finland's success leaned on service exports, and the strong belief in the market economy displaced the public sector almost entirely as a service provider.

Technology and Economy

Technological development, especially in the ICT sector, has unexpectedly reshaped society. The efficiency of production, services, and applications doubled in 15 years, and digitalization became commonplace. Finland capitalized on global warming as an agricultural boom, while southern Europe suffered from drought. The Nordic brand rises among the top ten globally recognized, and Finland profiles as a producer of high-quality agricultural products.

Social Changes

While "big democracy" has distanced itself with federalization, local identity communities have strengthened, bringing community values and combating oligarchization. The workplace emphasizes interaction and low hierarchy, and the education system has adapted to the need for buying specialized training for workers.

Repositioning and Sustainable Development

Through technology and innovations, Finland navigates towards a more sustainable future. Society leverages renewable energy, and Finnish companies are at the forefront of sustainable development solutions. This shift is not only environmental but also economic, opening new markets and business opportunities.

The years 2020-2035 depicted a time when Finland and the European Union faced significant challenges but also adapted and thrived in a changing world. The EU's political landscape evolved towards a closer federation, while Finland found success by strengthening local communities, utilizing technological progress, and embracing principles of sustainable development. This era demonstrated how crises can lead to innovation and new growth if approached with flexibility and adaptability.

Scenario Evaluation Update

The blue scenario was chosen as the desired future during the OEF process de facto. The programs of the last three governments align with it, even though there are significant differences in the programs of the Sipilä, Marin, and Orpo administrations.

The path of Power-Finland has been winding, and there has been little significant progress in the last 10-15 years if key national economy indicators are used as measures. Growth and productivity have consistently fallen behind other Nordic countries. If the comparison is made with the rest of Europe, the situation does not look as bad.

Environment-Finland: Ecology before Economy

As the world grapples with climate change and its induced crises, Finland emerged as a leader in ecological innovation. In Finland, ecology was elevated alongside - and even beyond - the economy to guide decision-making. Compelled by necessity, a reorganized UN and a new world order based on sustainable economy laid the foundation for a more just and sustainable humanity and planet.

Dall-E's interpretation of a vibrant green Environment-Finland, which, as part of the new world order, models the best solutions for sustainable development.

Global Challenges

The years 2020-2035 are remembered as a time when climate change exacerbated global challenges in an unprecedented manner. The transformation of the Horn of Africa into uninhabitable desert triggered refugee flows towards Europe, leading to unbearable pressures especially on the borders of Southern Europe. Ghettos formed at the borders became hotbeds of terrorism and fundamentalism, challenging human rights perceptions and political structures. The impacts of climate change were not limited to ecological disasters but caused widespread social and economic instability globally.

Finland's Position

Finland faced its own challenges, such as frequently changing governments and societal imbalance, but also benefited from its northern location. As global interdependence increased and technology advanced, Finland adopted the role of a forerunner in ecological and economic innovation. Embracing the core idea of the circular economy – turning waste back into usable material – and using technology to implement the circular economy elevated Finland to a model country for sustainable development.

UN's Reassessment

As global problems intensified, it became apparent that national institutions alone could not respond to them. The answer was found in a reassessed and reorganized United Nations, which experienced a renaissance as a tool of global governance. The UN's dual strategy, which dealt with acute regional disasters on one path and included a long-term environmental program on the other, began to take effect in the 2030s, instilling hope in managing global crises.

New Economic Order

Environment-Finland is built on the idea that ecological sustainability and economic prosperity can support each other. Contrary to the past, ecology sets the terms for the economy, not vice versa. The circular economy and technology combine to create a sustainable economic model, where resource use is systematically reduced. Advances in digitalization and artificial intelligence enable new work and lifestyle models, and social innovations, such as a universal basic income, lay the groundwork for a more inclusive and flexible society.

Towards a More Sustainable World

By the 2030s, Finland and the world have traveled a long way towards a sustainable future. Although challenges remain large, the new order – based on ecological values, technology utilization, and global cooperation – has laid the groundwork for humanity to build a significantly more sustainable and just world. The Environment-Finland scenario offers a vision of how we can navigate through catastrophes and challenges towards a common good, keeping in mind the well-being of both humanity and the planet.

Scenario Evaluation Update

Regarding the green scenario, it is evident that environmental threats are recognized and responded to with programs and agreements. However, the environmental path has been followed only sporadically before shifting focus back to more immediate threats. Large fossil industry interests and growing political counter-movements have diverted attention elsewhere. Climate change drives populations to move, but migration is identified as the problem and is reacted to accordingly. In terms of future studies, politics is more reactive and responsive rather than proactive.

City-Finland: Local Global Networks

The world, along with Finland, has moved towards a future organized locally, where cities and regions form independent partnership networks. Technology, education, and business have created community-based societies and economies, based on local decision-making and coordinated network collaboration. The concept is reminiscent of the Ancient city-states, but the novelty lies in connecting with other areas, some of which may be on the other side of the globe. Local governance is based on participatory and partly direct democracy, network collaboration fosters creative cultural and economic exchange, and the resulting multilateral benefits.

Dall-E's interpretation of a radical red City-Finland, where the world is organized from the bottom up through local areas, urban communities, and global networks.

New Era of City-States

By 2035, national states have lost some of their sovereignty in favor of cities and regions. Technological advancement, particularly in digitization and automation, has enabled the decentralization of production and the strengthening of local production. Regional autonomy has increased, bringing with it a new wave of democracy strengthening: people once again feel participatory and influential in their communities. The states and state unions have been left with only the stripped but essential tasks of market freedom and security.

Networked Regions

Although the role of nation-states has weakened, globalization has not disappeared – it has merely changed its form. Networks between cities and regions have formed a new model of global connectivity. These networks are not limited by geographical or political boundaries but are based on common interests, such as sustainable development, technology sharing, and intercultural interaction. Regional alliances have laid the foundation for international cooperation and new economic opportunities.

New Wave of Technology and Economy

Technology has been key in enabling localization. The sharing economy, platform economy, and digitalization have redefined the concepts of production, consumption, and work. New generations no longer value ownership in the same way as previous ones; instead, they value access to services and resources. This has led to the disintegration of traditional employment relationships and the rise of self-employed individuals and freelancers.

The strengthening of local production has reduced dependency on global supply chains, increasing the resilience of regions during economic and environmental crises. However, the global economy remains an essential part of the world order, and economic cooperation between regions is necessary for achieving sustainable development. Regions and cities must find ways to combine local strengths with global markets and innovations.

As artificial intelligence, robotics, and automation advance, people face new moral and ethical questions. Technology offers immense opportunities to improve the quality of life, but it also creates risks such as loss of privacy, job elimination, and diminished human autonomy. The education system adapted to new technology, economy, and social structure. Job titles lost their significance, and learning occurred naturally in various life situations. Machine companions handled work as slaves did in Ancient city-states.

Transhumanism and the Paradigm Shift

The cultural atmosphere in 2035 reflects a broader social change. At the crossroads of globalization and localization, cultures have diversified and localized. People maintain and uphold local traditions and identities while being open to global influences and cooperation. Diversity is enhanced by the strengthening human alliance with machines.

The boundaries between technology and biology began to blur, and humans reached beyond their physical and psychological limits. Transhumanism, the idea of enhancing humans through technology and science, gained a foothold, although it also raised ethical questions and sparked social debate. The new era challenged traditional notions of egoism, ownership, and community. People began to see themselves and their communities as part of a larger whole, leading to a deeper understanding and cooperation both locally and globally.

The scenario is both a challenge and an opportunity: it offers a new way of thinking and living but also requires adaptation and a new type of responsibility. By 2035, Finland and the rest of the world have entered an era that transcends traditional boundaries and creates new types of communities, economies, and human roles in the world. Societies actively seek a balance between local autonomy and global cooperation. Sustainable development principles guide economic activity, and intercultural dialogue promotes peace and understanding. In the future world, the ability of humans, machines, and communities to adapt, innovate, and collaborate will determine how well we can meet upcoming challenges and capitalize on the opportunities offered by a changing world.

Scenario Evaluation Update

The glaringly red City-Finland is only seen as a twinkle in the eye of the world's creator. A weak signal is the increasing similarity among urban metropolises around the globe. Most have similar Red Hills and Otaniemi areas, where creative cultures thrive in similar ways in English, so you hardly notice any differences other than the time zones. Cities take cues from each other and copy their ideas without regulation and agreements. However, the city path is still in its early planning and zoning phase, far from implementation. On the other hand, the scenario will never come to fruition through regulations and agreements; it develops and self-organizes from patterns and attractions.

Relationships between Scenarios

The Finland scenarios can be classified along two dimensions. At one end of the policy spectrum is the Business as Usual (BAU scenario), which aims to keep the situation as similar as possible to the current one. This doesn't mean that change should not occur, but rather that the change should not extend to societal or economic structures and institutions. At the opposite end is a significant change tendency compared to the starting situation (change scenario), where changes also reach into social and economic structural elements. On the other dimension, the divider is the systemic environmental relationship, which naturally also holds its political significance. On one end of the environmental spectrum is an adaptive (cautious) relationship with the ecological and social environment, and at the other end is a transformative (radical) relationship. In futurist language, one might speak of an axis between reactivity and proactivity.

The Quadrant of Scenarios classified according to policymaking (as usual versus change) and environmental relation (adaptive versus transformative).

Among the scenarios, Inner-Finland and Environment-Finland are fundamentally community-based, while Power-Finland and City-Finland emphasize more individuality, although the latter also has an ethos to combine both motivating factors. If the future is viewed in terms of organizational psychologist Adam Grant's terms and classifications - takers, givers, matchers - then there are differences among the scenarios in how much space is available for each type. In BAU scenarios, the taker role is important as an energy or structure bringer. However, they differ in how taking occurs. In Power-Finland, it is allowed as a motive for individual action, while in Inner-Finland, taking and “selfishness” are outsourced to interest groups. In Environment-Finland, the giver role is emphasized to balance humanity with the planet's resource consumption. The crisis path also requires strong leadership and coordination, which is most characteristic of the City-Finland scenario.

As people can three-dimensionalize time into the past, present, and future, their history develops as a continuous process of change, the interpretation of which changes as the distance to the event increases. Interpretations can also coexist, similar to scenarios where different events and motives emerge. In this respect, the difference between the past and the future can sometimes be less than imagined. Of course, past events do not change from a new interpretation. The future, in this regard, is more malleable. Two scenarios depict “twisting” future-making, which is characterized by a strong human influence. In the Power scenario, the impact maintains structures, and in the City scenario, governance and institutions are broken. Adaptive scenarios are by nature either adapting to the environment or making adaptations. In the Inner-Finland scenario, there is primarily a reaction to the social environment, and in the Environment scenario, there is an aim for balance with the natural environment.

The last wave of modern times was dominated by industrial economy. The new era is defined by information and service economy, as prophesied by Pentti Malaska at the turn of the millennia: “Sooner or later, the production mode that gives rationality to society will be more service-oriented than industrial. While the industrial economy built roads, bridges, railways, airports, and ports to move goods quickly, safely, and cheaply from one place to another, the service economy needs networks, information highways, intranets and internets, servers, stations, and programs forming the infrastructure of the information society.” Information must travel securely and quickly, electronically packed from one machine to other machines, and also from one person to another cheaper than by industrial economy’s means, “packed in flesh.” Malaska's vision has come true, and now we watch from either the stands or the field what happens next.

All scenarios include renewal and changes in the technological and social infrastructure. The difference lies in the extent to which renewal is accompanied by reform, where changes are so radical that “the logic and operating system of the age” change. The new infrastructure creates opportunities for producing and exploiting new types of services. In physics, a phase change is the transformation of matter from solid to liquid or from liquid to gas. According to the laws of physics, ice becomes water and water becomes gas as environmental conditions change. A fitting metaphor for social changes is the epidemiology of epidemics. The mathematics of the spread of diseases is the same in nature as in the virtual world. If an infected being spreads the disease on average to more than one new victim, an epidemic starts and spreads. Otherwise, it dwindles and dies out. Ideas, memes, viruses, and epidemics spread according to the same logic. At some point in their course, there is a tipping point that decides whether we return to a simple daily order or whether the government changes, water turns to ice, or whether Corona becomes an epidemic. Or if we transition to a new network logic or cling to the old industrial rationality.

The roots of disruption are always both in the change of the operating environment and in the changing of guiding ideas. Only after these events can the old way of seeing dissipate into the air like gas. A new mental “operating system” pushes the old one aside. Change scenarios dismantle and reorganize matrix-like institutional structures based on hierarchy and specialization into networks, webs, and clusters. The change is much more unnoticeable in BAU scenarios, where it is more about trend-like fluctuations of concentrations than dramatic shifts from one era to another. The future remains open to all four future scripts and their combinations, where different ideas struggle against each other. The new twisting factor is generative artificial intelligence, which in 2017 was a hazy view but still very abstract. In this respect, the view has cleared, and for more and more people, AI is seen as the gamechanger of the coming years.

Links

• eDelphi Panel Finland Scenarios 2035 https://www.edelphi.org/finland-scenarios-2035 (open)

• xDelphi Panel Finland Scenarios 2035