This article was downloaded by: University of Bucharest On: 03 december 2014, At: 05:11 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: Ahti Salo, Ville Brummer & Totti Könnölä (2009) Axes of balance in foresight reflections from Finnsight 2015, Technology analysis & Strategic management, 21:8, 987-1001, DOI:
10.1080/09537320903262447 To link to this article: http://dx. doi. org/10.1080/09537320903262447 PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Taylor & francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the Content) contained in the publications on our platform.
Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www. tandfonline. com/page/termsanndconditions Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:11 03 december 2014 Technology analysis & Strategic management Vol. 21
8 november 2009,987 1001 Axes of balance in foresight reflections from Finnsight 20151 Ahti Saloa*,Ville Brummera and Totti Könnöläb asystems Analysis Laboratory, Helsinki University
binstitute for Prospective Technological Studies of the Joint research Centre of the European commission, Edificio Expo, C/Inca Garcilaso, 3, E-41092 Seville, Spain In 2005, the Finnish Government
group decision support 1. Introduction As an instrument of strategic policy intelligence (Smits and Kuhlmann 2004), foresight must often serve multiple objectives that are shaped by its policy context.
or (5) to foster new networks (Georghiou and Keenan 2006). Ultimately, many of these objectives seek to strengthen the efficacy of innovation activities,
Eriksson and Weber 2008; Hekkert et al. 2007; Salo, Könnölä, and Hjelt 2004.**Corresponding author. Email:
ahti. salo@tkk. fi ISSN 0953-7325 print/ISSN 1465-3990 online 2009 Taylor & francis DOI:
10.1080/09537320903262447 http://www. informaworld. com Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:11 03 december 2014 988 A. Salo et al.
In effect, the extent to which the objectives of a foresight exercise are instrumental (e g. priority-setting)
or informational (e g. awareness-raising) has implications for planning decisiion that include, among others, choices about how many stakeholder groups will be consulted;
Irvine and Martin 1984; Martin and Irvine 1989; Rask 2008) with the aim of aligning the methodological design of the exercise with the explicit and even implicit objectives that are placed on the exercise.
In this paper, we describe Finnsight 2015 (henceforth Finnsight for brevity), the national foresight exercise of the Academy of Finland and the Finnish funding agency for technology and Innovation (Tekes),
which served to inform albeit indirectly the development of the national strategy and the attendant implementation of several Strategic Centres of Excellence in Science and Technology.
Kaivo-oja, Marttinen, and Varelius 2002; Andersen et al. 2007. For examplle the Ministry of Trade and Industry has facilitated a so-called Foresight Forum (Könnölä, Brummer, and Salo 2007;
the Finnish Agency for Technology and Innovation (Tekes) has catalysed extensive consultation processes with researchers and industrialists in its strategy developmmen (Salo and Salmenkaita 2002;
and the Finnish innovation Fund (Sitra) has sought to promote a constructive dialogue on impending societal challenges by establishing a So-called future Forum.
In addition to one-of-a-kind exercises, important elements of foresight activity are ingrained in policy processes at the highest level of decision making:
Salo and Kuusi 2001. Yet, these many activities notwithstanding (or possibly because of the proliferation thereof), there have been no foresight exercises on a scale that would match the scope
Germany and United kingdom, see Havas 2003; Durand 2003; Cuhls 2003; Keenan 2003. This may have been
because Finland is a small country: thus, some results from even seemingly isolated foresight activities can be brought to bear on policy making even in the absence of formal coordination,
Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:11 03 december 2014 Axes of balance in foresight 989
because it is more likely that some experts participate in several such activities. Furthermore, the overall institutional and organisational structure (cf.
Edquist 1997) of the Finnish innovation system has remained largely unchanged for some time. As a result, there has been need less for establishing national thematic priorities that would transcend the boundaries of individual organisattion
or go beyond the processes of thematic priority-setting that are carried out within specific S&t policy instruments such as research
Salo 2001; Salmenkaita and Salo 2002. This situation changed in April 2005 when the Government took a decision in principle on the structural development of the public research system at large.
In this decision, the Government emphasised that the research system is to be developed in its entirety, with the aim of improving the quality and relevance of research and development activities.
The Government also noted that key measures towards this end will include the establishment of shared priorities, the strengthennin of the national and international profile of research organisations,
and Technology policy Council of Finland (STPC) should develop by the end June 2006 a national strategy for establishing Strategic Centres of Excellence in Research and Innovation.
These two main funding agencies for basic and applied technological research (which had annual funding appropriation of some¤297 million and¤527 million in 2008,
Salo and Salmenkaita 2002. Yet, the very remit of the foresight exercise for which the apt title Finnsight 2015 was coined implied that a large-scale consultative process was called for,
and legitimacy. 3. Process design and implementation 3. 1. Early preparations and management structures The initial preparations of Finnsight were started in early 2005 at a time
definition of panel titles and appointment Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:11 03 december 2014 990 A. Salo et al. of panel chairmen).
it was imperative to achieve a proper balance in addressing the Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:11 03 december 2014 Axes of balance in foresight 991 intertwined components of research (of key concern to the Academy of Finland and innovation
and approved by the Steering Group was based on panel-centricwork where each panelwould have three half-a-day meetings.
It is noteworthy that the dates for the two initial panel meetings were fixed by the panel chairmen before the panellists were selected:
Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:11 03 december 2014 992 A. Salo et al. panel meetings were organised only about seven weeks later than the initial meeting of the panel chairmen. 3. 3. Analytical concepts and methodological
This compilation document was circulated to the panellists about three days before the workshop. Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:11 03 december 2014 Axes of balance in foresight 993 In the first panel meetings
this compilation document served as a background document that helped set the stage for the meeting.
and of knowledge in this focus area of competence respond to the societal and industrial needs in 2015?).
Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:11 03 december 2014 994 A. Salo et al. The coordination of panels was supported by three meetings for the panel chairmen.
At this one-day meeting, much of the attention was devoted to the synergies at the panel interfaces.
Könnölä, and Salo 2008) which made it easier to compare results. Second, the questionnaires supported the consideration of interfaces in that the panellists were requested to specify which other panels their driving forces
and economic crisis of 2008 09) was driven by the recognition that Finland is strongly dependent on global developments, due to its relatively small size and the structure of its economy.
and those policy makers who would not have the opportunity to read the full Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:11 03 december 2014 Axes of balance in foresight 995 Table 1. Examples of focal areas of competences identified by the panels.
The panel reports were published on 13 june 2006 in the Auditorium of the Museum of Contempporar Art (Kiasma) in central Helsinki.
Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:11 03 december 2014 996 A. Salo et al. d) Subsequent policy developments Because foresight is a highly systemic instrument with close linkages to other policy processes that contribute to the development of the R&i system,
Smith 2000; Smits and Kuhlmann 2004. Such developments often build on various processes of sense-making and negotiation that draw upon on foresight conclusions.
With this important proviso, we briefly characterise selected policy developments that have been influenced or at least informed by Finnsight.
In 2006, the STPC6 referred to Finnsight in its comprehensive report which contained numerous proposals towards the development of the Finnish research and innovation system (STPC 2006).
Also, in the same month when the results of Finnsight were published, the STPC took steps towards the establishment of Strategic Centres for Science,
Technology and Innovation7 in fields that are important to the future of Finnish society and business and industry.
with the aim of fostering research that will offer possibilities for the commercial deployment of results within 5 10 years.
By June 2009, six strategic centres have started their operations (i e. energy and environment; metal products and mechanical engineering;
Furthermore, in 2007 the Ministry of Trade and Industry started a process towards the establisshin a National Innovation strategy,
The objectives of this process whose Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:11 03 december 2014 Axes of balance in foresight 997 results were published in June 2008
nevertheless to provide feedback on the foresight process and the panel reports in April 2006. In this survey
As instruments of strategic policy intelligence (Smits and Kuhlmann 2004), foresight exerciise such as Finnsight must respond to implicit
Rask 2008. We therefore reflect on Finnsight along four design attributes (see also Könnölä et al. 2009) that are concerned with (1) instrumental vs informative use of foresight results;(
2) exclusive vs extensive engagement of stakeholders;(3) consensual vs dissensual development of recommendations; and (4) fixed vs autonomous management of the process. 4. 1. Instrumental vs informative use of foresight results In terms of alternative modes of harnessing foresight conclusions,
Along this axis, it is noteworthy that the Finnsight reports were published in June 2006 when the Government took decisions towards the implementation of a national strategy in which the establishment of Strategic Centres of Science,
Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:11 03 december 2014 998 A. Salo et al. 4. 2. Extensive vs exclusive stakeholder engagement Extensive stakeholder engagement refers to foresight approaches where the number of participants is high
even if this may cause a certain degree of unpredictability and cause management challenges. In contrast, exclusive stakeholder engagement refers to expressly controlled stakeholder participation that may be driven,
and coalitions that may reflect rivalling visions or even incompatible perspectives on the future (Könnölä,
Brummer and Salo 2007. Along this attribute, Finnsight was closer to the consensual approach. To some extent, this was
Könnölä, Brummer and Salo 2007) while others found that the full length panel reports were more interesting than the synthesis report which,
Könnölä, and Hjelt 2004. Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:11 03 december 2014 Axes of balance in foresight 999 In Finnsight,
a balance along this dimension had to be achieved to ensure that the process would contribute to the attainment of foresight objectives
and that they could also adapt the use of methodological tools that were offered to them in a responsive manner (Salo, Könnölä, and Hjelt 2004).
Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:11 03 december 2014 1000 A. Salo et al. Notes on contributors Ahti Salo is a professor at the Systems analysis Laboratory of the Helsinki University of Technology.
and Innovation policy Council as of January 2009) is to assist the Government and its ministries by addressing, for instance,
and B. A. Mölleryd. 2007. Foresight in Nordic innovation systems. Oslo: Nordic Innovation Centre. http://www. nordicinnovation. net/img/nordic foresight forum final report. pdf (accessed 20 september 2009.
Ansoff, I. 1975. Managing strategic surprise by response to weak signals. California Management Review 17, no. 2: 21 33.
and A. Salo. 2008. Foresight within ERA NETS: experiences from the preparation of an international research program.
Cuhls, K. 2003. From forecasting to foresight processes new participative foresight activities in Germany. Journal of Forecasting 22, nos. 2 3: 93 111.
Durand, T. 2003. Twelve lessons drawn from‘Key technologies 2005',The french technology foresight exercise. Journal of Forecasting 22, nos. 2 3: 161 77.
Edquist, C.,ed. 1997. Systems of innovation: technologies, institutions and organizations. London: Pinter. Eriksson, E. A. and K. M. Weber. 2008.
Adaptive foresight: navigating the complex landscape of policy strategies. Technological forecasting and Social Change 75, no. 4: 462 82.
Georghiou, L, . and M. Keenan. 2006. Evaluation of national foresight activities: assessing rational, process and impact.
Technological foresight and Social Change 73, no. 7: 761 77. Havas, A. 2003. Evolving foresight in a small transition economy.
Journal of Forecasting 22, nos. 2 3: 179 201. Hekkert, M. P.,R. A a. Suurs, S. O. Negro, S. Kuhlmann,
and R. E. H. M. Smits. 2007. Functions of innovation systems: a new approach for analysing technological change.
Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:11 03 december 2014 Axes of balance in foresight 1001 Irvine, J,
. and B. R. Martin. 1984. Foresight in science: picking the winners. London: Dover. Kaivo-oja, J.,J. Marttinen,
and J. Varelius. 2002. Basic conceptions and visions of the regional foresight system in Finland. Foresight 4, no. 6: 34 45.
Keenan, M. 2003. Identifying emerging generic technologies at the national level: the UK experience. Journal of Forecasting 22, no. 2 3: 129 60.
and A. Salo. 2007. Diversity in foresight: insights from the fostering of innovation ideas. Technological forecasting and Social Change 74, no. 5: 608 26.
and R. Koivisto. 2009. Management of foresight portfolio: analysis of modular foresight projects at contract research organization. Technological Analysis & Strategic management 21, no. 3: 381 405.
and J. Irvine. 1989. Research foresight: priority-setting in science. London: Pinter. Rask, M. 2008.
Foresight balancing between increasing variety and productive convergence. Technological forecasting and Social Change 75, no. 8: 1157 75.
and A. Salo. 2002. Rationales for government intervention in the commercialization of new technologies. Technology analysis and Strategic management 14, no. 2: 183 200.
Salo, A. 2001. Incentives in technology foresight. International Journal of Technology management 21, no. 7: 694 710.
and O. Kuusi. 2001. Developments in parliamentary technology assessment in Finland. Science and Public policy 28, no. 6: 453 64.
and J.-P. Salmenkaita. 2002. Embedded foresight in RTD programs. International Journal of Technology Policy and Management 2, no. 2: 167 93.
and M. Hjelt. 2004. Responsiveness in foresight management: reflections from the Finnish food and drink industry.
Smith, K. 2000. Innovation as a systemic phenomenon: rethinking the role of policy. Enterprise&innovation Management Studies 1, no. 1: 73 102.
and S. Kuhlmann. 2004. The rise of systemic instruments in innovation policy. International Journal of Foresight and Innovation policy 1, nos. 1 2: 4 32.
STPC. 2006. Science, technology, innovation. Helsinki: Ministry of Education. http://www. minedu. fi/export/sites/default/OPM/Tiede/tutkimus-ja innovaationeuvosto/TTN/julkaisut/liitteet/Review 2006. pdf?
lang=fi (accessed 7 october 2009. Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:11 03 december 2014 Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:11 03 december 2014
Introduction From priority-setting to societal challenges in future-oriented technology analysis Future-oriented technology analysis (FTA) is derived a term from a collective description given to the range of technology-oriented forecasting methods and practices by a group of futures researchers and practitioners
‘‘Technology will play as significant a role in the 21st century as it did in the 20th''4. From the conceptual ground of the paper,
In its first iteration in 2004 it was billed as an EU-US Scientific Seminar but the scope has widened
the success of foresight in recent years illustrates the strength of what they describe as the‘‘covenant between futures methodology and the needs of long-term strategic management and policy''.
This was reflected in the futures 43 (2011) 229 231 2 This tension has been mirrored at the time of writing by an attempt by parts of the European commission to put into wider usage the collective term they are using for internal managerial purposes
www. elsevier. com/locate/futures 0016-3287/$ see front matter 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:
The 2006 anchor papers formed the core of the book. In concluding the collection, Keenan et al. identified a number of dimensions in
The 2008 FTA Conference continued the focus on the‘‘impacts and implications of FTA for policy and decision making''but this time constructed its themes and anchor papers differently.
Introduction/Futures 43 (2011) 229 231 230 In Spring 2011 the fourth FTA Conference will take place.
toward integration of the field and new methods, Technological forecasting and Social Change 71 (2004) 287 303, in press. 2 T. J. Gordon, J. C. Glenn (Eds.
Futuresresearchmethodology, Version 2. 0, Millenniumproject of theamerican Council for theunitednationsuniversity2003 (July. 3 R. A. Slaughter, Probing beneath the surface:
review of a decade's futures work, Futures 21 (1989) 447 465.4 H. A. Linstone, Corporate planning, forecasting,
and the long wave, Futures 34 (3 4 april 2002) 317 336.5 F. Scapolo, New horizons and challenges for future-oriented technology analysis the 2004 EU-US seminar, Technological forecasting
and Social Change 72 (2005) 1059 1063.6 S. Kuhlmann, P. Boekholt, L. Georghiou, K. Guy, J.-A. He'raud, P. Laredo, T
a pressing and long-term challenge, Futures 41 (2009) 67 70.8 I. Miles, From futures to foresight, in:
Concepts and Practice, Elgar, Cheltenham, 2007, pp. 24 43.9 F. Scapolo, A l. Porter, M. Rader, Future-oriented technology analysis (FTA:
impact on policy and decision-making the 2006 FTA INTERNATIONAL SEVILLE SEMINAR, Technological forecasting and Social Change 75 (2008) 457 461.10 J. C. Harper, K. Cuhls, L. Georghiou, R
. Johnston, Future-oriented technology analysis as a driver of strategy and policy, Technology analysis & Strategic management 20 (2008) 267 269.11 M. Keenan, R. Barre',C. Cagnin, Future-oriented technology analysis:
Strategic intelligence for an Innovative economy, Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2008, pp. 163 169.12 O. Saritas, C. Cagnin, A. Havas,
I. Miles, Impacts and implications of future-oriented technology analysis for policy and decision making, Technology analysis & Strategic management 21 (2009) 915 916.13 T. Ko nno la, J. Smith, A. Eerola, Introduction
, Future-oriented technology analysis impacts and implications for policy and decision making, Technological forecasting and Social Change 76 (2009) 1135 1137.14 I. Nonaka, H. Takeuchi, The Knowledge-creating Company, Oxford university Press, Oxford
, 1995. Luke Georghiou*Manchester Institute of Innovation research MBS, University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester M13 9pl, UK Jennifer Cassingena Harper Malta Council for Science and Technology, Villa Bighi, Bighi, Kalkara
Available online 19 november 2010 Introduction/Futures 43 (2011) 229 231 231
Tailoring Foresight to field specificities§Antoine Schoen a,,*Totti Ko nno la b, 1, Philine Warnke c, 2, Re'mi Barre'd, 3, Stefan Kuhlmann e, 4 a Universite
Futures 43 (2011) 232 242 A r T I C L E I N F O Article history:
Available online 19 november 2010 A b s T R A c T Thepaperpresentsanapproachatimprovingtheimpact offoresightbysystematicallytaking into account the characteristics of the targeted research and innovation (R&i) domains when designing a Foresight exercise.
and learning capability could be improved substantially by tailoring the Foresight approach to the targeted innovation arena. 2010 Elsevier Ltd.
+31 053 489 3353/3350.5 PRIME=Policies for Research and Innovation in the Move towards the European research area, European Network of Excellence (2004 2009;
http://www. prime-noe. org/index. php (accessed November 7, 2009. Contents lists available at Sciencedirect Futures journal homepage:
www. elsevier. com/locate/futures 0016-3287/$ see front matter 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:
/Futures 43 (2011) 232 242 233 All these results point to the fact that diverse innovation areas need diverse governance tools
It builds on a framework developed by Barre'(2007) in The french Futuris project 24. We suggest to extend this concept to the European level
/Futures 43 (2011) 232 242 234 with extensive formal and informal consultation of stakeholders including scientists and research organisations.
Priority setting may, however, decrease the diversity of options that could challenge conventional approaches and dominant designs 29
e g. 35) may create pathdependdencie and locking-out alternative technological options 36. Here, Foresight can also contribute to the creative restructuring
/Futures 43 (2011) 232 242 235 objectives matrix (Table 2). In each cell of the matrix, the Foresights do not have the same actors involved, nor the same perspectives, nor the same objectives.
%while e g. genomics has been growing for the last 10 years at 8, %and the recent rate of growth of nanoscience has been near to 14%.
/Futures 43 (2011) 232 242 236 For instance, the progressive sliding of the field of biocatalysis away from‘catalysis'within chemistry towards biotechnologies illustrates an actual reconfiguration of a current knowledge area that is combining splitting and merging
then we will elaborate the designs of the Foresight exercises fitted to the specific Knowledge dynamics and institutional arrangements in these two fields. 5. 1. The case of genetically modified plants (GMP) After the completion of the human genome map in 2001,
and biotechnology that was initiated by the European commission in 2003. It has produced a 20-year vision and a short,
-medium-and long-term Strategic research Agenda for Europe's plant sector setting out a consensus on the research needed to fulfil the vision.
The European union had approved a number of GM crops until late 1998, but growing public concern over their supposed environmental and health risks led several EU countries to demand the moratorium.
By late 1999 there were enough such countries to block any new approvals of GM produce.
9‘‘Lesogmface aux nouveaux paradigmes de la biologie'',meeting organised on February 11th and 12th 2009 in the framework of the ANR-OGM COBINA research project. 10 Decision announced by Ilse Aigner, federal ministry for agriculture, on April 14th 2009.
A. Schoen et al.//Futures 43 (2011) 232 242 237 and those ingredients traceable to their source.
In 2004, the European commission has lifted a 5-year moratorium on genetically modified produce. Since then, six countries Austria, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary and Luxembourg have chosen to ban Monsanto MON 810 modified maize contradicting EU Commission position.
2) NGO and green movements have impeded strongly the development of markets for any products including GM component within Europe.
This feature is clear when the evolution of volume of scientific output(+200%over 10 years,
from 1996 to 2006) is compared with the changes occurring in‘‘all science''(50%over the same period),‘agricultural and biological sciences''(30),
/Futures 43 (2011) 232 242 238 5. 1. 3. GMP: towards a Tailored foresight In the field of GM plants research we find a strong growth rate
and goals that was developed with a broad range of stakeholders including consumer and environmental organisations (Plants for the Future 2005).
The European Technology platform for Nanoelectronics European Nanoelectronics Initiative Advisory Council (ENIAC) was launched in 2004 with the mission to bring together all leading players in the field
The high growth rate which characterises the field (the number of scientific publication has grown from 134%between 1998 and 2006) 46.
/Futures 43 (2011) 232 242 239 5. 2. 3. N&n: towards a Tailored foresight In the realm of nano-related research we see a strong growth rate and at the same time a strong divergence.
and opening up may be useful to avoid early lock in into dominant paradigms that may later prove less fruitful.
Merging optics and nanotechnology A European roadmap for photonics and nanotechnologies 2005 2007. Exercise aimed to provide recommendations for EU R&d efforts as input for FP7 and Strategic research Agendas in two fields (Nanomaterials & Photonics.
/Futures 43 (2011) 232 242 240 (including in variable geometry schemes. It follows that the Foresight function,
Acknowledgements This paper is based on a workshop organised by the JRC-IPTS European foresight Action at Seville, Spain, June 2008.
References 1 A. Bonaccorsi, Search Regimes and the Industrial Dynamics of Science, Minerva 46 (3)( 2008) 285 315.2 L. Georghiou, J. C. Harper, M. Keenan,
. Brown, K. Konrad, H. van Lente, The sociology of expectation in science and technology, Technology analysis & Strategic management 18 (3/4)( 2006) 285 298.7 B. De
insights from the FORLEARN mutual learning process, Technology analysis & Strategic management 20 (3)( 2008) 369 387.9 E. A. Eriksson, K. M. Weber, Adaptive foresight:
navigating the complex landscape of policy strategies, Technological forecasting and Social Change 75 (4)( 2008) 462 482.10 B.-A°.Lundvall (Ed.),National systems of Innovation:
)( 1997) 83 118.12 F. W. Geels, J. Schot, Typology of sociotechnical transition pathways, Research policy 36 (3)( 2007) 399 417.13 F. W
refining the co-evolutionary multilevel perspective, Technological forecasting and Social Change 72 (6)( 2005) 681 696.14 R. R. Nelson, S g. Winter, In search of a useful theory of innovation
rethinking the role of policy, Enterprise and Innovation Management Studies 1 (1)( 2000) 73 102.17 O. Marsili, The Anatomy and Evolution of Industries:
(ERA), European commission, Luxembourg, 2008.19 D. Braun, Special issue on‘‘The political coordination of knowledge and innovation policies'',Science and Public policy 35 (4)( 2008.
the case of the European union, Journal of European Public policy 3 (3)( 1996) 318 338.22 S. Kuhlmann, Future governance of innovation policy in Europe three scenarios, Research policy 30
(6)( 2001) 953 976.23 R. Kaiser, H. Prange, Managing diversity in a system of multilevel governance:
the open method of co-ordination in innovation policy, Journal of European Public policy 11 (2)( 2004) 249 266.24 R. Barre',Essai d'interpre'tation de
Journal of Foresight and Innovation policy 1 (1/2)( 2004) 4 32.26 A. Salo, T. Ko nno la, M. Hjelt, Responsiveness in Foresight management:
reflections from the Finnish food and drink industry, International Journal of Foresight and Innovation policy 1 (1 2)( 2009) 70 88.27 T. Ko nno la, V
insights from the fostering of innovation ideas, Technological forecasting and Social Change 74 (5)( 2007) 608 626.28 J. Irvine, B. R. Martin, Foresight in Science:
and lock in by historical events, Economic Journal 99 (394)( 1989) 116 131.30 W. B. Arthur, Increasing Returns and Path Dependence in the Economy, University of Michigan Press
an analytical framework and key issues for research, Energy Policy 28 (9)( 2000) 625 640.32 A. Salo, T. Gustafsson, R. Ramanathan, Multicriteria methods for Technology foresight, Journal
of Forecasting 22 (2 3)( 2003) 235 255.33 M. Keenan, Identifying emerging generic technologies at the national level:
the UK experience, Journal of Forecasting 22 (2 3)( 2003) 129 160.34 B. R. Martin, R. Johnston, Technology foresight for Wiring up the National Innovation system.
evolutionary theory, network analysis and postsocialism, Regional Studies 31 (5)( 1997) 533 544.36 G. C. Unruh, Understanding carbon lock in, Energy Policy 28 (12)( 2000
reflections from a hydrogen Foresight project, Journal of Cleaner Production 15 (3)( 2007) 259 265.39 K. Cuhls, From forecasting to Foresight processes new participative Foresight activities in Germany, Journal
of Forecasting 22 (2 3)( 2003) 93 111.40 J. P. Salmenkaita, A. Salo, Emergent Foresight processes:
industrial activities in wireless communications, Technological forecasting and Social Change 71 (9)( 2004) 897 912.41 A. Bonaccorsi, Search Regimes and the Industrial Dynamics of Science, in:
Presentation at PRIME Annual Conference 2005,7 8 january, Manchester, 2005.42 A. Bonaccorsi, Explaining poor performance of European science:
institutions versus policies, Science and Public policy 34 (5)( 2007) 303 316. A. Schoen et al.//Futures 43 (2011) 232 242 241 43 S. Kuhlmann, ERA-Dynamics Project Strategic Report 2006 2007:
Knowledge dynamics, Institutions, and Policy in Europe, PRIME Network of Excellence, 2008.44 A. Schoen, P. van den Besselaar, L. Henriquez, P. Lare'do, D. Pardo, Search Regimes:
European Strategies in Global economy'',Toulouse, July 7 9, 2008.46 B. Kahane, A. Delemarle, L. Villard, P. Lare'do, Knowledge dynamics and agglomeration phenomena:
Presentation at the PRIME Winter School on Emerging Nanotechnologies, Grenoble, 4 8 february, 2008.48 A. Bonaccorsi, G. Thoma, Institutional complementarity and inventive performance in nano science and Technology research
Policy 36 (6)( 2007) 813 831.49 A. Rip, H. te Kulve, Constructive technology assessment and Socio-Technical Scenarios, 2008.50 A. Rip, Folk theories of nanotechnologists, Science
as Culture 15 (4)( 2006) 349 365.51 T. Swierstra, A. Rip, Nano-ethics as NEST-ethics:
patterns of moral argumentation about new and emerging science and technology, Nanoethics 1 (1)( 2007) 3 20.
/Futures 43 (2011) 232 242 242
Overtext Web Module V3.0 Alpha
Copyright Semantic-Knowledge, 1994-2011