Порівняння методів

	Three Horizons Framework	Causal Layered Analysis
Галузь	Futures Foresight Studies	Futures Foresight Studies
Родина	Process / pipeline	Process / pipeline
Рік появи	2016	1998
Автор методу	Bill Sharpe, Anthony Hodgson, Graham Leicester (International Futures Forum)	Sohail Inayatullah
Тип	Pattern-mapping pipeline for transformative change over time	Layered deconstruction-and-reconstruction pipeline for futures and problem analysis
Основоположне джерело	Sharpe, B., Hodgson, A., Leicester, G., Lyon, A., & Fazey, I. (2016). Three horizons: a pathways practice for transformation. Ecology and Society, 21(2), 47.	Inayatullah, S. (1998). Causal layered analysis: Poststructuralism as method. Futures, 30(8), 815-829.
Інші назви	Three Horizons Model, 3H Framework, Three Horizons Mapping, H1-H2-H3 Pathways	CLA, Causal Layered Analysis Method, Inayatullah CLA, Layered Futures Analysis
Пов'язані	3	3
Підсумок	The Three Horizons framework is a structured way of thinking about transformative change by mapping three overlapping curves of activity across time. Developed within the International Futures Forum and given its definitive articulation by Bill Sharpe, Anthony Hodgson, Graham Leicester and colleagues in their 2016 Ecology and Society paper, it distinguishes the first horizon (H1), the dominant present system that is declining in its fit with a changing world; the third horizon (H3), an emerging and viable future pattern that is currently marginal but growing; and the second horizon (H2), the turbulent zone of transition in which entrepreneurial innovations and experiments compete, some carrying the system toward H3 and others merely propping up H1. Rather than predicting a single future, the framework is a pathways practice that helps groups see the present as a contested landscape of patterns and locate their own intentions and actions within it.	Causal layered analysis (CLA) is a critical futures method developed by Sohail Inayatullah and set out in his 1998 paper 'Causal layered analysis: Poststructuralism as method.' Rather than forecasting, its aim is to open up the space of possible futures by reading an issue at four levels of depth. The surface 'litany' of headlines and accepted trends sits atop systemic causes, which rest in turn on the worldviews and discourses that legitimate them, all anchored in deep myths and metaphors. By moving down through these layers to expose the assumptions and narratives beneath a problem — and then reconstructing upward from a transformed deep story — CLA produces futures that differ not merely in detail but in their underlying logic.