PofoliaShared via Pofolia

Social Sciences & Humanities Open· 2026Q1

Decision-ready foresight in the social sciences: A meso-level governance analysis of the DeflyCompass framework

Pablo Lara Navarra, Antonia Ferrer-Sapena, Enrique Alfonso Sánchez-Pérez

Short summary

The DeflyCompass Framework (DCF) provides an auditable, meso-level pathway for translating uncertain evidence into decision-ready foresight by separating construct from evidence and detailing institutional processes.

AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.

Key points

  • The DeflyCompass Framework (DCF) offers a traceable method for trend delimitation, reducing trends from 276 to 30 with high evaluator agreement.
  • Hybrid analysis in DCF enhances evidential coverage by integrating mutually checkable heterogeneous procedures.
  • Institutional singularity is supported as a classificatory problem, not an early-warning one, based on classifying 55 institutions across 16 variables.
  • A documented 24-professional process within DCF demonstrates intervention and reconsideration capabilities.

AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.

Abstract

Foresight informs collective action not only through signal detection and modelling, but through the institutional processes by which uncertain evidence is interpreted, contested, authorized, and revised. This article reconstructs the meso-level evidential basis of decision-ready foresight in the DeflyCompass Framework (DCF) through a retrospective integrative synthesis of peer-reviewed studies from the cumulative DeflyCompass programme, distinguishing direct evidence, corroborative evidence, and architectural inference. Four bounded findings emerge: explicit criteria made trend delimitation traceable, 276 to 69 to 30 trends, with high rating convergence among evaluators but no direct validation of stakeholder viability; hybrid analysis broadened evidential coverage when heterogeneous procedures remained mutually checkable; classifying 55 institutions across 16 variables supported institutional singularity as a classificatory, not early-warning, problem; and a documented 24-professional process evidenced intervention and reconsideration. Originality lies in separating construct from evidence and specifying an auditable meso-level pathway. Practically, its artefacts and review points can be implemented independently; academically, the study frames end-to-end prospective validation as the next research task.

The authors' abstract, as published at the source. Social Sciences & Humanities Open, 2026 · DOI ↗

TakeawaysPremium
Ask the paperFree account

Continue with a free account

Ask the paper: 3 free questions a day about this paper; save it, get its citation, new summaries every day for your field. Takeaways are Premium.

Continue free on the web

Sign in with Google or Apple; no card needed. You come back to this paper.

On your phone:

Field: General Social Sciences

General Social SciencesSocial Sciences