Thank you for initiating this important discussion. To facilitate this discussion, I would like to share some reflections.
Today’s world faces unprecedented challenges of climate change, food security, environmental sustainability, and increasing fragility due to conflicts and related crises. Agricultural development programs operate amid a backdrop of volatility, uncertainty, complexity, and ambiguity.
Traditionally, evaluation function has focused predominantly on retrospective accountability, measuring past performance against predetermined plans, objectives and targets. While valuable, this approach, in today’s rapidly changing context, often doesn’t result in valuable insights and clear, impactful messages. Evaluations that assess relevance, effectiveness, and sustainability based on the conditions at the time of design can produce accurate reflections of past actions but offer limited guidance for future decision-making.
When evaluation processes rely solely on historical benchmarks, they risk overlooking emerging trends and future challenges. For example, a program designed to improve crop yields based on a specific climate scenario may become less relevant if climate patterns shift unexpectedly. Similarly, a project assessed as sustainable under current conditions might prove vulnerable under future stressors. This gap underscores the need for evaluation methodologies that are forward-looking and capable of engaging with plausible futures.
Vairous organizations already embed foresight into their respective practices: - The World Food Programme (WFP) has integrated foresight-informed approaches into its Anticipatory Action programs, enabling more proactive responses to food crises. - Organizations such as GEF, CGIAR are exploring how to better assess long-term resilience and systemic impacts in their environmental and agricultural investments. - FAO has recently published a report that aims to inspire strategic actions to transform agrifood systems into sustainable, resilient, and inclusive ones. This report ( accessible here: https://www.fao.org/global-perspectives-studies/fofa/en/) explores three different scenarios for the future of food and agriculture, based on alternative trends for key drivers, such as income growth and distribution, population growth, technical progress in agriculture, and climate change.
Strategic foresight should be based on a suite of accessible tools and approaches to address this challenge. While various tools and methods have been developed, practical guidance on their applicability remains limited. Many evaluators lack training in foresight methods. To utilize the full potential of foresight in evaluation, several steps are essential:
Capacity Building: Training evaluators in foresight methods and fostering collaboration between foresight and evaluation practitioners.
Practical Frameworks: Developing accessible guidance, case studies, and toolkits tailored to the realities of food security, environmental, and agricultural programs.
Institutional Change: Encouraging organizations to incorporate foresight into their evaluation mandates and to allocate resources for ongoing learning and adaptation.
In an era of unprecedented change, evaluation must evolve from a retrospective mirror to a forward-looking compass. Integrating foresight methods into evaluation processes can enhance relevance, sustainability, and systemic impact assessments, ultimately supporting programs that are resilient and adaptable in the face of uncertainty.
Looking forward to further discussions and shared learning on this important topic.
RE: From Hindsight to Foresight: How Evaluation Can Become Future-Informed
Italy
Serdar Bayryyev
Senior Evaluation Officer
FAO
Posted on 25/03/2026
Thank you for initiating this important discussion. To facilitate this discussion, I would like to share some reflections.
Today’s world faces unprecedented challenges of climate change, food security, environmental sustainability, and increasing fragility due to conflicts and related crises. Agricultural development programs operate amid a backdrop of volatility, uncertainty, complexity, and ambiguity.
Traditionally, evaluation function has focused predominantly on retrospective accountability, measuring past performance against predetermined plans, objectives and targets. While valuable, this approach, in today’s rapidly changing context, often doesn’t result in valuable insights and clear, impactful messages. Evaluations that assess relevance, effectiveness, and sustainability based on the conditions at the time of design can produce accurate reflections of past actions but offer limited guidance for future decision-making.
When evaluation processes rely solely on historical benchmarks, they risk overlooking emerging trends and future challenges. For example, a program designed to improve crop yields based on a specific climate scenario may become less relevant if climate patterns shift unexpectedly. Similarly, a project assessed as sustainable under current conditions might prove vulnerable under future stressors. This gap underscores the need for evaluation methodologies that are forward-looking and capable of engaging with plausible futures.
Vairous organizations already embed foresight into their respective practices:
- The World Food Programme (WFP) has integrated foresight-informed approaches into its Anticipatory Action programs, enabling more proactive responses to food crises.
- Organizations such as GEF, CGIAR are exploring how to better assess long-term resilience and systemic impacts in their environmental and agricultural investments.
- FAO has recently published a report that aims to inspire strategic actions to transform agrifood systems into sustainable, resilient, and inclusive ones. This report ( accessible here: https://www.fao.org/global-perspectives-studies/fofa/en/) explores three different scenarios for the future of food and agriculture, based on alternative trends for key drivers, such as income growth and distribution, population growth, technical progress in agriculture, and climate change.
Strategic foresight should be based on a suite of accessible tools and approaches to address this challenge. While various tools and methods have been developed, practical guidance on their applicability remains limited. Many evaluators lack training in foresight methods. To utilize the full potential of foresight in evaluation, several steps are essential:
In an era of unprecedented change, evaluation must evolve from a retrospective mirror to a forward-looking compass. Integrating foresight methods into evaluation processes can enhance relevance, sustainability, and systemic impact assessments, ultimately supporting programs that are resilient and adaptable in the face of uncertainty.
Looking forward to further discussions and shared learning on this important topic.
Best regards,
Serdar Bayryyev, Senior Evaluation Officer
Food and Agriculture Organization