A scenario planning exercise published in “Scenarios for the Future of Technology and International Development” that described a 2012 influenza pandemic originating from wild geese in China — eerily mirroring COVID-19’s dynamics a decade before it happened. One of four futures exploring how technology and governance evolve under crisis.
View Evidence Cards Back to HubPrimary evidence from the Lock Step scenario — a forward-looking exercise in strategic planning that predicted pandemic dynamics with startling accuracy.
The Lock Step scenario described an influenza pandemic originating from wild geese, deadlier than H1N1. It spread rapidly: “Even the most pandemic-prepared nations were quickly overwhelmed when the virus streaked around the world, infecting nearly 20 percent of the global population and killing 8 million in just seven months.” The scenario was set in 2012 — COVID-19 emerged from China in 2019.
Lock Step’s central thesis: the pandemic triggers a world of “tighter top-down government control and more authoritarian leadership, with limited innovation and growing citizen pushback.” China’s response was presented as the model: “China’s government was not alone in taking extreme measures to protect its citizens” — mandatory quarantine, mandatory temperature checks, total border shutdowns.
The scenario described: “The mandatory wearing of face masks” and “body-temperature checks at the entries to communal spaces like train stations and supermarkets.” Both became global realities during COVID-19. The scenario also anticipated digital surveillance: governments “took a firmer grip on production and distribution of key resources.”
Lock Step described economic impacts matching COVID-19: “International mobility of both people and goods screeched to a halt, debilitating industries like tourism and breaking global supply chains.” The scenario projected a 20% drop in global economic activity — the actual 2020 contraction was the worst since World War II.
A remarkably accurate prediction: “Sub-Saharan Africa, which had had many cases in the early months of the pandemic, quickly got the upper hand through aggressive measures.” Africa’s COVID-19 outcomes were indeed better than projected, partly attributed to younger demographics, prior disease experience, and swift government response.
Lock Step predicted that authoritarian pandemic measures would trigger growing citizen pushback: “By 2025, people grew weary of so much top-down control and letting leaders and authorities make choices for them.” Anti-lockdown protests, freedom convoy movements, and vaccine mandate resistance during COVID-19 validated this prediction.
Lock Step was one of four scenarios in the Rockefeller Foundation’s futures report, each exploring different intersections of political alignment and adaptive capacity.
Strong government, weak adaptation. Pandemic triggers authoritarian governance worldwide. Top-down control increases. Citizens accept restrictions in exchange for safety. Innovation declines. Eventually, pushback grows as economic costs mount.
Strong government, strong adaptation. Coordinated global strategies address climate change, disease, poverty. Governments and corporations collaborate. Technology serves the public good. Most optimistic scenario.
Weak government, weak adaptation. Economically unstable world prone to shock. Criminal networks and hackers grow in power. Governments struggle to maintain order. Technology is weaponised against established institutions.
Weak government, strong adaptation. Localised, grassroots innovation flourishes in the absence of strong global governance. Ad hoc solutions emerge from necessity. Uneven progress across regions.
The scenario planning exercise was a collaboration between two major organisations.
A comparison of the scenario’s predictions with what actually occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic.
| Lock Step Prediction (2010) | COVID-19 Reality (2020–2023) | Accuracy |
|---|---|---|
| Pandemic from wild animals, 8M dead in 7 months | SARS-CoV-2 from animal origin, 7M+ official deaths (WHO est. 15M+) | High |
| Mandatory face masks and temperature checks | Global mask mandates; temperature scanning in buildings | Exact |
| China’s authoritarian response as “model” | China’s zero-COVID praised early then criticised | High |
| Border closures, tourism collapse, supply chains break | Global travel bans, tourism -74%, container ship crises | Exact |
| Africa fares better than expected | Africa had lower death rates than projected | High |
| Citizen pushback by 2025 | Anti-lockdown protests, freedom convoys, 2021–2023 | Close |
| Government surveillance increases permanently | Contact tracing apps, vaccine passports, QR code systems | Partial |
Lock Step belongs to a tradition of scenario planning exercises that anticipated real-world pandemics.
| Exercise / Scenario | Date | Type | Key Prediction |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dark Winter | June 2001 | Tabletop Exercise | U.S. healthcare collapses under bioattack |
| Atlantic Storm | Jan 2005 | Tabletop Exercise | International coordination fails; vaccine nationalism |
| Lock Step | May 2010 | Scenario Planning | Pandemic triggers authoritarian governance; masks, border closures |
| SPARS 2025–2028 | 2017 | Scenario Document | Vaccine hesitancy, social media misinformation |
| Event 201 | Oct 2019 | Tabletop Exercise | Coronavirus pandemic, 65M deaths, economic collapse |
| COVID-19 (Reality) | Dec 2019+ | Actual Pandemic | All predictions validated to varying degrees |
Lock Step became one of the most viral conspiracy theories of the COVID-19 era, requiring extensive fact-checking.
During COVID-19, the Lock Step scenario was reframed as “Operation Lockstep” — a purported conspiracy where the Rockefeller Foundation planned the pandemic. Social media posts claimed it was a “playbook” for authoritarian control. USA Today, Reuters, PolitiFact, and Full Fact all published fact-checks debunking this interpretation.
Scenario planning is a legitimate strategic methodology used by corporations, governments, and militaries worldwide. Shell Oil pioneered it in the 1970s. The purpose is to explore possible futures to improve decision-making — not to plan or predict specific events. Lock Step was one of four scenarios, each designed to stress-test different assumptions.
That Lock Step accurately anticipated pandemic dynamics does not mean its authors caused or planned COVID-19. Many experts had warned about pandemic risk for decades. The very existence of exercises like Dark Winter (2001), TOPOFF (2000–2007), and Event 201 (2019) demonstrates that pandemic scenarios were widely developed across governments, academia, and philanthropy.
Setting aside conspiracy theories, Lock Step raises legitimate questions about scenario planning and its relationship to policy. If philanthropic foundations fund pandemic scenario planning that later becomes government policy, what are the democratic accountability mechanisms? This is a valid governance question, distinct from conspiratorial claims.
Scenarios for the Future of Technology and International Development — Rockefeller Foundation & GBN (May 2010, 53 pages)