Abstract This article examines the integration of strategic foresight (SF) as a source of evidence for policymaking. As with past-oriented evidence, SF faces challenges related to its reliability and usability; yet, because it addresses uncertainty and long-term change, these issues take distinctive forms that warrant dedicated consideration. To advance this debate, we specify the conditions under which SF can be recognized as a legitimate and effective form of evidence. Through a comparative analysis of two policy-focused cases, the UK Government Office for Science’s Net Zero Society: Scenarios and Pathways report and the JRC’s Policy Lab and the ESPAS Horizon Scanning exercise, we develop a conceptual framework based on three enablers that enhance SF’s evidential value: robustness, appropriateness, and inclusivity. When SF outputs are designed with these factors in mind, they can meaningfully complement other forms of evidence within a broader, pluralistic knowledge ecosystem. We conclude in favor of integrating SF with established evidence practices under clearly articulated enabling conditions and limitations.
Vito et al. (2026) studied this question.