This paper provides an overview of foresight systems in the European Union, Finland, and Estonia. The systems analysed in this review were selected for their progressiveness, multi-layered nature, complexity, and ability to facilitate relatively effective cooperation between different actors. The European Union’s case was chosen because the EU is a unique supranational organisation with a number of foresight-generating institutions. Moreover, it encourages and supports its Member States in building their own foresight systems. Finland, compared to other countries, is often singled out because of the emphasis it puts on the application of futures studies in policy-making at national, regional, and even municipal levels. This paper aims to describe the components, functioning and application of the two systems in policy-making. The European Union, especially since the current European Commission took office, has been aiming to integrate foresight into policy-making at the very beginning of the political cycle in order to ensure that policies are future-proof. The entire foresight infrastructure is connected the ESPAS coordination network, which covers nine European Union institutions and promotes the use of foresight. The European Commission, in particular the Joint Research Centre and the Competence Centre on Foresight, are the main drivers for the integration of foresight into policy making. The European Commission has also launched the EU-wide Foresight Network, pooling international expertise and experience and involving high-level officials from Member States. It is also worth mentioning Horizon Europe, a programme aimed at funding research projects and innovations rooted in futures studies, while also promoting the development of Member States’ capacities in this field. The Finnish foresight system was introduced 30 years ago and has been constantly improving since, with the involvement of both government bodies and stakeholders from various segments of society. The Finnish society favours innovation and education and can be characterised by a high level of trust in public institutions, commitment to sustainability and responsibility for future generations, which creates a conducive context for the application of futures studies. The main stakeholders in the Finnish system are the Parliamentary Committee for the Future, the Finnish Innovation Fund SITRA, the National Foresight Network, the Government Foresight Group, and the ministries’ joint foresight working group. During each electoral term, the Government submits to the Parliament a Report on the Future, covering both the overall situation and prospects for specific sectors. These very influential reports are later incorporated into election campaigns and government programmes. In Finland, there is a culture of exchanging knowledge and finding common ground. Therefore, it is not an issue that foresight is generated not only by the national government, which inevitably leads to differences in sectoral priorities. The Estonian case is singled out for its reduced institutional proximity to Finland and, possibly, for the historical proximity to Lithuania. Either way, the Estonian case demonstrates both how and to what extent foresight can influence public policy-making and scenarios.