European flag
Linkedin Youtube

Browse this page

Home
>
>
Methodology

Methodology

Our horizon-scanning methodology consists of three steps:

  1. identify
  2. select
  3. analyse

By combining desk research and expert consultation at each step, our method aims to be as thorough as possible in identifying emerging ethical issues relevant to EU policymakers.

Step 1: Identify

The first step consists of collecting input on emerging issues from different input sources: horizon-scanning and foresight initiatives, emerging policy debates, media discussions, issues flagged in scientific and academic sources covering different domains (technological, geopolitical, economic, environmental, sociocultural developments), and by the SAEGE ethics network.

We complete this step once or twice per year and use material generated from this for any Horizon Scan Briefs published in the same year.

Academia

In order to monitor emerging debates and discourses in academia, we include ethics journals focused on applied topics, as well as future studies topics, among others. At least one Latin American, one African, and one Asian journal is included. Scopus search strings are then deployed with terms like “ethics”, “risk” and “technology” to identify emerging issues in these journals:

Policy, foresight and think-tanks

Given the focus on EU policymakers, key EU horizon-scanning and foresight sources are central inputs. Our horizon-scanning work draws on EU foresight initiatives, European and international policy think tanks, and private foresight institutes.

Internal EU foresight initiatives

European policy think-tanks

International (policy) think-tanks

Private future studies and foresight institutes

Media

To broaden geographic representation, we complement Western/Global North media with selected sources from other regions. Media inputs include, among others:

Expert consultation

To identify issues beyond the input sources listed above, we consult the ethics community. These consultations can include:

  • scanning publications or participating in events of relevant organisations
  • discussions on emerging ethical issues with members of the ethics community
  • small surveys sent to members of the ethics community

The ‘ethics community’ can include, for example, the National Ethics Councils Forum, the European Network of Research Ethics Committees, and others.

Step 2: Select

A list of one to three issues is selected per brief, based on the criteria below.

  • Domain: The issue is either concrete or emerging in one of our core domains (technological, economic, (geo)political, socio-cultural, environmental), or at the intersection of several of them.
  • Ethical significance: The issue involves a substantive ethical dimension, for instance because it touches on key values such as European values.
  • Policy relevance: The issue falls within the scope of EU policymaking, for instance because it relates to existing or upcoming policy initiatives or to areas where experts have called for EU action to address policy gaps, revise existing policies, or develop new ones.
  • Category: The issue fits at least one of the following categories:
    • Recurrent: it recurs across the sources listed above.
    • Flagged by experts: it is judged to be an issue of high ethical significance by the consulted experts or by experts from the ethics network.
    • Wildcard / weak signal: it is an ethically relevant issue of low probability and potantially high impact. This could be derived from ‘weak signals’ picked up in very few of the sources, i.e. early indicators of emerging issues that may have significant future implications for society, but which currently receive limited attention and are characterised by high uncertainty.

Expert consultation

Recognising the broad scope of the issues across geopolitical, technological, environmental, sociocultural, and economic domains makes a fully comprehensive longlist unattainable for the briefs. As such, we will hand a curated list of 5–10 issues to external experts to review and complement.

Step 3: Analyse

To conduct an ethical analysis of the issue:

  1. We draw on relevant (academic) literature, which helps to identify the ethically significant features more concretely.
  2. We identify the timeframe of the issue, determining whether it is ongoing, short-term (1–5 years) or long-term (5–10 years and beyond).
  3. We elaborate the policy relevance, with a focus on EU initiatives and policy discourse. The aim here is to indicate potential value conflicts, misalignments or infringements that might arise in the future. This may also include illustrative scenarios or other anticipatory formats to highlight future trends, ethical demands, benefits, pitfalls and trade-offs.
  4. Finally, we list anticipatory policy options, taking into account existing EU policy and any gaps.

Expert consultation

To validate our analysis, external academic experts are consulted as reviewers on the ethical analyses conducted on the issues.

Publication

A Horizon Scan Brief is compiled and published every four to five months based on this methodology. The brief is delivered to the European Group on Ethics and to EU policymakers, and the issues it contains are published on this website.

View all horizon-scanning issues

Limitations

The approach described above draws on established horizon-scanning practices, including desk-based research, expert consultation, and structured search strategies, to derive a list of issues.

However, this methodology has inherent limitations:

  • Blind spots: There is a risk that certain emerging issues may be overlooked due to limitations in the sources consulted. To mitigate this risk, the list of sources is viewed as iterative rather than definitive and is refined continuously to improve its diversity and quality.
  • Biases: The selection and prioritisation of issues inevitably involve elements of subjective judgement. To minimise this risk, the process relies not only on predefined selection criteria and the assessment of members of SAEGE, but also on validation and review by external experts.