Analysis of reasons and countermeasures for the necessity of alternative futures discourses in South Korea
Abstract This paper examines an overview of the Western origins and concepts of alternative futures to address the ‘alternatives to what’ question, and to define three approaches to clarify the concept of alternative futures. An integrated approach, as a holistic means, should be considered as incorporating both the formal approach and the content-based approach. Moreover, this paper presents the necessary reasons for alternative futures discourses in Korea and proposes several countermeasures to improve Korea's futures practice. To date the Korean society and its futures practices have been dominated by five tendencies: (a) a dominant modernization paradigm, (b) a prevailing unipolar worldview, (c) an uncertainty avoidant culture, (d) poor methodological practice, and (e) Westernization of the Korean futures studies. These current tendencies and their ensuing negative effects have undermined both the continuation of creative futures and the Korean way of seeing the future. Thus, Korea's futures practice has experienced a lack of alternative futures approaches as well as a kind of identity crisis. In order to respond to those problems and create rigorous products of future practice, it is crucial for Korea's futures community to concentrate on the five alternative tendencies: (a) inventing Korean models in a viable utopia, (b) adopting a liberal cosmopolitan worldview, (c) building an uncertainty tolerant culture, (d) overcoming methodological challenges and (e) moving toward indigenous futures studies. In particular, indigenous futures studies can provide the grounds for relevant and enriched futures studies as well as the development of universal futures studies.