Cette page regroupe l'ensemble des publications de Futuribles sur cette thématique (Vigie, revue, bibliographie, études, etc.)
The fact that the candidate of the far Right-wing Party, Jean-Marie Le Pen, reached the second-round run-off in the election for French President on 21 April 2002 made a big impression on everyone in France. Against a background of social unrest and disillusionment with the main political parties, around 17% of the French electorate voted for the leader of the extreme Right-wing party whose campaign message was largely nationalistic. Were more French people really opposed to the presence of recent immigrants or those of foreign descent at the start of the new millennium? This is far from certain, according to Guillaume Roux.
The author looks at xenophobia in France over the long term and how it has changed, both in general and when the population is broken down by age and by attitudes to different minorities, as well as in comparison with other countries (the United States and others in Europe). He argues that the long-term trend is in fact towards a decline in xenophobia in France. And although certain events, such as the riots in November 2005, may cause sudden blips in the observed trends, factors such as the arrival on the scene of new generations (younger people turn out to be more tolerant than their elders), the general improvement in levels of education or overall changes in people's values suggest that this long-term trend is likely to last.
Lors du Conseil des ministres du mercredi 11 janvier 2006, le gouvernement de Dominique de Villepin a présenté, sous la responsabilité du ministre de l'Emploi, de la Cohésion sociale et du Logement, Jean-Louis Borloo, et du ministre délégué à la Promotion de l'égalité des chances, Azouz Begag, le projet de loi pour l'égalité des chances qui est une des réponses du gouvernement français aux événements des banlieues de novembre 2005. Ce texte contient de nombreuses mesures concernant ...
(95 more words)
Fin octobre 2005, Dominique de Villepin annonçait le remplacement du Commissariat général du Plan par un Centre d'analyse stratégique. Depuis début décembre, Sophie Boissard était chargée de préparer cette transition qui n'allait pas de soi, loin s'en faut. Diplômée de l’ENA (École nationale d’administration) et de l’ENS (École normale supérieure), elle a commencé sa carrière au Conseil d’État, dont elle est maître des requêtes. Depuis 2004, elle était directrice adjointe puis directrice du ...
(37 more words)
People often - in France, in particular - contrast the way the pensions systems work in Europe with the system in the United States, the former being labelled broadly "state-run", whereas the latter is based exclusively on capitalization. Yet the reality is far more complex than it appears, as Charles du Granrut argues here: the American system does not rely entirely on capitalization and pension funds; public authorities also play an important role.
Charles du Granrut first outlines the main features of the American pension arrangements (social security, private systems, capitalization...) and how they contribute to the income of retired Americans. He goes on to analyse the main trends highlighted in various recent reports. As he emphasizes, the ageing of the population will undoubtedly have a major impact on the state pension system as the reserves seem to be condemned to run out if the way the system works is not reformed. And the supplementary pension schemes, as they stand, are far from being able to make up for the shortfall in the reserves of the state system, largely because the pension funds have been underfunded and American households save too little.
Like Europe, the United States is therefore at risk of encountering major problems with regard to financing pensions in the coming decades, with potentially serious consequences for intergenerational fairness and for the standard of living of the elderly. But perhaps America will be able to cope more easily, thanks to the flexibility created by the fragmented nature of the system
Le BIPE a dégagé trois scénarios possibles en fonction des comportements des particuliers, des entreprises, de l'État et des institutions financières sur les 30 prochaines années - à environnement macroéconomique inchangé et croissance démographique constante. Pour cela, le BIPE a développé une « étoile du progrès », outil d'évaluation qui tient compte de critères économiques, mais aussi environnementaux, socio-économiques et de longévité : insertion des jeunes dans la vie active, prise en charge des périodes de dépendance, révolution du temps libre des ...
(482 more words)
With the parliamentary debate on the French budget for 2006 in full swing, Alexandre Siné sets out the prerequisites for a proper understanding of the issues surrounding public expenditure. The topic is of course frequently aired in the media. But the questions of public finance are generally treated either by focusing on "totem" figures whose size is beyond the instinctive grasp of the normal person (a deficit of 46.8 billion euros - why not 60?) or by highly technical discussions (annexes to the main budget, Title III, etc.) that are meaningless to the man or woman in the street.
So we are very grateful to Alexandre Siné for giving us here an expert's analysis, focusing on a few crucial topics, that is easy to understand and essential for a genuine reflection about how much flexibility the French authorities will have in the future. Indeed, this article shows to what extent the national budget is shaped - aside from all the attempts to optimise it generated every year by the fertile imagination of the services of the finance ministry - by expenditures that "increase slowly but surely". This is fairly clear from the parliamentary voting mechanism that operated under rules set in 1959 whereby the "services votés" - i.e. the minimum amount that the government considers to be indispensable in order to maintain public services at the level of the previous year - were voted on as a whole, although they account for more than 90% of public expenditure.
Today, the 2001 "organic law" which applies to financial legislation (called LOLF) has altered this procedure. But simply applying this law will not do anything to change the salient fact affirmed by Alexandre Siné: that this structural rigidity in the national budget constitutes an abdication of political control, as every year parliament has less and less say in the financing of the central government, except to continue to sell off the state's assets as long as there are any to sell.
Winner of the Nobel Prize for Economics in 1998, Amartya Sen is known above all for his work on indicators of poverty and development which now form the basis of the international comparisons produced every year by the UNDP (United Nations Development Programme) in its Human Development Report. One of his other main concerns is cultural freedom and the promotion of democracy - a universal value that he feels is too often monopolized by the West. André-Yves Portnoff knows Sen's work well and stresses here the contribution of his thinking in these two fields; he is delighted by the ethical rigour that the Indian scholar brings to his work.
In 2004 Futuribles, in partnership with the Aleph group of the French Commissariat général du Plan, launched a series of articles with the aim of enlightening readers about what is happening in other countries in the area of futures studies. Seven articles have been published, presenting the main national specialist bodies and the approach to strategic thinking guiding public decision-making in various countries (Germany, Japan, Sweden, South Africa, etc.).
To round out the series Bruno Hérault analyses the methods used in other countries: which topics are most commonly examined? How are they treated? What kind of lessons are learned? While being careful to avoid hasty benchmarking - whereby what works in one country is applied to another even though their situations are quite different - Bruno Hérault offers a fairly detailed comparative survey. Most countries undertake some form of futures studies (institutional, geographic, scientific, environmental or social); the topics studied vary depending on circumstances, but the same topics tend to crop up regularly on the agendas of specialist organizations and think-tanks.
What a strange country France is, where the state claims to be the sole and exclusive embodiment of the common good and yet, as a result, it is incapable of tolerating the existence of independent agencies where discussions could take place that might challenge the rightness of public decision-making. Jean-Jacques Salomon provides yet another example, writing from his own experience as the President of the Collège de la prévention des risques technologiques (CPRT), set up by Michel Rocard when he was French Prime Minister.
Jean-Jacques Salomon starts by stating what he understands by the precautionary principle, which is all too frequently accused of paralysing the spirit of invention and innovation necessary for progress. He goes on to stress how important it is to have independent agencies capable of assessing advances in science and technology, given that the applications are, as we all know, becoming ever more ambivalent, their potential outcomes ranging from the best to the worst. Yet, as the former President of the CPRT argues, these agencies are misfits in the French political and institutional system, and the authorities therefore suspect them of wanting to hinder the projects drawn up by the orthodox civil service.
After explaining how the CPRT operated, illustrating his account with several particularly striking examples, Jean-Jacques Salomon describes how the Collège finally came to be closed down. In addition to this specific instance, he obviously also demonstrates clearly the French public authorities' desire to run everything their way without countenancing the slightest opposition, nor even accepting that their choices should be a matter for democratic debate, highly necessary though that is.
Ce chapitre est extrait du Rapport Vigie 2016 de Futuribles International, qui propose un panorama structuré des connaissances et des incertitudes des experts que l'association a mobilisés pour explorer les évolutions des 15 à 35 prochaines années sur 11 thématiques.