This article was downloaded by: University of Bucharest On: 03 december 2014, At: 05:10 Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number:
1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1t 3jh, UK Technology analysis & Strategic management Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
12 oct 2009. To cite this article: Stefanie Jenssen (2009) Foresight and governance: how good can it get?
The case of stakeholder image construction in a municipal vision project, Technology analysis & Strategic management, 21:8, 971-986, DOI:
Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www. tandfonline. com/page/termsanndconditions Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:10 03 december 2014 Technology analysis & Strategic management Vol. 21
8 november 2009,971 986 Foresight and governance: how good can it get? The case of stakeholder image construction in a municipal vision project Stefanie Jenssen*Centre for technology, innovation and culture (TIK), University of Oslo, Norway The article addresses the theme of foresight and equality in the area of stakeholder participation
Drawing on fieldwork studies of a Norwegian municipal vision project conducted in 2006 it is shown how a specific image of young people was constructed
stefanie. jenssen@tik. uio. no ISSN 0953-7325 print/ISSN 1465-3990 online 2009 Taylor & francis DOI:
10.1080/09537320903262397 http://www. informaworld. com Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:10 03 december 2014 972 S. Jenssen multi-stakeholder dialogue
and strategic decisions. 3 In their seminal paper on‘Inclusive foresight'Loveridge and Street (2005) argue that the credibiilit of foresight is dependent on extending participation to social stakeholders, especially those not normally seeking participation themselves.
or a political entity with predefined power or influennc in the project but young people between 14 and 19 years of age.
However, similar to Fombrun's (1996) definition‘image'is here related to seemingly inherent characteristics, including socioeconomic,
Relevance of case study What picture do we have of young people between 14 and 19 years of age?
The present case of a Norwegian municipal vision project points to the often implicitly assumed shared understanding of who young people are
In regard to foresight Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:10 03 december 2014 Foresight and governance: how good can it get?
Institute for Prospective Technological Studies (JRC-IPTS)( 2005 7)‘ a vision is imagined an representation or a shared picture of the (usually desired future'.
such as understanding past and present, and exploring the future in different scenarios (Godet 2001). In the literature on municipal planning, visioning is regarded as a separate method,
as a more direct process of establishing a desired vision of a communal future not necessarily based on different future scenarios. 5 This latter approach is politically crucial for public organisations trying to develop policy and long-term thinking.
2004,195) there was virtually no mentioning of visioning as a collective activity within the planning profession before 1990.
Scholars of science and technology studies (STS) have called attention Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:10 03 december 2014 974 S. Jenssen to the specific qualities of foresight
arguing that its practices point to certain ways of framing and rationalising the future (Rappert 1999.
however, have questioned the direct influence of scientific expectatiion and technological promises on strategic development of organisations (Sanz-Menéndez and Cabello 2000;
Burt 2007. They have studied foresight in the context of organisational identittie and the ways individuals fulfil identities
and follow rules and procedures (Bood 2002). Schwandt and Gorman (2004) argue that organisations do not necessarily follow a straight and rational logic of techno-scientific expectations and promises.
Building on these arguments Jenssen (2007) advocates a more cautious approach to the importance of foresight as a strateggi tool for policy
and decision-making by emphasising the complexity of organising and organisations. Thirdly, this discussion of stakeholder image construction in foresight is inspired by issues of reflexivity in social theory (Giddens 1991;
Beck, Bonss, and Lau 2003; Lash 2003; Latour 2003), as a form of governance (Wynne 2002;
Grunwald 2004; Cunliffe 2005; Konrad and Voß 2006) in designing foresight processes and adaptive planning (Grin, Felix, and Bos 2004;
Weber 2006) and as a critical tool in qualitative research (Lynch 2000; Colombo 2003; Cañellas-Boltà and Strand 2006.
Reflexivity is a broad concept, with roots in philosophical, literary and social as well as natural science discourses.
In the context of future orientation, reflexivity has evolved from an understanndin of human practice as described by Garfinkel (1967) via a social theory of modernity introduced by among others Giddens (1991) and Beck, Bonss,
and Lau (2003), towards a new understanding of foresight methodology and practice (Fuller and De Smedt 2008).
Most literature today sees reflexivity as a positive value in itself, a practice to aspire to
and to be followed by social institutions. Beck, Bonss, and Lau (2003,2) refer to‘reflexive social institutions'as central agents charged with the responsibility to make‘reasonable decisions about the future...
in a world that is, in some respects, literally boundless'.'Foresight is thus a coordinated response to uncertainty and risk.
Giddens (1991,29) argues that the‘popularity of futurology in the system of high modernity is not an eccentric preoccupation...
but signals a recognition that the consideraatio of counterfactual possibilities is intrinsic to reflexivity in the context of risk assessment and evaluation'.
'Foresight is thus an expression of the constant self-monitoring of social institutions, their ability to address present
and future issues and to act responsibly in a changing environment. Less attention, however, is given to the paradoxical aspects of reflexive knowledge in its relation to expectations and the organisation of the future.
How do we mobilise knowledge for futureorieente activities and expectations about future development? Giddens (1991,29) argues that our present knowledge about social institutions
and relations between social actors relates to existing structures and could limit our openness to new insights.
Thus reflexive knowledge might in the end confound our expectations. Therefore we need a broader understanding of reflexivity Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:10 03 december 2014 Foresight and governance:
how good can it get? 975 in foresight as containing both enabling and constraining features,
The empirical study is based on 34 hours of in depth interviews and fieldwork observations in those various settings.
and to collect‘relevant ethnographic moments'(Van't Klooster and Van Asselt 2006) during the 7-month project period.
For the discussion at hand ethnographic moments were chosen which were‘indicative of dissonance'(Herzfeld 1997) and highlighted‘contesting values or problematic social changes of some kind'(O'connor 2004).
This article is based on the collection of specific moments in which the idea of assumed shared values collided with the ideal of community engagement. 9 The following discussion of how an image of schoolchildren as stakeholders
and participants was constructed by the visioning project leadership touches on possibilities and limits of inclusive foresight in municipal planning processes and expounds the challenges of our contemporary understanding of communicative planning tools as power instruments (Pløger 2002).
Requested vision: a desired future picture of Lundal The municipality of Lundal10 is situated closely to the Norwegian capital of Oslo and one of the richest municipalities in Norway.
In September 2005, the municipal administration conducted a survey measuring their inhabitants'satisfaction with the community services provided.
The results of the survey showed an overall satisfying result, except for one group of inhabitants, young people between 14 and 19 years of age.
According to the survey this social group was satisfied least with communal offers for social and cultural engagement.
‘All pupils and students in secondary schools and colleges should be invited to participate in a vision project organised by the municipality to create a desired picture of their community in 2020'.
'Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:10 03 december 2014 976 S. Jenssen Figure 1. The future picture of Lundal was situated clearly within the possible and desirable.
From power point presentation by project leadership, March 2006. The visioning project was organised by a project group consisting of one of Lundal's municipal administration employees
The resulting visions were planned to be revised part of the municipal long-term plan regarding social development of the community (2006 2020.
The process of the visioning project was defined also as being guided by Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:10 03 december 2014 Foresight and governance:
and giving priority to their ideas about Lundal's future was expressed by the community council in September 2005:‘
This means that this time the focus is on areas of action which address the well-being of the citizens
To avoid political discussions about unrealistic use of municipal areas resulting from the young Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:10 03 december 2014 978 S. Jenssen Figure 2. Illustration by German cartoonist
Power point presentation, March 2006. people's suggestions, they were asked to focus on the‘well-being of citizens and on ideas about
They were asked to use their estimated age of about 30 years in 2020 as a starting point for their visionary ideas. 14
when it came to their contributions their present social status was not what the project leaders were interested in.
They suspected that visions taking their starting point in the young people's present situationwould result in enumerations of their daily needs
which would show desired descriptions of Lundal in 2020. These future pictures were to be written using expected trends in municipal developmmen coupled with the young people's ideas.
The municipal project leader ordered the ideas collected from the Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:10 03 december 2014 Foresight and governance:
979 Figure 3. The design of the municipal vision project according to the project group, February 2006. schools systematically and created three future pictures,
Once we have discussed financial conditions, time and the political premises for such processes, it is difficult to imagine deeper analyses of possible visions.
or agree Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:10 03 december 2014 980 S. Jenssen on a desired vision, for instance upcoming municipal elections.
and recommendations need to be based upon sound data of the past and present, as well projections of those trends that can be projected with reasonable confidence of accuracy,
'18 In the case of the Lundal vision project, long-term social planningwas intended to be influenced by young people between 14 and 19 years of age.
defining them as non-experts (Cañellas-Boltà and Strand 2006), or they should be able to influence the activities of an organisation.
The participation of young people as stakeholders in the vision project is an example of a wider legitimation movement that does not base stakeholder participation on authority but on authenticity (Brown and Michael 2002.
Their genuine position as young people in the community was the starting point for politicians, administrative leaders and project organisers, from
no juvenile wishes and demands connected to the present, no ideas about physical projects, only ideas about social well-being and a clear dissociation from too fantastic notions.
Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:10 03 december 2014 Foresight and governance: how good can it get?
Areas Pre-definitions as stakeholders Preconditions for their contributions as participants Cognitive Young people are the future Imagine yourselves as grown-ups in 2020!
This case illustrates thus not only challenges of inclusive foresight taken up by Loveridge and Street (2005) but also much wider problems regarding good governance
Pløger 2001. 21 They argue that one of the problems municipal planning is confronted with is assumed the frequently existence of universal values
The case discussed here illustrates Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:10 03 december 2014 982 S. Jenssen that power in such processes is both hierarchical and relational, yet‘not simply a relationship between partners, individual or collective;
as steering and decision-shaping and of politics as decision-making (Johnston 2002). Foresight as well as governance is seen often as consisting of networking
but helps identifying power structures related to government (Stoker 1998). However, since foresight methods and practices are always part of an organisational setting, local, sectorial, regional or otherwise,
‘Most OECD member Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:10 03 december 2014 Foresight and governance:
'2. See Cuhls (2003), Cuhls and Georghiou (2004), Rask (2008), Van't Klooster and Van Asselt (2006).
3. About the relationship between foresight and decision making see Brown et al. 1999), Ringland (2002), Brown, Rappert, andwebster (2000), Böhle (2003), Genus (2006), Georghiou (2001), Johnston (2001), Berkhout and Hertin (2002.
4. In scenario planning a set of alternative scenarios are created to achieve an understanding of the range of possible future developments, more or less regardless of
on the assumption that images of a desired future can direct individuals'present behaviours, guide choices and influence decisions.
For more insight into scenarios and visions work, see Van Notten (2005) and Gertler and Wolfe (2004.
2003). ) 5. On visioning in municipal planning, see Shipley and Newkirk (1999), Shipley (2002), Shipley et al.
2004). ) 6. Slaughter (2004,92 4) sees the development of Critical Future Studies (CFS) following the traditions of STS in‘challenging the inevitability
and the taken-for-grantedness of the familiar, as well as of the novel and the new'.
but also by economics, innovation studies, organisational studies, linguistics and semiotics, see Van Lente (1993), Brown, Rappert, andwebster (2000), Brown and Michael (2003), Borup et al.
2006). ) 8. The term‘expectational reflexivity'covers those simultaneously enabling and constraining situations in which collecctiv expectations are predefined by governmental actors who need to establish future visions firmly within the frame of existing governmental structures.
The notions of active citizenship and community involvement have become increasingly promineen in political discussions and policy practices within planning and future oriented governance (Stukas and Dunlap 2002;
Marinetto 2003. 10. The informants involved in the visions project requested to keep their municipality's identity unrevealed.
Proposal sent by Lundal's head of administration to the community council, September 2005, p. 7. 12.
March 2006 italics added. 13. Invitation sent by Lundal's head of schools to all secondary schools and colleges,
February 2006 italics added. 14. From Invitation. 15. Interview with vision project leader, April 2006. All interviews were conducted in confidentiality,
and the names of interviewees are withheld by mutual agreement. 16. Interview with vision project leader April 2006.17.
Interview with vision project leader, June 2006.18. In this respect, foresight practises and guidance literature interact with research areas of science and technology studies (STS), especially regarding insights about the relationships between‘given facts and future values'.
'As Brown (2005,331) writes:‘‘in a wide range of contexts, present day evidences, proofs, facts or truths are giving way to future-oriented abstractions premised on desire,
imagination and the will to the yet not present'.'19. According to The United nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (UNESCAP 2009) good governance has eight major characteristics.
It is oriented participatory, consensus, accountable, transparent, responsive, effective and efficient, equitable and inclusive and follows the rule of law.
It assures that corruption is minimised, the views of minorities are taken into account and that the voices of the most vulnerable in society are heard in decision-making.
It is also responsive to the present and future needs of society. 20. Local newspaper article, 5 april 2006.21.
See also Flyvbjerg (1998. Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:10 03 december 2014 984 S. Jenssen 22.
Theorist of urban planning Huw Thomas takes a pragmatic position when discussing the relationship of planning, power and values:‘
‘when we do good we use power. When we help some we exclude others'(Thomas 1994,217.
On communicative ethics, see Habermas (1998. 23. According tovoß and Kemp (2006,4) reflexive governance‘refers to the problem of shaping societal development in the light of the reflexivity of steering strategies the phenomenon that thinking
and C. Lau. 2003. The theory of reflexive modernisation: problematic, hypotheses and research programme. Theory, Culture & Society 20:1 33.
and J. Hertin. 2002. Foresight futures scenarios: developing and applying a participative strategic planning tool. Greener Management International 37:37 52.
Böhle, K. 2003. Onkey issues of foresight: participation, prioritisation, implementation, impact. Technikfolgenabschätzung 12, no. 2: 32 8. Bood, R. 2002.
Exploring the future as social practice. Paper presented at conference on‘Probing the future: developing organizational foresight in the knowledge economy',11 13 july 2002, University of Strathclyde Graduate school of Business, Glasgow, UK.
Borup, M.,N. Brown, K. Konrad, and H. Van Lente, eds. 2006. The sociology of expectations in science and technology.
Technology analysis and Strategic management 18, no. 3/4: 285 98. Brown, N. 2005. Shifting tenses: reconnecting regimes of truth and hope.
Configurations 13, no. 3: 331 55. Brown, N, . and M. Michael. 2002. From authority to authenticity:
governance, transparency and biotechnology. Health, Risk and Society 4: 259 72. Brown, N, . and M. Michael. 2003.
A sociology of expectations: retrospecting prospects and prospecting retrospects. Technology analysis and Strategic management 15:3 18. Brown, N.,A. Nelis, B. Rappert, A. Webster, F. Anton, C. Cabello, L. Sanz-Menéndez, A. Lohnberg,
and B. van de Meulen. 1999. Organising the present's futures towards an evaluation of foresight,
knowledge flows and the coordination of innovation. http://www. iesam. csic. es/proyecto/formwp1. pdf (accessed September 2009).
Brown, N.,B. Rappert, anda. Webster, eds. 2000. Contested futures: a sociology of prospective techno-science.
Burlington, VT: Ashgate. Burt, G. 2007. Towards a research agenda for environment, learning and foresight. Paper presented at 3rd Strathclyde international conference on organisational foresight, 16 18 august 2007, University of Strathclyde Graduate school of Business, Glasgow, UK.
Cañellas-Boltà, S, . and R. Strand. 2006. Reflexivity and modesty in the application of complexity theory.
In Interfaces between science and society, ed. A. Guimarães Pereira, S. Guedesvaz and S. Tognetti, 100 17.
European commission Joint research Centre Italy. Sheffield: Greenleaf Publishing. Colombo, M. 2003. Reflexivity and narratives in action research:
a discursive approach. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung 4, no. 2. http://www. qualitative-research. net/index. php/fqs/article/view/718 Cornish, E. 2004.
Futuring: the exploration of the future. Bethesda, MD: World Future Society. Cuhls, K. 2003. Development and perspectives of foresight in Germany.
Technikfolgenabschätzung 12, no. 2: 20 8. Cuhls, K, . and L. Georghiou. 2004. Evaluating a participative foresight process:
futur the German research dialogue. Research Evaluation 13, no. 3: 143 53. Cunliffe, A. 2005.
The need for reflexivity in public administration. Administration & Society 37, no. 2: 225 42. Dreyfus, H. L,
. and P. Rabinow. 1982. The subject and power. In Michel Foucault: beyond structuralism and hermeneutics, 208 26.
2005 7). FOR-LEARN online foresight guide. European commission. http://forlearn. jrc. es/guide/0 home/index. htm (accessed September 2009.
Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:10 03 december 2014 Foresight and governance: how good can it get?
985 Flyvbjerg, B. 1998. Rationality and power: Democracy in practice. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Fombrun, C. 1996.
Reputation: Realizing value from the corporate image. Boston, MA: Harvard Business school Press. Fuller, T, . and P. de Smedt. 2008.
Modernisation of foresight methodology: reflexivity and the social construction of knowledge, a note to authors in COSTA22.
European Science Foundation. http://www. costa22. org/articles. php (accessed June 2009. Garfinkel, H. 1967.
Studies in ethnomethodology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-hall. Genus, A. 2006. Rethinking constructive technology assessment as democratic, reflective discourse.
Technological forecasting and Social Change 73, no. 1: 13 26. Georghiou, L. 2001. Third generation foresight:
Integrating the socioeconomic dimension. Paper presennte at the proceedings of international conference on Technology foresight the approach to and potential for new technology foresight.
National Institute of Science and Technology policy, Japan. www. nistep. go. jp/achiev/ftx/eng/mat077e/html/mat0771e. html (accessed September 2009.
and I. Miles, eds. 2008. The handbook of technology foresight: concepts and practice. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
and D. A. Wolfe. 2004. Local social knowledge management: community actors, institutions and multilevel governance in regional foresight exercises.
Giddens, A. 1991. The contours of high modernity. In Modernity and self-identity: self and society in the late modern age, 10 35.
Stanford, CA: Stanford university Press. Godet, M. 2001. Creating futures: scenario planning as a strategic management tool. London:
Economica. Grin, J.,F. Felix, and B. Bos. 2004. Practises for reflexive design: lessons from a Dutch programme on sustainable agriculture.
International Journal of Foresight and Innovation policy 1: 126 48. Grunwald, A. 2004. Strategic knowledge for sustainable development:
the need for reflexivity and learning at the interface between science and society. International Journal of Foresight and Innovation policy 1: 150 67.
Habermas, J. 1998. The inclusion of the other: studies in political theory, ed. C. Cronin, and P. De Greiff.
Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Hagen, A, . and S. Asmervik. 2003. If planning is everything maybe it's everything?
New possibilities and roles in municiple and local planning. Paper presented at Nordic conference, 14 16 august 2003,
Lillehammer. http://www. ks. no/upload/4342/p-hagen asmervik. doc (accessed September 2009). Herzfeld, M. 1997.
Anthropology and the politics of significance. Social Analysis 41, no. 3: 107 38. Jenssen, S. 2007.
The demand for dialogue: studying the influence of organisers in public foresight. International Journal of Foresight and Innovation policy 3, no. 4: 403 19.
Jenssen, S. Forthcoming. Municipal visions: reflexive futures between paradigm and practice. Futures the journal of policy, planning and futures studies.
Johnston, R. 2001. Foresight refining the process. International Journal of Technology management 21, no. 7/8: 711 25.
Johnston, R. 2002. The state and contribution of international foresight: new challenges. Paper presented at EU US seminar:
the role of foresight in the selection of research policy priorities, 13 14 may 2002, Institute for Prospective Technological Studies (IPTS), Seville, Spain.
Johnston, R. 2008. Historical review of the development of future-oriented technology analysis. In Future-oriented technology analysis strategic intelligence for an innovative economy, ed. C. Cagnin, M. Keenan, R. Johnston, F. Scapolo,
Keenan, M. 2002. Using expert and stakeholder panels in technology foresight principles and practice. Foresight Methodoloogie 45 59.
UNIDO. http://www. tc. cz/dokums publikace/tf-course-textbook-unido 1085 11. pdf (accessed September 2009. Konrad, K,
. and J. P. Voß. 2006. Sustainability foresight: reflexive governance in the transformation of utility systems. In Reflexive governance for sustainable development, ed. J-P. Voß, D. Bauknecht and R. Kemp, 162 88.
Lash, S. 2003. Reflexivity as non-linearity. Theory, Culture & Society 20, no. 2: 49 57.
Latour, B. 2003. Is re-modernisation occurring and if so, how to prove it? A commentary on Ulrich Beck.
Ling, T. 2002. Decision making in the public sector. In Scenarios in public policy, ed. G. Ringland, 124 31.
Loveridge, D. 2008. Foresight: the art and science of anticipating the future. Newyork: Routledge. Loveridge, D,
. and P. Street. 2005. Inclusive foresight. Foresight 7, no. 3: 31 47. Lynch, M. 2000. Against reflexivity as an academic virtue and source of privileged knowledge.
Theory, Culture, & Society 17:26 54. Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:10 03 december 2014 986 S. Jenssen Marcus, G. 1995.
Ethnography in/of the world system: the emergence of multi-sited ethnography. Annual Review of Anthropology 24:95 117.
Marinetto, M. 2003. Who wants to be an active citizen? Sociology 37, no. 1: 103 20.
O'connor, K. 2004. Devising a new approach to capitalism at home. Anthropology Matters Journal 6, no. 2. http://www. anthropologymatters. com/journal/2004-2/o'connor 2004 devising. htm (accessed September 2009.
Pløger, J. 2001. Public participation and the art of governance. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design 28, no. 2: 219 41.
Pløger, J. 2002. Communicative planning and democracy new perspectives in planning research. NIBR Report no. 17.
Norwegian Institute for Urban and Regional research. http://www. nibr. no/publikasjoner/rapporter/172/(accessed September 2009.
Rappert, B. 1999. Rationalising the future? Foresight in science and technology policy co-ordination. Futures 31, no. 6: 527 45.
Rask, M. 2008. Foresight balancing between increasing variety and productive convergence. Technological forecasting and Social Change 75, no. 8: 1157 75.
Ratcliffe, J.,E. Krawczyk, and R. Kelly. 2006. FTA and the city: imagineering sustainable urban development.
Paper presented at second international Seville seminar on Future-oriented technology analysis (FTA), 28-29 september 2006, Institute for Prospective Technological Studies (IPTS), Seville, Spain.
Ringland, G. 2002. Scenarios in public policy. Chichester: Johnwiley. Sanz-Menéndez, L, . and C. Cabello. 2000.
Expectations and learning as principles for shaping the future. In Contested futures: a sociology of prospective techno-science, ed. N. Brown, B. Rappert,
and A. Webster, 229 49. Burlington, VT: Ashgate. Schwandt, D. R, . and M. Gorman. 2004.
Foresight or foreseeing? A social action explanation of complex collective knowing. In Managing the future: foresight in the knowledge economy, ed. H. Tsoukas,
Shipley, R. 2002. Visioning in planning: is the practice based on sound theory. Environment and Planning A 34, no. 1: 7 22.
and R. Earley. 2004. Evaluating municipal visioning. Planning Practice & Research 19, no. 2: 195 209.
and R. T. Newkirk. 1999. Vision and visioning: what do these terms really mean a taxonomy of the terms vision,
and visionary as used in planning literature over the last ten years. Environment and Planning B, Planning and Design 26, no. 4: 573 91.
Slaughter, R. A. 2004. Futures beyond dystopia: creating social foresight. London: Routledge Farmer. Stoker, G. 1998.
Governance as theory: five propositions. International Social science Journal 50, no. 155: 17 28. Stukas, A a,
. and M. R. Dunlap. 2002. Community involvement: theoretical approaches and educational initiatives. Journal of Social issues 58, no. 3: 411 27.
Thomas, H. 1994. Values and planning. Aldershot: Ashgate. Thygesen, H. 2009. Technology and good dementia care:
a study of technology and ethics in everyday care practice. Phd diss. University of Oslo.
UNESCAP. 2009. What is good governance? United nations. http://www. unescap. org/pdd/prs/Projectactivities/Ongoing/gg/governance. asp (accessed September 2009.
Van Lente, H. 1993. Promising technology: the dynamics of expectations in technological developments. Phd diss. University of Twente.
Van Notten, P. 2005. Writing on the wall: scenario development in times of discontinuity. Boca raton, FL: Dissertation. com. Van Notten, P.,J. Rotmans, M. Van Asselt,
and D. S. Rothman. 2003. An updated scenario typology. Futures 35, no. 5: 423 43.
Van't Klooster, S, . and M. Van Asselt. 2006. Practising the scenario-axes technique. Futures 38:15 30.
Voß, J-P, . and R. Kemp. 2006. Sustainability and reflexive governance. In Reflexive governance for sustainable development, ed. J-P. Voß, D. Bauknecht and R. Kemp, 3 30.
Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. Weber, K. M. 2006. Foresight and adaptive planning as complementary elements in anticipatory policy-making:
a conceptuua and methodological approach. In Reflexive governance for sustainable development, ed. J-P. Voß, D. Bauknecht, and R. Kemp, 189 221.
Wynne, B. 2002. Risk and environment as legitimatory discourses of technology: reflexivity inside out? Current Sociology 50, no. 3: 459 477.
Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:10 03 december 2014
Overtext Web Module V3.0 Alpha
Copyright Semantic-Knowledge, 1994-2011