Fitness for a future of rapid change
On the sidelines of the South Australian Industry Climate Conference 2025, it was a privilege to have an extended chat with strategic foresight practitioner Professor Ariella Helfgott.
Dr Helfgott has worked across 26 countries in 8 global regions guiding governments, industries and communities in using foresight to create resilient, healthy and prosperous futures. Most recently she spent three years as a Director of Strategic Foresight in the Department of the Premier and Cabinet for the Government of South Australia.
Brian: Years ago I interviewed Sir Tim Smit – co-founder of Cornwall’s magnificent Eden Project. Tim Smit said he didn’t apologize for being an optimist. I was wondering where you sit on the scale from relentless optimist – like I am – to having to be a realist because of what do you see in the future?
Ariella: I tend to use the word hope more than optimism. I suppose people might use these terms differently. Let me explain my position with these definitions. All of the psychological literature on hope says that hope isn’t an emotion, that it’s made up of three capabilities:
- the capability to imagine a positive future;
- the capability to imagine pathways to it;
- and the belief that you have some agency to take action.
If people lack any of these three abilities, they feel less hope, but these are muscles you can develop.
And there’s also something called the Stockdale Paradox. Have you heard of the Stockdale Paradox?
Brian: No, I haven’t.
Ariella: It comes from Admiral James Stockdale and is a military strategy.
You must face brutal realities while never losing your commitment to a positive vision of the future.
If you just face the brutal realities and you don’t have that commitment to the positive future, then you’ll be lost in despair.
If you only have a positive vision of the future without facing brutal realities, you’re in denial.
At either end of those options, you won’t take the actions that are needed to ensure a positive future.
So for me, from a futures perspective, you absolutely have to do both: face the brutal realities and never, ever lose that commitment to the positive future.
I’m in the hope business.
Sometimes people use hope and optimism interchangeably. But I’ve always thought that optimism was more like a sense that things will be okay. Whereas for me hope is this very active process of maintaining that commitment; helping others to envision positive futures that they can actually get behind; helping them understand why they have to stay committed to that while facing the brutal reality so that we can do the pathfinding.
So yes, I think we’re probably in the same category though I’m using different language. I think we have a moral responsibility to maintain that commitment to a positive future or else we’re sunk.
Brian: Absolutely. I do like that phrase hope is a verb. I think that embodies what you just said.
So I wonder how you see the role of non-government organisations. Are you still involved with the World Energy Council?
Ariella: Yes. I’m currently the global Director of Foresight and Strategy.
Brian: Oh, excellent. So how do you see that as it relates to intergovernmental organisations like the International Energy Agency? How do you see the different capabilities of the two groups?
Ariella: Non-governmental organisations play a vital role in supporting the health of democracies and civil society. When those institutions are undermined, such as through increasing restrictions or political attacks, it’s often a signal of deeper democratic strain.
The World Energy Council, founded over a century ago in the aftermath of the First World War, was established to help prevent future conflict through international cooperation on energy. It was created as a neutral, independent, and inclusive platform for dialogue, bringing together diverse voices to address shared energy challenges. That founding spirit of peace, neutrality and connection remains at the heart of the Council’s work today.
The Council’s mission has evolved to focus on accelerating successful energy transitions worldwide, supporting the development of clean, affordable, reliable and equitable energy—the CARE framework—for all. In today’s world, where energy issues are increasingly politicised and fragmented, that mission is more essential than ever.
I am struck by the breadth of positive progress taking place around the world. For example, ASEAN, where countries like Malaysia, Singapore, Thailand and Vietnam are building a transnational ASEAN grid. These insights don’t often make headlines in Australia, where public discourse is shaped by a narrower media lens. Yet through the Council, we’re able to connect into these critical global conversations.
This work feeds directly into the World Energy Issues Monitor, our annual global pulse check that identifies the most pressing action priorities, critical uncertainties, blind spots, and bright spots across the global energy landscape. The 2025 edition captured bright spots from around the world – real examples of innovation, leadership, and progress across the energy transition.
The Council’s value lies in its role as a trusted convener and connector. It hosts regional, national and global dialogues—not only at high-profile public events, but also through behind-the-scenes exchanges between senior energy executives, government leaders, and communities. These dialogues allow countries facing common challenges to learn from each other and create shared pathways forward. Where one country sees a blind spot, another may already have developed a bright spot—and the Council plays a critical matchmaking role to bring those solutions to light.
In a time of rising geopolitical uncertainty and increasing fragmentation, the World Energy Council provides a uniquely multilateral, non-political space for constructive collaboration. It connects countries, transfers knowledge, and builds relationships of trust—helping the world navigate complex transitions together.
For Australia, this moment presents a real opportunity. While others may waver, we can double down on being a reliable and forward-looking partner in global energy transition efforts. The Council helps us stay connected, informed, and able to lead with credibility and impact.
Brian: So that brings me to the next point which is about building empathy. I’m wondering – I know these aren’t mutually exclusive – but what are your views about storytelling versus academia? How do we go about building those two together to build more empathy so that – for example – even when Trump has withdrawn the US from the Paris Agreement, we continue to build action for resilience?
Ariella: I think for me, building empathy and building bridges is probably my top action priority. And yes, empathy and storytelling. So it’s interesting that part of the reason that we’re collaborating with Stav – Stavroula Adameitis – is that she is an artist and an amazingly beautiful communicator and storyteller. When we do futures work, the ability to collaborate with someone like Stav – to help translate everything that we’re doing into really relatable metaphors, stories and visuals that ordinary people can see themselves in and can get behind – is really important. So that’s literally the whole reason that we’re in this together now.
Stav: I’m the A in the STEAM conversation.
Brian: Excellent. I’m from Urban Ecology Australia. Our founding architect Dr Paul Downton said, “The city can save the world“. And he went on to say, “we can’t just talk about it, we have to do it“. And so we built Christie Walk, the model eco-village.
Ariella: That was being built when I was studying engineering. I started civil engineering in 1997 and my student friend was Katherine Daniell. Now she’s my colleague. At Adelaide University she did research with Paul Downton on sustainability assessment at Christie Walk.
Brian: Oh, really?
Ariella: And I was the maths nerd in the group. I did lots of sustainability metric calculations. Katherine’s now the Dean of the School of Cybernetics at ANU.
Brian: That’s a wonderful story. I love it. I did civil engineering too, and then town planning. So we’ve come through similar channels.
So what advice would you have for a group like Urban Ecology Australia in trying to reach out more widely? I mean, we do all the standard things. I edit the website and keep the blog going. We have tours regularly through the village to show people what’s possible, to give them a vision of what cities could look like. What else could we be doing?
Ariella: In terms of doing more to reach out, is that specifically about the Christie Walk project or just in general about cities?
Brian: It’s to provide inspiration to people to want to be able to do more in their own lives. And particularly for people who are considering building new communities in urban areas.
Ariella: In a post called Seeds of a Good Anthropocene the Stockholm Resilience Centre began collecting samples of sustainable futures that already exist. Have you ever come across it?
Brian: No.
Ariella: They deliberately emphasise that we are in the Anthropocene, where humans are having the most impact on everything. They are seeking examples of humans doing well, where we actually manage to live in harmony with ourselves, each other and nature, and they collect them from all over the world. So one thing that you could do is get yourselves on that list so that your story is being spread everywhere.
Brian: Great idea, thank you.
Ariella: I think it’s really important that your community sees the work you’re doing as part of something bigger—not isolated, but connected to a broader movement. That’s one of the reasons I value the World Energy Council. It’s a global network that reminds us that leadership isn’t just about individuals—it’s about ecosystems. It’s about empowering networks of people to support each other and drive change together.
Take Christie Walk—it’s a great local example of what’s possible in cities. But the question is: do you have a network of people and places like that, so you’re not doing this work alone? Mutual support and uplift are essential.
That’s the approach we’ve taken with the South Australian Futures Agency, which Stav and I co-founded. Our mission is to ensure all South Australians have the capabilities to navigate deep uncertainty—because we are living through a time of accelerating change and disruption.
Uncertainty affects people physically—we release cortisol, it’s uncomfortable, and the natural reaction is to want it to go away. But that’s when people become vulnerable to those who promise false certainty. And in uncertain times, anyone offering certainty is either misguided or dangerous.
What we want to do instead is build people’s capacity to navigate uncertainty—to face it with agency and imagination. That’s why storytelling is so central to our work. When people can imagine positive futures, they’re more likely to create them.
Our model is ecosystem-based: we’re creating nodes and communities of practice across South Australia, and connecting them with global networks. We want people to see that this work—while it may feel unconventional—is actually part of a real, growing international movement.
And we’re investing in building those muscles for uncertainty. In June, we’re bringing out Vaughn Tan, an expert on the difference between risk and uncertainty. He’s done pioneering work on “productive discomfort” showing how uncertainty, while uncomfortable, is actually necessary for innovation. If everything’s certain and locked in, you can’t adapt or create anything new. So this moment of openness is also full of possibility, if we have the skills to navigate it.
We’re also bringing Jeremy Bentham, who was a key reason I joined Shell years ago. He’s an extraordinary thinker on energy systems and foresight. By connecting people here to global leaders like Jeremy and Vaughn, we give them both inspiration and practical insight into how change happens.
That matters – because people need to see that transformation is possible. When they feel connected to others doing the work, they’re more likely to believe it can happen here too.
Take London, for example. Despite narrow roads and a booming population, they’ve successfully reduced car use and massively expanded public and active transport. There are lessons in how they did that. Every time someone says “that’s not possible here,” it helps to be able to point to a place where it’s already happening.
There are examples of change everywhere. Our job is to connect the dots, and show what’s possible.
Brian: How important is it for Adelaide to host COP31 next year? Because for me, that was a light bulb moment yesterday when Premier Malinauskas and Deputy-Premier Susan Close were describing the bid for COP31. The eyes of the world will be on us.
Ariella: Absolutely, and I have a lot of thoughts about that. If Adelaide secures COP31, its impact and legacy will depend entirely on what we make of it.
On a personal level, my feelings about COPs have had ups and downs. In 2015, when COP21 happened in Paris, I was living in Utrecht. My closest friends were there, and I didn’t go. They were passionately committed to making a difference, and indeed, something shifted positively that year. It was a powerful reminder about perseverance and facing tough realities head-on. However, it’s also crucial to acknowledge a hard truth: for some participants, COP events can become little more than tourism opportunities. Yet, COP31 offers us an incredible opportunity to go beyond that.
And the world’s eyes certainly will be on us. In Brazil, numerous articles highlight the clearing of Amazon rainforest to host COP30. I don’t want similar headlines about South Australia hosting COP31. If we’re having it here, can we please do a really good job of this?
This event remains vitally important despite the global geopolitical landscape becoming increasingly fragmented. Recent global energy scenarios from the World Energy Council emphasize how cooperation looks very different now. Historically, energy scenarios frequently emphasized global collaboration and multilateral agreements as key drivers of the energy transition. Since around 2016, this optimistic, cooperation-driven scenario was dominant. However, at the latest World Energy Congress in Rotterdam in April 2024, global consensus emerged that such broad multilateral cooperation is no longer plausible in the same way.
Our current scenarios, titled Rocks and Rivers, reflect this shift. In the Rivers scenario, cooperation is more targeted, driven by mutual self-interest – such as South Australia collaborating specifically with Sweden on green steel or working with other nations on hydrogen initiatives. The Rocks scenario is focused more on national security and strategic alignments based on trust.
But in both scenarios, energy transition still advances. The question is no longer about the pace of global cooperation, but rather, recognizing that transformations are increasingly demand-driven. History demonstrates clearly – whether with solar panels, battery-electric vehicles, or even the LNG revolution of the 1970s – that rapid transformation requires three conditions: supportive policy environments, pioneering businesses, and aligned supply chains. When these conditions align, changes happen faster than anticipated.
Given these conditions already exist in various forms, the critical strategic question now is: do we act decisively and risk being early, or hesitate and risk missing critical opportunities? Despite the fragmented global context and uneven progress, the evidence suggests strongly that market-driven, supply-side energy transformation is continuing and irreversible, even amid recent global disruptions.
COP events provide a critical platform for diverse stakeholders – policymakers, businesses, NGOs – to engage constructively on these issues. Having experienced multiple sides of these conversations, my perspective is nuanced. At Oxford’s Environmental Change Institute, I was among the “good guys.” At Shell’s Scenario Team, I was seen by some as one of the “bad guys.” Now, at the World Energy Council, how I’m perceived depends greatly on who you ask.
This polarization can make genuine dialogue challenging. I’ve experienced firsthand how deeply entrenched these divisions can become. This polarization is counterproductive. Effective transformation requires dialogue and collaboration between supply and demand sides. This principle emerges clearly in the Rocks and Rivers scenarios.
If Adelaide hosts COP31, it provides an unmatched opportunity to foster precisely this kind of transformative collaboration. We have a chance to showcase how meaningful partnerships and genuine dialogue across sectors and interests can drive impactful, lasting change.
Brian: Do you want to tell me a bit more about the work that you’re doing together with Stav, what you’re actually working on?
Ariella: We’ve set up the SA Futures Agency with the idea of wanting to build people’s capacity to navigate uncertainty and to anticipate future trends and changes and then shape better futures; acknowledging the tension between what they control and what they don’t.
But one of the things that I don’t like about terms like future-proofing is that they make it sound like the future is something that is gonna just happen and you have to just proof for that rather than you actually have some agency.
There are many instances where the future isn’t already written; what’s going to happen has a lot to do with what we all do about it, especially collectively.
So the reason why we call it SA Futures Agency is we’re wanting to build people’s actual futures agency. It’s a deliberate use of the double meaning of agency.
Stav: And we’re also a cross-disciplinary group. I come from a visual arts, design and fashion background. Others are software and data wizards, community stakeholder and engagement specialists, and workshop facilitators.
We are not a traditional bunch. But we’re also not promising to be crystal balls. To help organisations see the future, we’re a compass.
We’re bringing our tools to help organisations ask the questions, find the blind spots, shine the bright spots, and help people overcome what they’re not seeing or talking about through our own varied backgrounds.
It’s also important to note that we are a startup. We’re fully independent. We’re not affiliated with any government agency. We’re just a bunch of passionate weirdos coming together to make change.
Brian: And that’s how change does happen.
Ariella: We do foresight guided strategy development processes for state government agencies, local government, businesses: any organisations that have a footprint in South Australia. Happy to help you guys if you want!
And then we do education and training.
I taught this process at the Universities of Oxford, Utrecht, Wageningen. I’ve taught it to the Prime Minister’s office of the United Arab Emirates. So I have really tried-and-tested our two-day Foundations of Foresight course.
I can teach people: this is how you do horizon scanning; this is how you make scenarios; this is how you do the normative visioning to get the positive vision of the future; this is how you do the pathfinding to make the strategic pathways in between; this is how you look at the robustness of those across scenarios, this is how you put it all together into a strategy. And that’s the end result of the two days.
Stav: Futuring is a systematic process; it’s not woo-woo.
Ariella: Some people think it is, though. And one of the reasons people think that is because there’s no actual data about the future. There’s data about the past up until the present. What everyone has about the future are assumptions.
Stav: I think when you talk about the future, the timing that’s of most prescience and pertinence is the present.
Ariella: And what we’re actually trying to do is to help people make better decisions right now by looking further ahead.
Brian: So when did you do that work with the South Australian Department of Premier and Cabinet?
Ariella: I finished at the end of January. So I spent three years being the Director of Strategic Foresight for the Department of Premier and Cabinet. I was doing long-term futures work for all the State Government agencies. In three years we did 30 strategies for 19 agencies.
Brian: You must be seeing a lot of that coming to fruition now.
Ariella: When you talk about seeing things come to fruition, for me it always comes back to recognising that there are multiple possible futures, each shaped by the choices we collectively make today. Now that we’re operating outside of government, we have the opportunity to create futures work that speaks directly to our communities and reflects the rapidly changing world around us. This means making our insights accessible, opening up the conversation, and involving everyone in the journey. Storytelling becomes central here, because the narratives we share about the future profoundly influence the actions we are willing to take in the present.
Brian: I agree.
Ariella: Scott Smith, in How to Future, highlights a critical issue: when expert futurists deliver fixed, predetermined narratives about the future, they leave their audience with no meaningful agency, only the limited choice to either accept or reject that predefined future. I deeply resonate with this viewpoint. Our approach is fundamentally different; we strive to bring diverse groups together to co-create compelling, inclusive, and empowering stories about possible futures.
Right now, as many traditional institutions are faltering, we see harmful narratives quickly filling these gaps. It’s more important than ever that the futures we collectively imagine are strong enough to offer powerful, positive alternatives – narratives that everyone can support, embrace, and actively shape together. We need people to be able to do more than go along with someone else’s narrative.
Stav: People also vote with their eyes, and what they experience in terms of visuals, aural and music. My job is to sort out how we can engage the arts outside of art galleries, instead of just looking at screens? What are the other canvases? Clothing is a canvas. A wall is a canvas, a T-shirt is a canvas. A projection on a building during Illuminate is a canvas. There are so many different canvases available that you can use to communicate ideas; ideas that can and should be shared.
My faith in artistic institutions is crumbling somewhat. So I’m trying to do what I can to get out of those echo chambers and into communication with the average person.
Ariella: Maybe you could have dinners at Christie Walk. Why not get celebrity chefs who use local produce and have dinners on site and then get the local magazines to cover it. Everyone loves a square meal.
Brian: I was trying to think of what we could do to tie in with COP31. It’s a good idea, assuming we get COP.
Ariella: I’m very hopeful that we will be. It’s going to be huge. Everybody’s going to have to pitch in big time.
Brian: Thank you so much for sharing your expertise and ideas with us; it’s hugely appreciated.
Leave a Reply