Human societies face various unsustainability problems, often characterized as “wicked” in the sense that they have no single definitive formulation. Thus, the role of creativity or insight in solving such problems has attracted a lot of attention from scholars. Therefore, this study investigated how an emerging methodology, Future Design (and its unique intervention of asking problem solvers to take a future generation’s perspective), can facilitate insight problem solving (IPS) and the generation of sustainable solutions. In a municipality in Japan, nine officers from a bureau responsible for water supply management participated in a series of seven Future Design workshops. In two groups, these officers created visions of water supply management 30 years into the future, taking the perspective of a future generation working in the same municipality. On the basis of in-depth transcription analyses of these workshops, we obtained a hypothetical framework demonstrating that four factors mediate the influence of perspective taking on IPS: (a) Discounting the present generation’s cost, (b) contrasting the future with the present, (c) deconstructing hierarchy, and (d) intellectual joy. While the first three mediators (a, b, and c) were considered to be contributors to the problem reframing and IPS via constraint relaxation, the fourth (d) was considered to do so via positive interpretation. Further, the reason why taking a future generation’s perspective is likely to lead to sustainable solutions, useful for the future—rather than the present—generation, is also discussed.

There are two approaches to future planning: backcasting and scenario planning. While some studies have attempted to relate and combine these two approaches, a future design (FD) approach has recently been advocated and researched. Given this state of affairs, the paper provides an overview of the FD approach and discusses the potential benefits of linking and incorporating it into backcasting and scenario planning by summarizing the main features of such benefits for future planning for sustainability. A feature of an FD is that it explicitly orients people’s ways of thinking in the current generation to be generative for not only their own future but also generations to come, as well as in designing a plan within a coherent timeframe by demonstrating the characteristics of being prospective and retrospective from the viewpoint of a different generation. Another feature of FD lies in strategy making through some visioning process and in redefining the boundary between what is controllable and what is uncontrollable by considering the perspectives of future generations. We consider this article as a concept paper for the special issue of “Designing Sustainable Future Societies,” building on a literature review and author’s conceptual framework. Thus, our ideas and concepts suggest some potential benefits from incorporating FD into backcasting and scenario planning, further inducing people to be future-oriented and/or sustainable in terms of strategy making. We finally demonstrate some examples of FD practices and illustrative ideas of FD incorporation, remarking on possible avenues for future research.

Many serious problems occur due to conflicts between the interests of the present generation and the welfare of future generations, and thus, the actions of the preset generation may be a consequence of presentism. Drawing on the theoretical framework of metacognition, the present study investigates how presentism can be overcome through future design interventions that incorporate an imaginary future generation setting. Four workshop participants were interviewed, and transcripts of the interviews were made. There were two major findings. First, we identified narratives in the responses of participants that suggest that metacognition was active during the workshops concerning the two cognitions governed by present and future selves. Second, the narratives identified above were classified into two categories, and the two corresponding roles of metacognition were identified: the monitoring and controlling function and the harmonizing function. The former is essential for the acquisition of identity as a future person; the latter is essential for reconciling this future identity with the identity of the person in the present. The present study proposes that future design is a tool that can be used to intervene in the metacognition of individuals concerning how one chooses a temporal reference point from which to view the past, present, and future of society rather than a tool to naively motivate individuals to care for future generations.

There is ample evidence to indicate the direct effects of receiving social support on mental health during and after a disaster. However, the importance of reciprocal exchanges of social support (i.e., balanced receipt and provision of social support) in maintaining the mental health status of individuals is not widely recognized. Using equity theory and reciprocity norms as a conceptual base, we distinguished two types of social support, namely, emotional support and instrumental support, and examined the effects of reciprocal exchanges of types of support on depression in survivors of an earthquake-damaged community. To collect data, in 2019, a questionnaire survey was conducted among 295 survivors of the 2015 Gorkha Earthquake in a rural village in Nepal. Our results showed that the relationship between reciprocal exchange of support and depression varied depending on the types of support. The amount of emotional support received by the individual alleviated his/her depression only when accompanied by giving emotional support. By contrast, the net amount of instrumental support given by the individual increased his/her depression. The practical implications of the study are discussed.

We address whether being intergenerationally accountable (IA) is effective at maintaining intergenerational sustainability (IS) through conducting lab-in-the-field experiments of IS dilemma games. In baseline, a sequence of six generations, each composed of three members, is organized, and each generation chooses whether to maintain IS (sustainable option) or to maximize their payoff by imposing costs on future generations (unsustainable option) via deliberation. In IA, each generation is additionally asked to provide reasons and advice to subsequent generations along with the decision. Results indicate that IA induces generations to choose the sustainable option with positive reasons and advice, enhancing IS.