Societies and economies are at the cusp of large-scale transformative changes. The digital revolution alone is changing the way we work, learn and interact with each other. The full consequences of these changes are not yet evident, but they require governments to anticipate working differently in the future, and to plan for that now.

The rise of platform economies, new consumption patterns and innovative technologies are transforming both service delivery and people’s lives in general. Smart solutions are entering our everyday lives and digitalisation and datafication of everything is the norm. In political economy, short-term considerations seem to prevail, while long-term challenges with cascading effects (like climate change and demographic shifts) are already being felt. Governments around the world are facing an unprecedented transformation process, where systems that have worked and delivered results in prior decades are being questioned.

This chapter outlines the need for governments to think about the future in new ways – in a more dynamic, anticipatory format. Systems approaches are not value free: they are influenced by how we think and conceptualise the future. Thus, special attention should be paid to how policymakers operationalise the future: what time-frames are talked about, what kind of narratives (e.g. smart governance) are used to outline different scenarios. All of the above guides systems transformation on the ground and is an important starting point to discuss what kind of change is possible or plausible.

Chapter 1 outlined the normative and value-led approach to futures. Anticipatory processes for systems change require taking action today and exploring different options. What is often considered plausible is based on values. Yet, how these interlink with the systems transformation in the public sector has not yet been examined. For example, the main line of literature on public sector change, public sector innovation, has usually been viewed through a public service lens (Osborne et al. 2013). Less attention has been paid to how problems are framed and how value conflicts and priorities in transformation processes and outcomes are debated. Public policy in general is inherently contested (Fuglsang and Rønning, 2014; Oldenhof, Ostma and Putters, 2013), making the role of political engagement extremely important when starting systems change processes. But how should different values be expressed and enhanced, muted or addressed in public sector systems change processes?

This chapter tackles the opportunities and approaches to integrate diverse voices into the systems change process especially when discussing alternative futures and framing problems. Systems change and innovation in the public realm is increasingly dependent on the ability to engage and productively interact with stakeholders, and to coproduce solutions with a wide range of societal actors such as citizens, companies and non-governmental organisations (Bommert, 2010; Eggers and Singh, 2009). As such, the interest in citizen involvement has risen with the external environmental pressure for change in public service delivery. Government is not expected to ‘know best’ which makes co-creating with citizens crucial for positive outcomes. Thus, engaging with citizens can help include ‘real life evidence’ in the decision-making process and engage with what really matters on the ground (Rabeharisoa, Moreira et al. 2014, Smith-Merry 2012).

This chapter presents a selection of in-depth exploratory case studies. The framework of the case studies mirror that used in the report “Systems Approaches to Public Sector Challenges: Working with Change,” (OECD, 2017). The case studies look at cities as examples of how government entities can address specific policy challenges that cannot be resolved through conventional policy processes. The cases cover areas around complex values, deliberative processes and different approaches around systems change where problems are redefined.

The aim of this report has been to illustrate how public value is changing and how government is involved in value-led transformation. It furthers the current conversation on systemic transformation in the public sector. This work has tried to explore the nexus between futures, public value and civic engagement while avoiding the details of the complex world of governance and the countless public governance models.