The Future(s) of drugs and the addiction field in the EU by 2040 (Foresights Framework Scenarios)
Introduction and background
This page provides information on the most recent update to the EUDA Framework Scenarios. It provides background information on the project, methodological notes and access to the scenarios themselves.
What are 'scenarios'
Scenarios are widely used in corporate foresight and also have a strong traditional role in the foresight activities of EU institutions and their technical agencies (1). Scenario planning offers a strategic approach to prepare for a wide range of futures: rather than predicting one specific, most probable future, scenarios map out possible alternative developments. The implications of these developments can then be discussed and reflected upon, improving an organisation’s skills in terms of anticipatory decision-making. Scenarios emphasise that the future can be influenced; they invite us to think about ways of achieving desirable outcomes and how to avoid potentially detrimental pathways.
The EUDA (2) has been building its foresight capacity since 2019 through a range of activities, including foresight scanning and trends workshops, the EUDA trends workshop toolkit, and the development of the first pilot framework scenarios. The aim is to develop skills and tools which increase the organisation’s preparedness with regard to drug trends, policy and practice, as well as to support external stakeholders in foresight capacity-building. The scenarios presented below are part of this forward-looking approach and are intended to help the organisation in the early recognition of, and preparation for, potential future developments, including both opportunities and challenges, within an ever-changing global drugs landscape.
Scenarios: three alternative futures for drugs and the addiction field in 2040
Select one of the scenarios.
Scenario 1: EU Harmony
In 2040, social inequality in the EU is lower than at any other time in recent memory. After emerging from a range of crises in the mid-2020s, economic, social and territorial cohesion advanced rapidly, leading to a high level of collective well-being: People have never had it so good. Drugs may not have disappeared completely, but addiction is at an all-time low and causes less harm than ever. Political polarisation is much reduced and society as a whole more trusting, making it much easier to integrate the growing numbers of young workers moving to (and within) the EU. Migration and immigrants have become a strong asset in an increasingly diverse Europe, fuelling innovation and boosting added value.
Scenario description
Where we are, and how we got there: The EU and the world in 2040
In 2040, EU citizens enjoy a high quality of life in what is increasingly becoming a ‘well-being Europe’. Even though it may not have initially appeared so, the lessons learned from the successful international collaboration during the COVID-19 pandemic were not lost on the world, and after the geopolitical crises of the early 2020s, a renaissance of democracies has brought stability to the global economy. By 2040, the hard work carried out in the 2020s and 2030s to mitigate the most severe climate change impacts and reverse environmental degradation is beginning to pay off. Furthermore, after more than a decade in which global attention increasingly focused on the importance of innovation and technological development, there is now ample funding for scientific research, and knowledge flows freely through international networks.
Life within the EU in 2040
Cohesion in the EU has made considerable progress. By 2040, effective immigration policies mean that new arrivals are rapidly integrated, with young migrants offsetting the effects of a slowly ageing and shrinking (working) population. In many industries skill shortages are a thing of the past. The digital leap forward, completed by the mid-2030s, brought everyone and almost everything, everywhere online, and thanks to improved infrastructures and the enhanced availability of public services, disparities between EU regions have been shrinking for more than a decade and are now considerably lower than in 2020. As a result, general feelings of resentment have mostly subsided, and (most) people have more trust in institutions and no longer consider politics a zero-sum game. This has also facilitated the fight against organised crime, leading to a significant reduction in drug trafficking and drug-related violence. Corruption levels are down, as criminal networks now lack the cash to undermine governance, as are rates of robbery, burglary and theft, with fewer offenders now driven by the need to fund their drug addiction. Collective well-being is a core element of EU and Member State policies, and there is great willingness to expend political and financial capital on it.
The state of public health and healthcare in 2040
The healthcare system of 2040 is significantly less burdened. On the one hand, people live healthier lives, with emissions reductions and better occupational health and safety leading to improved physical health. On the one hand, less stressful working environments and a better work-life balance, as well as the absence of economic pressures and austerity, mean lighter mental loads and hence far fewer related disorders. On the other hand, healthcare as such has also improved. Thanks to better connectivity, health knowledge is available almost everywhere, while greater EU-wide cooperation and coordination in health issues (rooted in the common response to the COVID-19 pandemic and institutionalised in the years since) have resulted in a healthcare landscape which offers almost equal access to treatment, crucial for a highly diverse society. Disparities with regard to access and availability persist, but the focus on community-driven care — with its roots in established local institutions, relationships and trust – means that these are kept to a minimum. Thanks to the efforts of EU’s Initiatives targeting longetivity, more and more treatments for old-age and chronic diseases are available within general healthcare provision.
What this means for drugs, drug policies and drug monitoring in 2040
Greater cohesion, harmonisation and cross-border cooperation are also evident in the EU’s drug policies and their implementation, as well as in supplementary policy components, such as human rights, public safety and crime reduction, among others. Drug policies are now fully coordinated and co-created with civil society, resulting in ‘whole of society’ prevention programmes that are often implemented in the context of social equity programmes and instituted with a view to improving social justice and fairness. Well-funded R&D initiatives, supported by high-quality, responsive, and transparent data on drug use, have made rapid and targeted interventions possible. These interventions have become the norm in response to emerging addiction patterns. Innovative treatment and early prevention options have emerged which are constantly adapted to better fit the increasing complexity of needs profiles, and thanks to new technologies, rapid intervention is now possible at an individual level. Not only has this curbed the use of new psychoactive substances (NPS), rates of medicine misuse have also fallen, further supported by an EU-wide roll-out of personalised medicine. With a clear focus on reducing harms rather than simply combating drugs as such, some meticulously chosen drugs have been legalised and are available through carefully controlled channels. Thanks to the EU’s well-balanced innovation policies and its influence on the world stage, not only did the threat of a new wave of designer drugs envisaged by Artificial Intelligence (AI) never materialise, but global coordination also plays a key role in the fight against synthetic drugs in general. For example, the trade in drug precursors is rapidly curtailed by exporting nations once abuse has been detected, and online marketplaces for NPS and other drugs are constantly monitored and disrupted.
Key scenario insights
- The co-creation of policy with civil society, especially regarding changes in regulations and settings for drug use, leads to widespread buy-in among user groups.
- Dynamic, adaptive and responsive policy development which makes effective use of evidence leads to rapid, well-targeted reactions to new developments, in particular with regard to the threat posed by NPS.
- Clear, EU-wide harmonised regulations lead to stable and effective drug
- Innovation and consistent efforts to rethink and improve best practices boost the impact of prevention schemes and allow earlier reactions to emerging threats.
- Lower drug use reduces the violence and levels of crime which come as a by-product of the market in illegal substances, freeing resources to advance the well-being society.
- As data plays a key role in directing treatment efforts, a free and timely EU-wide exchange of information on substance abuse is instrumental in providing effective treatment schemes.
Scenario 2: Barely Managing
In 2040, the EU is holding on, but only just. With one global crisis after another hitting the continent, societal divides are much wider than before and a gloomy outlook prevails among EU policymakers. As people increasingly struggle to keep up with the rising cost of living, local and social health disparities grow, leading to income and geographic location — rather than need — being the key determinants of access to healthcare treatment. As drugs remain a key coping mechanism for many, EU authorities are only just managing to keep pace with rising complexities in drug and medicine misuse, addiction and the increase in drug-related violence … but for how much longer?
Scenario description
Where we are, and how we got there: The EU and the world in 2040
After the crises of the early 2020s, recovery remained slow. In addition, economic dependence on foreign nations never significantly diminished in the 2030s, limiting the EU’s control over its influence on the exporting policy of other nations. By 2040, international collaboration has reduced to solely ensuring the steady flow of trade — beyond this, there is little willingness to tackle issues together. Instead, the past decade has seen a rise in deliberate misinformation campaigns, influence operations have become common practice, and most states see no advantages in sharing information freely. With climate challenges having been largely ignored over the past 15 years in favour of short-term economic gains, the impacts of climate change are now increasingly severe, and with mitigating costs growing constantly, daily life is becoming harder for many in the EU.
Life within the EU in 2040
In 2040, the wealth gaps between EU regions show few signs of narrowing, and in some areas have even been widening for more than a decade. The Union’s economic landscape is now too uneven to provide similar living standards to all its citizens. The Member States have also diverged with regard to governance, with some leaning towards autocracy, while others have introduced new forms of public participation to strengthen their democratic roots. Issues with the integration of migrants mean that skill shortages persist in many industries, or – as populations age — are growing. While many in Europe continue to enjoy high standards of living and well-being, others are much less well off, and this rise in economic disparity has caused organised crime to become more widespread (and normalized) in regions where the economic outlook is particularly bleak. Life expectancy is beginning to fall, and the proportion of healthy life years within the lifespan is shrinking fast. There are few EU-wide initiatives dealing with these issues, leading to a patchwork of different approaches.
The state of public health and healthcare in 2040
‘Well, it could always be worse’ is an attitude widely shared among healthcare professionals and patients in 2040. So far, health systems have managed to keep pace with the rising incidence of illness (non-communicable diseases and mental health issues) but are at the limit of their capacity. With day-to-day life a struggle for a large share of the working population, more and more people are living in unsafe environments, inevitably leading to a rise, or at least no reduction, in communicable diseases. For 15 years now, Europe has been slowly moving away from becoming a well-being society. Wealth inequalities are evident in the distribution of major illnesses, from which almost a quarter of the working population is now suffering. The exact state of regional and economic health equity, however, remains unknown, as efforts to improve the sharing and compatibility of health data fizzled out in the 2030s. Too often, access to healthcare now depends on one’s personal wealth and place of residence. High-end healthcare, the product of innovative businesses, is available to those who can afford it; others increasingly rely on self-care and self-medication, in particular with regard to mental health issues, and seek relief in a growing black market for prescription drugs.
What this means for drugs, drug policies and drug monitoring in 2040
Member States explicitly or implicitly decriminalize certain recreational drugs, and further decriminalization gains vocal proponents, including industry lobbyists, the regulatory landscape in the EU is becoming increasingly uneven. Consequently, drugs that are illegal in some countries are being aggressively marketed in others. Changes in trade flows have also meant that some drugs are more widely available while others have become scarce or more expensive. Efforts to reduce the use of harmful yet legal drugs, for example by revising EU tobacco control legislations to create a smoke-free generation by 2040 or through international cooperation, have not met with success. Overall, the trend of increasing drug use and medicine abuse and misuse shows no sign of abating. Destigmatisation and social deprivation have widened the market for substance abuse, giving rise to new criminal opportunities, both with regard to innovations in product types — primarily in NPS and new synthetic drugs in general — and emerging distribution corridors, which authorities struggle to keep pace with. At the same time, drug-related criminal behaviour has increased significantly, leading to a new focus on community-level security. ‘Early warning’ efforts remain uneven. In some Member States, forensic science laboratories have the capacity to identify NPS and their precursors, and wastewater treatment facilities continually test for evidence of new drugs; in other countries, however, budget cuts mean that law enforcement is always playing catch-up in response to a much greater diversity of challenges. Users are often unaware of the health risks posed by new synthetic drugs and are thus at greater risk. Addictive behaviours have become more complex, while ‘one-size-fits-all’ approaches to treatment remain the norm, possibly also as a result of the growing information gap regarding usage and new types of addictions. This knowledge gap is aggravated by monitoring disparities. As a result, policymakers lack detailed guidance, and investment in anti-drug policies often remains untargeted. On the other hand, the criminalisation of some drugs and enforcement measures have increased, and community action is now more frequent and more widely accepted, even if some only consider it a symptom of state failure.
Key scenario insights
- The increasing complexity in diseases and drug profiles makes public intervention more difficult and requires a dedicated ‘ear-to-the-ground’ approach.
- As disparities increase, more groups will become vulnerable, often resulting in region-specific drug use and necessitating that surveillance focuses on (early) detection.
- Law enforcement resources are stretched through fighting a two-front war against a rise in organised crime and the development of new drugs, making the implementation of prevention schemes more difficult.
- Accelerated data sharing will be required to counter a lack of knowledge regarding how best to invest in strategies to respond to drug use problems and the role of new technologies (e.g., artificial intelligence, biotech, etc.) in illicit drug manufacturing. Otherwise, there is a risk of lobbying filling the gaps.
Scenario 3: House of Cards
By 2040, the EU is adrift in an international system that is directionless and volatile. International rules and regulations are largely ignored, and political blocs and alliances are falling apart. Within the EU, a tendency to ‘do it alone’ has resulted in political, social and economic fragmentation. In most Member States, this has negatively impacted population health and well-being to a significant extent. Health systems are mostly on the verge of collapse and barely functioning, while drug use, driven equally by perceived need and commercialisation, is now rife in all strata of society and addiction appears to be ubiquitous, along with the violence connected to drugs.
Scenario description
Where we are, and how we got there: The EU and the world in 2040
In the 15 years leading up to 2040, the world has become more fragmented. Barriers to trade have been raised between nations and international cooperation is at an all-time low, with retaliatory measures having become the norm. Over the past decade, the EU has struggled to meet the cascading challenges it has faced, and is now no longer considered — both outside and within the bloc — a force to be reckoned with in politics. Dependency on energy deliveries from autocratic countries has not been reduced, and it has long since been evident that all climate targets, once symbols of a shared European, will be missed by a wide margin.
Life in the EU in 2040
In most Member States, the economic situation looks dire. New technologies have led to the loss of jobs, while a failure to establish training programmes over the past decade means that unemployment is high and wages do not keep pace with inflation. Many are struggling and looking for easy solutions. At the same time, political polarisation, protests and public frustration have reached new heights, and since the 2030s, policymakers routinely turn inwards to maintain domestic stability. Member States no longer look towards the Union for solutions, and authoritarianism and exclusionary forms of nationalism are the norm. While the global number of refugees is higher than ever and skills shortages plague European industry, immigrants are turned away at the EU’s borders. Innovation — now not much more than a buzzword on everyone’s lips — has suffered, even though considerable funds are directed towards it.
The state of public health and healthcare in 2040
It may not be for want of trying, but for almost a decade now, health systems in the EU have increasingly been failing to manage the challenges that arise. A lack of funding and resources is aggravated by a failure of international collective action in the face of shared threats (e.g., new pandemics), which means that regional and seasonal emergencies (e.g., heatwaves due to unmitigated climate change) cannot be addressed. With widespread unemployment, inflation and poverty, living conditions have worsened considerably compared to the early 2020s. Many suffer from depression and other mental health issues, but treatment options are limited, with more and more people in the EU lacking access to health insurance. Costs as well as the absence of shared data and a powerful digital infrastructure mean that innovative medical solutions (including e-health) are never rolled out on an EU-wide basis.
What this means for drugs, drug policies and drug monitoring in 2040
In the EU and its Member States, there is no longer a common approach to the issues posed by drugs. Political fragmentation has brought about widely varying laws and enforcement policies, while supra-national organisations have become almost powerless. The focus on internal security means that repression rather than treatment has become the norm. Treatment and harm reduction approaches are considered to be contribute to the problem and remain severely underfunded, resulting in a distinct lack of knowledge, skilled personnel and research expenditure. At the same time, possibly heralded by the earlier widespread use of ‘brain doping’ substances, using drugs has become widely destigmatised, and both the use of synthetic drugs and opiates and the abuse of pharmaceuticals are common.
With this commercialisation of the drug market, the EU has become a major producer of synthetic drugs. The existing social disparities are also evident in how specific drugs are seen and drug laws are written and enforced. Sophisticated and innovative commercial suppliers are able to meet the demands of affluent white-collar users with products that are either legalised as a result of lobbying or exist in a grey area and are ignored by law enforcement, whereas poor people resort to cheap drugs, usually manufactured in back-street operations using hacked 3D-printers for chemical drugs and downloadable ‘printing plans’. As users are often completely unaware of the exact effects of the substances they are using, these synthetic drugs lead to surges in local and regional drug-related emergency admissions and deaths. Also, since treatment needs remain unmet, the rise in mental health issues has increased poly-use and public use, especially in rural areas. To counter the information and action gap created by fake news and political fragmentation, community-driven self-help groups are filling the void left by overwhelmed authorities, and are often just as hostile to drug dealers as they are to law enforcement. Life has become more violent as dealers settle disputes with force and addicts commit crimes to feed their habit, while others lash out due to withdrawal symptoms or drug-related personality changes.
In addition, some countries see the destabilising influence of drugs on societies as a legitimate tool in international relations and offer a safe harbour to drug producers and dealers in precursor chemicals. Others simply use synthetic substances as a source of income, while organised transnational crime networks, once among the biggest beneficiaries of globalisation, are finding it more difficult to operate in a deglobalised environment. At the same time, corporate investment in addiction is focused primarily on the development of legal substitutes and providing treatment for well-paying clients. Monitoring, on the other hand, has improved, in particular as a service for the private sector, but has failed to make an impact on addiction outcomes.
Key scenario insights
- As economic conditions worsen, the number of vulnerable and marginalised users increases, while changing public priorities and stretched financial resources lead to disappearing treatment options and a lack of focus on prevention.
- The drug landscape is becoming increasingly complex, with drugs marketed by a much wider range of suppliers at various income strata and promoted for specific needs, making policy interventions more difficult.
- New synthetic substances are constantly emerging, with severe consequences for unaware users and often overwhelming local and regional health services and law enforcement agencies.
- With regulations differing widely between EU Member States, there are no stable and effective responses to drug control and other related issues.
Methodological approach
How EUDA scenarios were developed
Across a series of futures workshops with EUDA staff, policy makers, representatives from Reitox national focal points and participants at Lisbon Addiction 2019 (involving around 120 participants overall), the set of 14 JRC Megatrends (3) were considered and discussed according to each trend’s likely impact on the future of drugs and addiction. This process resulted in the identification of five trends that were considered likely to have the greatest impact on the field to 2040. In addition, a horizon-scanning exercise, including a review of EUDA reports, identified six further emerging trends that can already be observed in the drugs area and may be regarded as relatively ‘strong’, visible or significant developments.
Table 1. Key factors for the EUDA framework scenarios
| Title | STEEP category | Description |
|---|---|---|
|
Population change |
Society |
Shifts in demographics and migration patterns, in terms of, e.g., life expectancy, birth rates and sex ratios, as well as migration routes and flows. |
|
Diversifying inequalities |
Society |
The disparities between people with regard to, e.g., income, access to education, housing and healthcare, or political power, and the resulting level of social cohesion. |
|
Shifting health challenges |
Society |
The evolution of illnesses (including non-communicable diseases) and combat options, as well as changes in the overall understanding of health with regard to, e.g., global pandemics or mental health. |
|
Accelerating technological change & hyperconnectivity |
Technology |
The advancement of technology and global connectedness in areas such as, e.g., nanotechnology or collective intelligence systems. |
|
Climate change & environmental degradation |
Environment |
The process of global warming, with direct effects on the natural environment, indicated by, e.g., rising temperatures, increasing numbers of extreme weather events, rising sea levels, etc. As impacts vary regionally, so do adaptation measures. |
|
Changing regulatory framework |
Politics |
Changes in laws and policies concerned with the regulation of drug circulation and use, such as, e.g., decriminalisation. |
|
Evolving cannabis policies |
Politics |
Political shifts within the EU in the legal status of cannabis, with regard to, e.g., the distinction between medical purposes and recreational use. |
|
Implications of global economy |
Economy |
Changes in the global economy that affect drug policy and monitoring, including, e.g., changes to funding opportunities, government austerity measures, political positioning, etc. |
|
Misuse of medicine |
Society |
The shift in medicine misuse, e.g., regarding scale and style, and the advancement of respective controlling mechanisms in terms of, e.g., prescribing practices or research needs. |
|
Complex needs profiles & individually tailored interventions |
Society |
Changes in the complexity of drug use, such as who uses drugs and for what reasons, and the related need for tailored interventions regarding, e.g., people’s specific vulnerabilities or participatory options. |
|
Innovation & new tools |
Technology |
The development of new instruments to monitor or detect medicine and drug use, as well as applications for improving overall health, such as, e.g., new treatment technologies or new forms of communication. |
|
Rise of AI (2024 addition) |
Technology |
The use of AI in the manufacturing and detection of illegal substances, as well as in the treatment of addictions and the enforcement of related legislation. |
|
Geopolitical volatility (2024 addition) |
Politics |
As the world becomes multipolar, the fate of international institutions and cooperation mechanisms is unclear. This includes collaboration in the fight against drug trafficking. |
Based on this list of 11 EUDA-relevant trends in total (see Table 1 above), combined with an additional systematic search of the relevant literature (4) to add further insights and developments, a structured process using a key-factor-based methodology (5) was undertaken, resulting in the creation of three prototype scenarios.
At the EUDA’s Scenario Engagement Workshop at Lisbon Addictions 2022, these framework scenarios were used as a starting point for the workshop discussions (for the kick-off presentation, see Future Impacts, 2022). Facilitators from Future Impacts and the EUDA supported 25 participants (6) in exploring the scenarios and debating the specific implications they might have in the 2040 timeframe for society in general, for drugs and addictions, as well as for drug monitoring and policy. Additional material was provided by a ‘letters from the future’ exercise which identified recommendations for current policy. Using the collected structured outputs, the three scenarios were then fleshed out, refined and updated.
Scenario assumptions
The year 2040 was chosen as a timeframe for the scenarios as it was considered just far enough in the future to provoke thinking beyond the next strategic cycle, making it easier for debate to venture outside the confines of ‘business-as-usual’. Furthermore, the choice of 2040 means that the scenario space remains conceivable for audiences and does not stray too far into the realm of the fantastic.
Over the period in which the scenarios were created, volatility and disruption were at a relatively high level, in particular with regard to the COVID-19 pandemic and shifts in the geopolitical landscape. Hence, the future developments underlying the scenarios were interpreted through the lens of the VUCA (volatile, uncertain, complex and ambiguous) framework. It was thus assumed that future events will be, to a certain extent, rapid and unpredictable, with difficult-to-interpret cause-and-effect relationships. However, the scenarios purposely do not foreground extreme levels of disruption or volatility (e.g., the outbreak of a pandemic with exceptionally high lethality, or the start of World War 3). They focus more on how innovation, the economy, societies, cooperation and technology could develop, and the extent to which aspects of these factors could become disruptive. Inputs relating to the specifics of more extreme volatility could be covered in future EUDA foresight activities.
Here, it is important to note that the narratives of two of the developed scenarios are intentionally stretched to the edges of the ‘cone of possibilities’, with the business-as-usual scenario running ‘straight down the middle’. This makes it possible to look at the widest range of implications. While the positive scenario may at first sight appear too rose-tinted and unrealistic based on current trajectories, its value lies in giving the reader an opportunity to explore how policy could be steered towards these outcomes.
Key-factor-based methodology
The key-factor-based methodology uses key factors as the backbone of a transparent, systematic and fully scalable process. The process begins with a careful examination of all the identified factors which could influence the subject area in question (‘influencing factors’). Developments that are likely to have a significant impact are identified as ‘key factors’ (KFs). The potential future developments of each KF are described in more detail based on a literature review, expert surveys or other sources, resulting in several ‘projections’ for each KF which highlight different future development paths.
The results are often presented in the form of a morphological box, i.e., a two-dimensional decision matrix, in which each column is headed by the KF name and the projections are described underneath, with one box for each projection (see Step 3 in Figure 2 below). This makes it possible to determine and visualise which combinations of projections are structurally compatible, fit together and are consistent. Scenarios are thus formed out of combinations of one projection per key factor. Based on these, the scenarios can be drafted (‘scenario drafts’), each describing how different developments in different social areas can produce a plausible future development.
Due to its systematic nature, this process can be relatively easily updated or scaled up or down by adding, adapting or removing key factors and/or projections, making it possible to rapidly adapt scenarios to changing requirements and conditions if and when new information comes to light. Within this methodological framework, it is also possible to add ‘micro scenarios’ that zoom in on specific topics or create specific regional scenarios which pinpoint developments in one region or country (while still remaining aligned with the framework (or macro-) scenarios).
The 2024 update
Scenarios are not static. They have to be monitored, subjected to stress tests and updated. To be most effective, scenarios must become part of a permanent process in which they are regularly compared to recent developments, debated and adapted, with new conclusions drawn.
This document shows how the original framework scenarios have been updated. For this 2024 update, Future Impacts revisited its original groundwork to assess how well assumptions had held up and conducted a short literature review. It became evident that new developments which the previous set of key factors did not fully reflect have impacted on the field of drugs, with several aspects standing out. One of these relates to the rapidly maturing technological developments in the field of Artificial Intelligence; another is persistent geopolitical volatility, with the first signs of drugs being used to create political leverage. Also, the rise in new psychoactive substances and synthetic drugs, which is widely expected to accelerate and grow in scale within the EU and beyond, features in all three scenarios, with their prevalence determined by the development of the other key factors.
The EUDA will continue to develop these scenarios going forward.
References
EUDA (European Union Drugs Agency) (2022), A foresight toolkit for the drugs field.
EUDA (2024), Understanding Europe’s drug situation in 2024 – key developments (European drug report 2024).
Future Impacts (2022), 3 Scenarios, 3 Alternative Addiction Futures for 2040. Presentation for the EMCDDA Scenario Engagement Workshop at LxAddictions22.
JRC (Joint Research Centre) (2023), Reference foresight scenarios: scenarios on the global standing of the EU in 2040.
EEA (European Environmental Agency) (2020), Population trends 1950 – 2100: globally and within Europe.
EEA (2021), Trends and projections in Europe 2021.
IOM (International Organization for Migration) (2020), The future of migration to Europe.
Kosow, H. and Gaßner R. (2008), Methods of future and scenario analysis: overview, assessment, and selection criteria.
Oxfam (2020), Global megatrends: mapping the forces that affect us all. Oxfam International Discussion Papers.
Notes
(1) See, e.g., the reference scenarios for 2040 published by the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre (JRC) (JRC, 2023), the EEA’s scenarios for its sustainable Europe in 2050 project (EEA, 2021), the EUAA’s use of scenarios in its 2023 report on the future of international protection in Europe (EUAA, 2023a) or Eurofound’s mapping of different possible socioeconomic outcomes of the Just Transition in four scenarios (Eurofound, 2023).
(2) On 2 July 2024, the EMCDDA officially became the European Union Drugs Agency (EUDA), with a revised mandate. While the foresight activities undertaken between 2018 and 2024 took place while the organisation was still called the EMCDDA, in this paper we refer to the agency by its new name, the EUDA.
(3) Megatrends are defined as long-term driving forces of change observable in the present which have a large effect on every aspect of life globally, and will continue to do so for several decades.
(4) This included recent EU foresight studies which covered the same timeframe (to 2040) as well as works which discussed developments specific to the drugs field.
(5) While the various different approaches of scenario methodology all have their own strengths and weaknesses (see, e.g., Curry and Schultz, 2009), the ‘modular’ or morphological way of constructing scenarios (i.e., the key-factors-based methodology) lends itself best to the needs of this project. The methodology was originally developed by a team at EU-JRC, and variants of the methodology exist. For more details on the approach see, e.g., Kosow and Gaßner (2008).
(6) The participants had a broad range of regional (including non-European) and professional backgrounds, including as members of the scientific and medical communities and representatives of relevant national institutes and EU institutions.
Acknowledgements
Future Impacts and their support in guiding the EUA foresight journey, including the development of the scenarios and accompanying toolkit.
About Future Impacts
Future Impacts designs and implements foresight processes around questions on the future for organisations and corporations. We carry out foresight projects to identify options for future-orientated actions today. To this end, we use or combine trend analysis, scenarios and Delphi surveys, among other approaches. Aside from our focus on the development and implementation of individualised foresight games, we also focus on foresight capacity building. We support our clients to expand their foresight capabilities and skills through training, toolkits and coaching.
