cost forecasting

World Future Review 2015, Vol. 7(1) 30 –38

© The Author(s) 2015 Reprints and permissions:

sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/1946756715587004

wfr.sagepub.com

Article

Origins of Counterfactual Analysis

The term counterfactual analysis has been in use for a long time. Interest in counterfactual condi- tional assertions is largely due to their close con- nection with the analysis of causality theory in philosophy. The first definition of causality, based on terms related to the counterfactual approach, was made by David Hume in “An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding (1748)” (Wilson 1986). In modern times, coun- terfactual assertions in their present context have become a separate object of study in the works of David Lewis (1973b, 1986a).

The typical counterfactual analysis starts with the question “What would have happened, if . . .,” which assumes a possible alternative course of history (virtual history). However, the strict definition of the term counterfact is still an open issue. In the context of counterfactual analysis, I apply this term to mean simply non-factual, which is not necessarily the same as “false” or “contrary to fact.”

One of the first and most renowned applica- tions of research in the field was that of Robert Fogel in economic history (Fogel 1964), which became emblematic of a successful counterfac- tual analysis. Indeed, Fogel’s work contains a detailed analysis of non-provable facts and, in this sense, establishes the realm of the non-fac- tual. An alternative course of history is con- structed, in which no railroads were laid in the United States, starting from the middle of the nineteenth century. This becomes a turning point that divides all subsequent history into two branches: the actual course that history took and the reconstructed, counterfactual one. The two branches are then compared to assess the influence of the large-scale introduction of rail- roads in that historical moment.

587004WFRXXX10.1177/1946756715587004World Future ReviewTodorova research-article2015

1Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, Sofia, Bulgaria

Corresponding Author: Mariana Todorova, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, 9 Ljubliana Str., floor 5, flat 5, Sofia 1618, Bulgaria. Email: [email protected]

Counterfactual Construction of the Future: Building a New Methodology for Forecasting

Mariana Todorova1

Abstract This article proposes the theory that counterfactual analysis may be used not only for building alternative scenarios of the past but also as a methodology for exploring the future. After defining three aspects of counterfactuality and counterfact (dormant facts, reinterpreted facts, and rumor) and illustrating each in historical contexts, the author outlines their prognostic potential with specific reference to recent events whose differing interpretations have profound implications for future policy and international relations planning. Based on these examples, the author concludes that using counterfactual analysis as a method for developing scenarios and forecasting represents a useful approach toward coping with uncertainty and identifying wild cards, black swans, and so on.

Keywords counterfactuality, forecasting, scenario building, futures studies methodology, wild cards, black swans

Todorova 31

Pretty close conceptually to counterfactuality are what is sometimes called virtual, alternative, or allohistory. These embrace the concept that real alternatives are contained in every moment of the history. We cannot definitively answer why some particular thing has happened without knowing what alternatives were possible. Narrowing the scope of these historical alternatives, we should at least take into account those possibilities that were the most likely and then calculate the prob- abilities for a different historical outcome.

This statement gives rise to the need for understanding the nature of probability. But his- torical probability is much more complex than mathematical: how is it possible to separate prob- able but unrealized alternatives from improbable ones? Although the task is complex, supporters of virtual history are confident that it is a neces- sary counterpoint to determinism.

Alternative or virtual history has existed for some time but primarily as a literary genre or a sub-genre of science fiction. For this reason, many authoritative historians have long refused to take it into account. But an increasing number of scholars are now making use of it in an aca- demic context. Successful examples of alternate and virtual history writing include, Constructing a World: Shakespeare’s England and the New Historical Fiction (2003) by Martha Rozett, pro- fessor of History at the State University of New York, Albany, as well as Virtual History: Alternatives and Counterfactuals (1999b) and The Pity of War (1999a) both by Niall Ferguson of Harvard University.

A number of fiction films (e.g., the screen adaptation of Robert Harris’ 2009 Fatherland) and many video/computer games (e.g., Command & Conquer: Red Alert, Civilization Series, Metal Gear and Resident Evil series), which use the techniques of alternative history, have also helped to popularize the topic.

Factuality and Counterfactuality

There are three popular views (Mulligan and Correia 2013) about the nature of facts that can be distinguished:

1. A fact is simply a statement of truth. 2. A fact is the description of a state of

affairs that appears to exist. 3. A fact is just a sui generis type of entity

used to describe objects that exemplify particular properties or stand in spe- cific relation to one another.

The term fact comes from the Latin fac- tum meaning something that “has happened, or was done, made, or accomplished.” Moreover, it is what has been established and thus is real—that is, recognized as actu- ally existing. Yet we know that factuality can change over time and often proves to be ran- dom, individual, particular, and unique. It is in this sense that the German phenomenolo- gist Martin Heidegger began using the term in his lecture titled “Basic Problems of Phenomenology” (1919–1920).

In contrast to fact and factuality, counter- factuality is a conditional statement, which is artificially constructed. Yet once a hypotheti- cal fact is perceived as real, research can focus on its potential impact on existing reality and be used to help construct a scenario for the future. The working definition of “counter- fact” or “counterfactuality” for the purposes of this study will be based on the following list of its essential features:

1. The counterfactual belongs to the fam- ily of the non-factual;

2. It describes an alternative course of history;

3. It compares the suggested alternative course of history to the actual one (either explicitly or implicitly);

4. It specifies one historical event after which the actual and counterfactual courses become separated; and

5. It requires an assessment of the plausi- bility of the applied analysis.

This is the basis, I believe, for creating a methodology that can transform counterfactual analysis into a useful prognostic tool.

32 World Future Review 7(1)

Counterfacts in Practice: Dormant Facts, Facts Reinterpreted, and Rumors

A. The term dormant fact refers to an exist- ing situation or reality whose potential impact has remained unrecognized or unfulfilled. It has “slept” (remained latent) in the past, but may be activated and become manifest if and when the social, economic, political, or religious context is changed, producing dramatic and often violent change. One such dor- mant fact was the “frozen conflict” that divided the ethnic and religious groups—particularly Christians and Muslims—throughout the countries that formed the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (SFRY) following the Second World War. However, with the disintegration of SFRY after 1989, and the change of the political context, that potential was not only realized but also became a dominant factor in the region, unfortunately leading to genocide and massacre.

B. Facts may also be subject to reinterpre- tation or even reinvention and assume new meaning or content when political, social, religious, or economic contexts shift. The reinvention of a fact is often used for propaganda and ideological purposes. Such, for example, has been the behavior of the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, which uses facts from the history of Bulgaria and Greece, reinterpreted or altered in ways that enable it to construct for itself an independent national identity, history, culture, and language. The authenticity and objectivity of these “facts” may be questionable, but to the Macedonian people, they are legitimate and credi- ble. The ultimate goal is, via reinven- tion of the facts, to convince the international community, too, of their veracity.

C. A third category of “counterfacts” con- sists of rumors and hypotheses, which, though not yet universally accepted as

facts, nevertheless can have immediate and potentially lasting impacts on reality equal to or even stronger than established facts. For example, the present leader of the United Kingdom Independence Party—Mr. Nigel Farage—used as his pivotal pre-election thesis and platform the rumor/hypothesis that, after the fall of restrictions on the labor market in the United Kingdom for Bulgarians and Romanians in 2014, immigrants would flood the country and threaten its estab- lished social system (a hypothesis-coun- terfact). This changed economic context he predicted would result in a global financial and economic crisis—a danger that has scared a significant portion of the British electorate who see Mr. Farage as their defender, thus making his party an important political power after the European elections in 2014. Anti-European principles of a similar kind can already be heard from within the government itself, and the assurance of Britain’s continuing EU membership is shaken.

My purpose in offering the above theory of counterfactual construction is to show that careful analysis can identify the existence of these types of counterfacts and pinpoint those that have a strong impact factor, that is, to assess their potential to become true facts, that is, reality. In this article, I wish to stress the interpretation and application of counter- factual analysis and its potential as a forecast- ing methodology particularly useful in helping to cope with uncertainty and aid in the identification of wild cards, black swans, and so on.

Using Counterfactual Analysis for Forecasting and Scenario Building

To display the importance and the potential effect of such a new forecasting methodology, four examples are used, taken from four areas of high uncertainty typical for the twenty-first

Todorova 33

century—international politics, business, cli- matology, and terrorism.

I. Ukraine: “Awakened Potential”— Could the Annexation of Crimea Have Been Predicted?

Counterfact 1: “Kievan Rus.”

In year 862 AD, Kievan Rus was formed. Some scholars believe it was the first Russian state. This is a counterfact related to the con- struction and reconstruction of Russian nation- alism, which is a powerful tool in Mr. Putin political arsenal for maintaining and strength- ening his popularity in Russia. Ukraine has always been perceived as a cradle of Russian identity. Through this counterfact, romanti- cism and mythologies have emerged, which serve the claim that Russia is an ancient state with robust roots in the past and that Ukraine has always been of great importance to Russia.

In this case, we have to ask ourselves which of the two theories holds true—the Norman one (affirming that the organization of states was an “import” from the Vikings) or the anti- Norman (which says that the state system was built originally by the Slavs, and actually serves Russia in terms of ideology)? Historians today are of different minds on this issue. What is more important here is that any new inter- pretation or reinvention of this disputed fact from the past, if applied, may convert either one into a counterfact and opens the opportu- nity to posit two highly divergent future paths for the region.

Counterfact 2: “Crimea.”

We can trace the importance of Crimea for Russia back to 1699, when King Peter the Great made an unsuccessful attempt to seize it by conquering the Azov stronghold situated on the shore of the Sea of Azov. Peter was repulsed, but during the following two centu- ries, the Russians, step by step, broke through the Turkish–Tatar defense and took over almost the whole Northern Black Sea coast starting from the mouth of the Danube River. Russia has been the dominant power in Crimea

throughout the last two hundred years. It set foot permanently on the peninsula in 1783 by capturing it back from the Ottoman Empire. Catherine the Great declared that “from now on and for all times” Crimea would remain Russian soil. The kings after her built the Russian Black Sea Fleet in Sevastopol and purposefully settled Russians in the Crimea.

In 1954, Nikita Khrushchev (himself of Ukrainian origin, who was head of the USSR at this time) constructed a new fact. Crimea was transferred from Moscow to Ukraine (then still part of USSR)—a territory, that had been inten- tionally “Russianized” over a period of two hun- dred years by targeted changes to the ethnic map—to strengthen trans-national communist ideology and promote the meta-national identity of Soviet citizens. But the counterfact (hidden potential or frozen conflict), which for decades lay latent in transferring this territory, realizes its power now, more than sixty years later, fostered by a number of other circumstances.

In a similar context, one could make a com- parison to see whether the Crimea case resem- bles the history of Transnistria (Moldova) and construct scenarios to determine whether the Crimea incident might be repeated elsewhere.

II. Counterfact hypothesis: Global Warming or Global Freezing—Al Gore vs. Vaclav Klaus

Former U. S. Vice-President Al Gore claims that the world faces imminent global warming due to the greenhouse effect. Vaclav Klaus, for- mer president of Czech Republic, on the con- trary, claims that a new form of ice age is coming. Which of these two is true, what is the reality here, and how does it influence the facts?

Unless both claims are equally based on real evidence, as scientists say, then we have two counterfacts with a significant impact on the world’s political, economic, and social reality, as well as fundamental consequences for humanity. These differently constructed fact-hypotheses result in two conflicting but potentially legitimate policies for confronting climate change.

At an early stage in its existence, the sci- ence of “Climatology” has intertwined with

34 World Future Review 7(1)

the political situation. Climate is an extremely complex, chaotic system whose individual trends are often predictable, at least for the short term, but whose overall pattern is too complicated to be precisely measured, much less predicted in detail. This is so because many different types of flowing processes are observed—in the atmosphere, hydrosphere, stratosphere, and so on. It can be argued that climatologists have not had enough time to fully investigate the effects of the CO

2 factor

or to get accurate feedback as to its exact causes even from their own studies. Yet already there is powerful feedback from different political factions, which seldom deal exclu- sively with real scientific facts.

However, global warming trends are cur- rently much more powerful and popular than those about global freezing, and now the cli- mate policies of nearly all developed countries are based on them. Vice-President Al Gore’s 2006 movie An Inconvenient Truth made him one of the most influential speakers on the topic of climate change and a leading advocate for decisive action to save the planet.

The second term of former President of the European Commission Edward Barroso passed under the logo of the three desirable types of growth—smart, sustainable, and green. Today’s Europe 2020 Strategy has inherited this Lisbon Strategy. Mr. Barroso continues to be guided by the idea that a new economic model needs to be built based on knowledge, a low-carbon economy, and high employment.

Representing the opposite trend, claiming not only that we should not expect global warming but also that we are on the threshold of a new mini-ice age, is Mr. Vaclav Klaus, for- mer President of the Czech Republic. In his book Blue Planet in Green Shackles (Klaus 2008), he sharply opposes present European environmental policy, according to which global warming is real and the prevention of major disasters urgently require taking drastic measures. It is his belief that people will adapt and are quite able to survive in a changing cli- mate. He counts on the fact that Earth’s climate and ecology are highly complex systems that possess the ability to regulate themselves, so that no human intervention is necessary. The

subtitle of his book reads, “What is at stake: Climate or Freedom?” by which he means eco- nomic freedom. The author’s answer is that he does not believe any radical measures are needed that threaten human freedom and pros- perity. According to him, human adaptation and flexibility, together with technical prog- ress and existing market mechanisms, will be sufficient to deal with the situation.

From the above, we can see two completely opposite trends, which, in fact, are not mutu- ally exclusive. They are each the basis for completely opposite, though plausibly legiti- mate, policies that are being applied. If, as time passes, one or both trends get disproved, who will take responsibility for the very costly actions (or deliberate inaction) made on national, international, and global levels?

I propose that we use counterfactual analy- sis to elaborate possible scenarios to anticipate the results of each of these different strate- gies—in this case, not only to outline the impacts of both hypotheses but also to fore- warn how risky it may prove to exclusively follow one dominant trend.

III. The Attacks of 9/11: A Pre-constructed Fact

We come now to a case study that touches on a very sensitive string of American society —the attack on the Twin Towers in New York and the Pentagon by hijacked passenger airplanes. I chose this example, first of all, because I claim that such incidents could be anticipated if there existed an early warning system staffed by a team of futurologists. I say this because I believe it is the aim of researchers like futurists to examine the potential influence of assumptions, rumors, positions, gossip, and so on, on existing social institutions and accepted norms.

In February 1999, two Chinese People’s Liberation Army senior Air Force colonels, Qiao Liang and Wang Xiangsui, published a book called Unrestricted Warfare (Liang and Xiangsui 1999, 145). That book critically analyzes the con- cept of “Unrestricted Warfare” as it relates to future military doctrine. The authors discuss a collection of tactics, techniques, and procedures that have been used throughout history and will

Todorova 35

continue to be used by future adversaries. They write,

Actually, with the next century having not yet arrived, the American military has already encountered trouble from insufficient frequency band width brought on by the three above mentioned types of enemies. Whether it is the intrusions of hackers, a major explosion at the World Trade Center, or a bombing attack by bin Laden, all of these greatly exceed the frequency band widths understood by the American military. (Liang and Xiangsui 1999, 144–45)

In 1999, these authors proposed the coun- terfactual-hypothesis that it would be a plausi- ble terrorist act to blow up the Twin Towers and, immediately after that, actually mentioned Osama bin Laden in this context. Yet, two years later, the ignored counterfact created by these two Chinese authors became reality.

Even Peter Schwartz (Schwartz 2004, 3–4) wrote,

On September 11, 2001, we saw the tragic consequences of ignoring those predictions. The terrorist attack that day was perhaps the most forecast event in the history. A half dozen reputable commissions over the last twenty years had suggested that an incident very much like this might occur. Many predictions had singled out the World Trade Center (in part because it had been attacked before), [and] mentioned the use of airplanes as weapons, or specifically referred to Osama bin Laden. No one knew when the event would happen—it might be next week, it might be two years from now—but the details were foreseen.1

Many aspects of the attacks on the Twin Towers have since been widely addressed—not only in scholarly research but also often pre- sented in variations as a subject for movie and TV dramas. I would argue that this popularity in and of itself tends to encourage the adoption of similar action plans by radical groups worldwide. In practice, these many fictional variations act as forecasts of what may all-too-soon become reali- ties. Such well-publicized fictional scenarios detail plausible terrorist threats so well that they may become self-fulfilling prophecies.

It will be interesting to see to what degree the public presentation of counterfactual events with negative outcomes in science fic- tion and films will influence governments and other authorities to adopt new stronger mea- sures to counter serious threats like cyber ter- rorism, nano-sabotage, biological weapons, and so on. Ultimately, we have to ask whether utopias still offer a sustainable model for the long-term future, or if dystopias have now usurped that role? Here, we touch on the philo- sophical problem of reflexivity, which states that modern society generates its own terms and definitions and interprets the events that happen in accordance with those terms. In ear- lier eras, disasters such as famine, pestilence, earthquakes, and floods—all thought to be impossible to prevent—were accepted as nor- mal or even justifiable. If acts of terrorism come to be similarly viewed as “natural” or “justified,” humans may no longer regard a terror-free world as a probable or even possible alternative.

IV. Rumors: Future Bankruptcy of Greece

The application of counterfactual analysis as a forecasting methodology is confirmed by yet another example—rumors concerning the pending bankruptcy of Greece.

Rumors leave “an empty space” between them and the real fact, in the phase of their appearance. “The filling of that space” can gradually shape reality, influencing people’s actions and expectations until it builds to the point where the rumored counterfact becomes an actual fact.

Noted business magnate George Soros (1994) described the principles of self-fulfill- ing forecasts:

The key feature of these events is that the participants’ thinking affects the situation to which it refers. Facts and thoughts cannot be separated in the same way as they are in natural science; or, more exactly, by separating them we introduce a distortion which is not present in natural science, because in natural science thoughts and statements are outside the subject

36 World Future Review 7(1)

matter, whereas in the social sciences they constitute part of the subject matter.

On January 15 2015, the Swiss National Bank unexpectedly abandoned its policy of maintaining a maximum rate of 1.2 Swiss Francs (CHF) per Euro. In response, the exchange rate for the Swiss Franc rose sharply, which led to turmoil in capital markets and concerns about the competitiveness of local exporters. (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/ articles/2015-01-15/snb-unexpectedly-gives- u p - c a p - o n - f r a n c - l o w e r s - d e p o s i t - r a t e ) . According to some analyses, the losses that will accumulate from now on will amount to billions. There will be a chain reaction through- out the whole financial system, and all entities will be affected—from the big banks, through brokers, hedge funds, and mutual funds to cur- rency speculators. It is anticipated that beside direct currency trading, many of the other ser- vices banks provide (such as securities lend- ing, conducting commercial transactions, and cash management for hedge funds) could suf- fer as well. The negative effect will be most powerful for the Swiss banks themselves, because the strong franc will reduce the inflow of assets from abroad and will stimulate the export of money to other countries. In the long run, financial institutions will suffer from the negative impact of more-expensive currency on the whole economy. So why did the Swiss National Bank take such a step?

One hypothesis is that this policy was adopted in expectation that the extreme left wing party SYRIZA (http://www.syriza.gr/ page/international.html#.VS-PWM4cTUA) would win the Greek national elections (as happened ten days later on January, 25, 2015). This in its turn was expected to endanger the financial and fiscal policies of Greece and eventually take it out of the Eurozone. Similar shock would weaken the euro, reducing its value against the US dollar, in which case the losses to Switzerland would be much less than if its currency were still tied directly to the euro.

If we assume that these were indeed the rea- sons behind the actions taken by the Swiss National Bank, we observe an example of

preliminary preventive actions based on a mere presumption. So far, one assumption has already happened, that is, the euro has fallen in value, but the second—Greek withdrawal from the Eurozone—has not happened yet. We must wait and see what comes next to tell if these rumors will come true as a self-fulfilling forecast.

Conclusion

Counterfacts—constructed facts—may refer to the past or to the present, and in either context can have equally strong real-world impacts and consequences. Reality is a complex concept (construct), which exists at an intersection of real (factual) and imaginary (counterfactual) events. To foresee the future, both facts and counterfacts need to be taken into account. The current article is intended to offer a basis for future research targeting the elaboration of a matrix that will be able to detect, in a given real- time context, counterfacts with the potential to influence and shape reality and in addition to define the relative probability that they will either be proved or decisively disproved as facts. That is, future research will continue try- ing to create a methodology to identify signifi- cant counterfacts and explore their potential to turn into real facts. This, in turn, will become a new starting point for constructing alternative scenarios for the future. Counterfacts have sig- nificant potential to improve scenario building methodology and techniques for elaborating more adequate images of the future. They can be incorporated in the work of governments, think tanks, and universities for better navigat- ing into the future.

What are some potential applications of counterfactuality in forecasting? Following the principle of analogy, we might look for dor- mant facts (part of counterfactuality), which upon wakening, would influence reality. The spectrum of similar impacts is rather wide- ranging—from frozen conflicts, such as that in the Ukraine, to new pseudo-religious currents, such as the Islamic State in the Mid-East or Boko Haram in Africa. The aim is to examine whether they have the potential to cause tur- moil as suggested by the examples mentioned above.

Todorova 37

History is being rewritten in many coun- tries, for example, in those areas of Europe no longer under the direct control of the former Soviet Union. Increasingly, the aim is to obtain new national identity and to set new goals for the future. Conclusions reached using this new rewritten history of recent times as well as that based on the reinterpretations of supposed facts from the deeper past will be constructive indicators of the likely direction of future developments.

Rumors and hypotheses often create or unlock mini trends, which subsequently gain sufficient strength to cause political, social, cultural, or economic turnarounds. Futures studies will undoubtedly benefit from finding such counterfactuals and from the assessment of whether they have the potential for produce major impacts.

It is often claimed that the future is unknow- able and the past cannot be changed. But, for better or for worse, evidence is mounting to suggest that neither of these statements is true.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Note

1. Yet most people, in both the Bill Clinton and George W. Bush administrations, focused their attention elsewhere prior to September 11: on domestic priorities, campaign priorities, and other military arenas including missile defense. A few people in responsible positions did look ahead. For example, following the surprising end of the Cold War, the President and the Congress created a commission chaired by Gary Hart and Warren Rudman, to advise it on a new fundamental national security strategy. I led the scenario team for the Hart–Rudman Commission. Our report, released a few months after George W. Bush was inaugurated in 2000,

warned that terrorist incidents represented the greatest threat to the United States. In one sce- nario, we anticipated terrorists destroying the World Trade Center by crashing airliners into it. Our most urgent recommendation was that the United States needed new levels of capabil- ity in homeland defense (Schwartz 2004, 2–3).

References

Ferguson, N. 1999a. The Pity of War. Explaining World War I. New York: Basic Books.

Ferguson, N. 1999b. Virtual History: Alternatives and Counterfactuals. New York: Basic Books.

Fogel, R. 1964. Railroads and American Economic Growth: Essays in Econometric History. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.

Harris, R. 2009. Fatherland: What if Hitler Had Won? London: Arrow Books.

Klaus, V. 2008. Blue Planet in Green Shackles: What Is Endangered: Climate or Freedom? Washington DC: Competitive Enterprise Institute.

Lewis, D. 1973a. “Causation.” Journal of Philosophy, 70:556–67.

Lewis, D. 1973b. Counterfactuals. Malden: Blackwell. Lewis, D. 1986a. “Counterfactual Dependence and

Times Arrow.” In Philosophical Papers, vol. 2, 32–66. Oxford: Oxford Press University.

Lewis, D. 1986b. On the Plurality of Worlds. Oxford: Blackwell.

Liang, Q., and W. Xiangsui. 1999. Unrestricted Warfare. Beijing: PLA Literature and Arts Publishing House.

Mulligan, K., and F. Correia. 2013. “Facts.” In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Spring 2013 ed., edited by Edward N. Zalta. http:// plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2013/entries/ facts/.

Rozett, M. 2003. Constructing a World: Shakespeare’s England and the New Historical Fiction. New York: State University of New York Press.

Schwartz, P. 2004. Inevitable Surprises: Thinking ahead in a Time of Turbulence. New York: Gotham Books.

Soros, G. 1994. “The Theory of Reflexivity.” Lecture delivered April 26, 1994 to the MIT Department of Economics World Economy, Laboratory Conference, Washington, DC.

Wilson, F. 1986. Laws and Other Words: A Human Account of Laws and Counterfactuals. Dordrecht: D. Reidel.

38 World Future Review 7(1)

Author Biography

Mariana Todorova is a futurist. She is a member of Bulgarian Parliament and assistant professor at Bulgarian Academy of Sciences and was formerly an

advisor to the president of the Republic of Bulgaria. She has specialized in the U.S. State Department, and studied at Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government and the Chinese Academy of Governance.