years

ART66.pdf

This article was downloaded by: University of Bucharest On: 03 december 2014, At: 04:56 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:

28 aug 2012. To cite this article: Denis Loveridge & Ozcan Saritas (2012) Ignorance and uncertainty:

influences on future-oriented technology analysis, Technology analysis & Strategic management, 24:8, 753-767, DOI: 10.1080/09537325.2012.715477 To link to this article:

Staton (2006) drew out the poverty of foresight if Derrida's claim that foresight does not say much about the future is accepted.

denis. loveridge@mbs. ac. uk ISSN 0953-7325 print/ISSN 1465-3990 online 2012 Taylor & francis http://dx. doi. org/10.1080

/09537325.2012.715477 http://www. tandfonline. com Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 04:56 03 december 2014 754 D. Loveridge

and sometimes interlocking, role of ignorance (Roberts and Armitage 2008; Roberts 2012) and uncertainty in underpinning quantitative and qualitative thought in FTA.

There is an evident paradox in characterising, if indeed that has any meaning, the‘future, 'something that does not exist even conceptually or perceptually,

as much is shrouded in various forms of ignorance, especially the unknown unknowns1 form (Rumsfeld 2002). The paper sets out to pay much attention to the situations that may confront FTA practitioners,

The co-joining of quantitative and qualitative information is exemplified by the T ohoku earthquake and tsunami on 11 march 2011 north east of Japan.

an extreme case of the combination of an Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 04:56 03 december 2014 Ignorance and uncertainty 755 unusually severe earthquake and tsunami,

what Taleb (2007) has called picturesquely a Black swan event as Richter scale 9 earthquakes were known events, though there had been only four more powerful ones in human history.

which the business has either strong or weak interdependencies or interlocking arrangements of a quite different character (Cagnin and Loveridge 2012).

Retracing ones steps to Derrida's criticism, real foresight (Loveridge 2001), perhaps more so than its institutional practice, can have much to say about the future recognising that ultimately the future is a‘black hole'.

a matter of importance to satellite communication, following the 2011 earthquake. No doubt it Will be downloaded by University of Bucharest at 04:56 03 december 2014 756 D. Loveridge

and O. Saritas argued that this is not what FTA is about, but when there is talk of‘managing the Earth'for this or that‘grand challenge'(all of

as described by Staton (2006), creates the impression that the umbrella is for immediate protection from inclement situations rather than trying to see beyond them into‘what comes next'.

and qualitative information that goes beyond the Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 04:56 03 december 2014 Ignorance and uncertainty 757 conventional‘synthesis report'.

Cooke (1991), Lipinski and Loveridge (1982) and Amara and Lipinski (1983) have described all similar processes for elicitiin expert (subjective opinion from either individuals or small groups.

the individual probability distributions can be joined (there are technical difficulties) using the procedure set out by Lipinski and Loveridge (1982).

Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 04:56 03 december 2014 758 D. Loveridge and O. Saritas Throughout FTA,

Casti (2010) is only the most recent person to question the frequent assumption that science

How often the nature of measurements is dissected according to the NUSAP2 system (Funtowicz and Ravetz 1990),

1989) developed the two-dimensional framework shown in Figure 1. Meredith's notions can help FTA practitioners'position methods to guide their role and use.

and conversely of ignorance, on the Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 04:56 03 december 2014 Ignorance

and to get past their dichotomy by placing knowledge in a broader context of its contribution to social evolution Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 04:56 03 december 2014 760 D. Loveridge

's matrix is a subset of a much larger set (Popper 2008. Consequently, it enables judgements to be made on the mix of methods to be used.

these judgements place less Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 04:56 03 december 2014 Ignorance and uncertainty 761 emphasis on philosophical matters and more on practical ones of concern in FTA,

and qualitative information an example of elicitation The events involved in the 2011 earthquake north east of Japan illustrate the importance of the STEEPV set and within it,

Figure 2 (Loveridge 2009) illustrates a scheme for undertaking the essential learning processes. Elicitation of opinions and combining them is a central feature in FTA.

though thatwas the more important aspect Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 04:56 03 december 2014 762 D. Loveridge

and O. Saritas Figure 2. Learning scheme (reproduced from Loveridge (2009) by courtesy of Routledge).

and Loveridge 1982) as it can only be summarised here. In 1977 1978, the Institute for the Future (IFTF) carried out a study of the future of the UK,

Scenario style photographs portrayed the UK at two time slots, 1985 and 1995. Interviews are used so often to obtain opinion that the procedure is regarded as mundane,

this raised the subsidiary question of their individual levels Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 04:56 03 december 2014 Ignorance

and Loveridge (1982)) that permitted an understanding of their level of expertise. The headings of the self-assessment criteria were:(

The outcome of self-ranking can provide weighting factors for each‘expert'(Amara and Lipinski 1983.

Verbal equivalents to different probability levels (Alpert and Raiffa 1982) were used during this part of the elicitation to seed the interviewee's thinking processes.

Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 04:56 03 december 2014 764 D. Loveridge and O. Saritas 7. Future influences on FTA All the foregoing has lain within the conventional boundaries of FTA

and Ravetz 1990)) to establish its veracity. These are‘straightforward'matters but do they remain so in the face of the political and social worlds'demands for immediacy that underlie the mode of living of modern society?

In 1983, Loveridge was only the then latest person to raise questions along the following lines:‘

of which far exceed those of the 1960s or 1970s. Kurzweil (2005) is only one among many to claim that the‘singularity,

'when computer‘intelligence'or at least computer power, may exceed the capabilities of the human brain,

and acceptance, bringing Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 04:56 03 december 2014 Ignorance and uncertainty 765 a new social role for computation and computers.

'In a sense, these are a throwback to the 1970's debates about the world problematique but seem now to be seen as a series of silos rather than as a global phenomenon.

The interdependence of the silos of‘grand challenges'adds dimensions that were appreciated in the 1970's

and that which cannot be at the time Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 04:56 03 december 2014 766 D. Loveridge

Notes on contributors Denis Loveridge is an Honorary Visiting professor at the Manchester Institute of Innovation research (MIOIR) at the Manchester Business school after 44 years in industry.

large and small, relating to Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 04:56 03 december 2014 Ignorance and uncertainty 767 long-term directions of change in the business environment.

and H. Raiffa. 1982. A progress report on the training of probability assessors. In Judgment under uncertainty, heuristics and biases, ed. D. Kahneman, P. Slovic and A. Taversky, 294 306.

and A j. Lipinski. 1983. Business planning for an uncertain future. Newyork: Pergamon Press. Cagnin, C. H,

. and D. Loveridge. 2012. A business framework for enabling networks to evolve towards sustainable development. Technology analysis & Strategic management 24, no. 8:

Casti, J. L. 2010. Mood matters: From rising skirt lengths to the collapse of world powers.

Cooke, R. M. 1991. Experts in uncertainty: Opinion and subjective probability in science. Oxford: Oxford university Press.

and J. R. Ravetz. 1990. Uncertainty and quality in science for policy, theory and decision library, Series A:

Kurzweil, R. 2005. The singularity is near: When humans transcend biology. London: Duckworth. Lipinski, A j,

. and D. Loveridge. 1982. How we forecast: The Institute for the Future's study of the UK:

Loveridge, D. 2001. Foresight Seven paradoxes. International Journal of Technology management 21, nos 7/8: 781 91.

Loveridge, D. 2009. Foresight: The art and science of anticipating the future. Newyork: Routledge. M'Pherson, P. K. 1974.

and B. Kaplan. 1989. Alternative research paradigms in operations. Journal of Operations Management 8, no. 4: 297 326.

Popper, R. 2008. How are selected foresight methods. Foresight 10, no. 6: 62 89. Popper, Sir K. 1957.

and J. Armitage. 2008. The ignorance economy. Prometheus 26, no. 4: December, 335 54. Roberts, J. 2012.

Organizational ignorance: Towards a managerial prospective on the unkown. Management Learning, Sage Journals Online First, doi:

10.1177/1350507612443208, April 30, http://mlq. sagepub. com/(accessed May 31, 2012. Rumsfeld, D. 2002. Department of defense news briefing, February 12, http://www. defense. gov/transcripts/transcript. aspx?

transcriptid=2636 (accessed December 1, 2010. Savage, L j. 1954. The foundations of statistics. Newyork: Wiley. Staton, M. 2006.

Monstrous foresight. In Second international Seville seminar on future oriented technology analysis: Impact of fta approaches on policy and decision-making, Theme 2 FTAEVALUATION, Impact and Learning, September 28 29, Seville, 12 pp.

Taleb, N. N. 2007. The black swan: The impact of the highly improbable. Newyork: Random House.

Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 04:56 03 december 2014

ART67.pdf

This article was downloaded by: University of Bucharest On: 03 december 2014, At: 05:02 Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number:

http://www. tandfonline. com/loi/ctas20 Navigating foresight in a sea of expectations: lessons from the sociology of expectations Harro van Lente a a Department of Innovation studies, Copernicus Institute of Sustainable development, Utrecht University, 3508 TC, Utrecht, The netherlands Published online:

28 aug 2012. To cite this article: Harro van Lente (2012) Navigating foresight in a sea of expectations:

lessons from the sociology of expectations, Technology analysis & Strategic management, 24:8, 769-782, DOI: 10.1080/09537325.2012.715478 To link to this article:

research institutes and policy circles (Borup et al. 2006; Van Lente and Bakker 2010. Expectations are produced, circulated, adapted and are forceful in various ways (Berkhout 2006).

Foresight exercises, or‘formal'assessments of the future, thus, are surrounded by‘informaal assessments of the future (Salo 2001).

This particular condition will have consequences for the established foresight approaches. This paper conceptually and empirically investigates the phenomenon that socio-technical developments are shot through with informal anticipations

and discusses the implications for formal foresight exercises of science and technology. The central question of this paper is whether and howforesight exercises,

h. vanlente@uu. nl ISSN 0953-7325 print/ISSN 1465-3990 online 2012 Taylor & francis http://dx. doi. org/10.1080/09537325.2012.715478

http://www. tandfonline. com Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:02 03 december 2014 770 H. van Lente out.

and policy circles (Cagnin, Loveridge, and Saritas 2011). During the last decades, dedicated foresight practices have emerged and various approaches and tools have been developed

and evaluated (Coates et al. 2001; Harper et al. 2008; Eerola and Miles 2011. Schoen et al. 2011,235) give the following definition:

Foresight can be characterized as a systemic instrument aiming at enhanced capabilities in innovation systems and their parts.

Foresight activities are seen as functions not only to identify promising technological pathways but also to engage relevant stakeholders and create common visions into action.

and the review article of Porter (2004) lists the nine families of foresight methods including quantitative and qualitative explorations and forms of stakeholder involvement.

Glenn, and Jakil 2005. Foresight exercises provide policy with better problem definitions, ensuring more involvement of stakeholders

and help to implement the policy (Harper et al. 2008). The special issue of Technology analysis & Strategic management in 2008 provides a good overview of these intended benefits.

In their review of theories and practices of foresight in Europe, Da Costa et al. 2008) list six,

what they call, ‘functions'of foresight for policy-making, see Table 1. Others cluster the intended benefits of foresight into three different objectives (Könnölä, Brummeer and Salo 2007;

Schoen et al. 2011. The first objective, priority-setting, concerns the ambition to identify a shared agenda,

including future actions and allocation of resources. Foresight helps to highlight and evaluate alternative paths.

Brummer, and Salo 2007. Apart from methods and objectives, foresight exercises also differ in the settings in which they are used.

varying from governmental agencies, funding agencies to individual research institutes or firms (Luiten, van Lente, and Blok 2006).

2011) label these settings as‘arenas 'and distinguish between (i) the arena of strategic orientation of research,

the daily production of research and innovation Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:02 03 december 2014 Navigating foresight in a sea of expectations 771 Table 1. Functions of foresight for policy-making.

2008). ) Table 2. Foresight objectives in relation to the arenas of governance. Arenas of governance Foresight objective Priority-setting Networking Building visions Strategic orientation Macro policy priority-setting National/EU level stakeholders networks Overall political

2011). ) by universities and firms, the production, diffusion and transfer of knowledge;(iii) the arena of programming,

2011) also link these arenas to the various objectives and present the following comprehensive overview (Table 2). Foresight is exercised also in firms,

where it tends to be framed in costs and benefits (Reger 2001; Rollwagen, Hofmann, and Schneider 2008.

This is the domain of strategic decision-making. Business studies have developed a set of techniques to assess the future for strategic decisionmakkin (Kappel 2001;

Van der Duin 2006. A popular technique is technology roadmapping, which has been used since the 1980s by Motorola and later by many other firms (Willyard and Mcclees 1997), like Philips (Groenveld 1997) and Lockheed martin (Houston and Turner 2001).

Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:02 03 december 2014 772 H. van Lente Technological roadmaps basically are creative connections between expected developments in technological skills, sequences of products and potential future

markets. 3. Sociology of expectations In the last decade, the so-called sociology of expectations has studied how in scientific and technological developments actors continuously and explicitly refer to what is possible in the future:

they draw from and add to a repertoire of images, statements and prophecies and by doing

so they contribute to a particular dynamic (Van Lente 1993; Brown 2003; Borup et al. 2006;

Van Lente and Bakker 2010. This approach studies how expectations in science and technology are structured,

how they grow, gain dramatic attention or quietly disappear, and how this affects the decisions of engineers, businesses and governments.

It investigates how researchers, businesses and governments derive their agendas from their collectively created images of a promising technology

The orientation towards the future applies to the behaviour of individuals, groups, organisations and society as a whole (Konrad 2006.

but rather a change or creation of a new reality (Guice 1999). In other words, expectations are performative:

likewise, the statement‘this material promises a reduction in electrical resistance of 30%in two years'does something,

they should be able to meet this specification within two years. Van Lente (1993,2000) has argued that such transformation of a promise into a requirement is a central mechanism in the dynamics of expectations:

and will vary in level, content and modality (Konrad 2006). The level of expectations may range from encompassing, abstract sketches of the future (macro) to detailed elements (micro.

And the modalities may range from taken Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:02 03 december 2014 Navigating foresight in a sea of expectations 773 for granted statements that do not meet any resistance,

The wellknnow story of Moore's Law is used often as a prime example (Mackenzie 1990.

Three years after his prediction, in 1968, Gordon Moore founded with Robert Noyce the company Intel,

however, points to the central role that the prediction has been playing in the strategic game between the manufacturers of memory chips (Mackenzie 1990.

however, it is not easy to distinguish between the validity of a claim and the collective perception of it (Van Lente 2000;

Berkhout 2006. While the financial health of a bank can be verified in ways other than rumours,

such as the roadmaps on the hydrogen economy (Bakker, van Lente, and Meeus 2011). 3. 2. Force of expectations The case of Moore's Law is extreme,

a project or programme can be defended by referring to a promising future (Borup et al. 2006.

While the Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:02 03 december 2014 774 H. van Lente current performance of a technology

and thus be granted support (Konrad 2006). Maybe it failed this time, but the next time it might succeed (Hellsten 2002).

In some cases, such as nuclear fusion, this mechanism has secured costly research during decades (e g. on the Joint European Torus and International Thermonuuclea Experimental Reactor),

when projects or programmes bring other outcomes than expected as they usually do (Geels and Smit 2000).

as introduced and used by the Gartner Advisory Group (Borup et al. 2006). They propose that a new development is accompanied by‘inflated expectations'that receive much attention and mobilise many investments,

Second, expectations provide direction to the search processes of science and technology (Rip and Kemp 1998.

Expectations thus reduce uncertainty in much the same way as heuristics do in research and development (Nelson andwinter 1982.

Finally, there is a coordination effect of expectations (Van Lente 1993; Konrad 2006. Techniica development is not solitary work,

but the work of networks of companies and research institutions. When a central control is lacking,

Rosenberg (1982) argues that expectations about rapid technologicca development may inhibit the development: when potential customers believe that, within the next few months,

and Stein (1992) shows that investors tend to use the speculatiiv information that others use as well;

more sophisticated and effective health technoloogies many types of work are articulated (Van Lente 2006). The promised future situation contains sequencing of genes, characterisation of proteins, databases, dynamic models and so on.

Indeed, there are many examples of unfulfilled promises (Douthwaite, Keatinge, and Park 2001; Hedgecoe and Martin 2003.

Moore's law is an extreme case of a strategic game, reinforced by technology roadmaps, between manufacturers who cannot afford to lose the race.

but still forceful (Brown, Rappert, and Webster 2000). Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:02 03 december 2014 Navigating foresight in a sea of expectations 775 3. 3. Expectations

and strategies A general assumption is that expectations can play such a big role due to the inherent uncertaiint of technological development (Antonelli 1989).

Researchers, firms and governments have to make decisions about future products in future markets, about things which,

and are uncertain about their future rivals in the future battlefields (Williams and Sorensen 2002). In addition, sociologiist of science and technology point to the dynamic nature of science and technology:

According to this belief in progress, a next version of products, systems or knowledge will be available (Braun 1995.

Berkhout (2006) emphasises the distinction between private and collective expectations. The first type relates to the cognitive schemes through

Mackenzie (1990) describes in his study on guided nuclear missiles how the degree of uncertainty about the promised capabilities of the missile depends on the distance from the development itself.

Brown and Michael (2003) describe the phenomenon of the trough of uncertainty in the study of clinical applications of biotechnology:

more data Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:02 03 december 2014 776 H. van Lente and more developments (Konrad 2006.

or promoting the‘robustness'of an expectation (Sung and Hopkins 2006). This provides other opportunities for foresight and assessments.

(which includes many choice moments) with more actors, more perspectives and, in general, more reflection (Schot and Rip 1996;

Roelofsen et al. 2008. For foresight exercises, it is relevant to consider that the constructivist perspective acknowledges that others are in the same situation as those who judge the expectations (Van't Klooster and Van Asselt 2011.

In contrast, the realist perspective implies an asymmetry: others may be victims of the game of expectations,

www. gartner. com. Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:02 03 december 2014 Navigating foresight in a sea of expectations 777‘niche'has been introduced to denote this protection (Vergragt 1988) and traces back to the evolutionary metaphor

of variation and selection (Nelson and Winter 1982. New technological options, as variations within a selection environment may

or guiding visions (Dierkes, Hoffmann, and Marz 1996; Sturken et al. 2004) like the‘electronic superhighway'in the 1990s or the‘hydrogen economy'of the last decade.

The idea is that a choice of the right Leitbilder will lead to a successful coordination of efforts (Grin and Grunwald 2000;

Kuusi and Meyer 2002. The criticism is that such dynamics can be traced only ex post,

and that the approach is insufficiently robust for an ex ante policy (Berkhout 2006). Eames (2006) and his colleagues have studied how the guiding vision of the hydrogen economy has lead to resistance.

They show that when the general vision is filled in with concrete projects contestations will arise.

Their example is the Clean Urban Transportation Europe project in the UK where industrial partners like Daimler-chrysler and BP,

2003, cited in Eames et al. 2006). The fact that it was supported by a European programme was an additional reason for suspicion.

and thus contribute to lock in (Jacobsson and Johnson 2000; Unruh 2000. On the other hand, foresight can be an antidote as well,

by Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:02 03 december 2014 778 H. van Lente Table 3. Lessons of the sociology of expectations for Foresight objectives of foresight Lessons of sociology of expectations Expectations are drawn from repertoires Expectations

are performative Expectations enhance the strategic character of S&t priority-setting The efficacy of foresight as an antidote to lock in is limited Enhanced legitimation for selected priorities Foresight exercises

an increasingly important task for foresight is to critically reflect on the available, circulating expectations (Könnölä, Brummer, and Salo 2007).

or even circumvent lock in conditions by engaging different stakeholders (Havas 2003). This may support the emergence of competing coalitions.

but their contribution will draw from a more general repertoire (Nahuis and Van Lente 2008).

instead of new coalitions, old partisan oppositions tend to be reproduced (Rip and Talma 1998. The second lesson is that statements about futures are not innocent descriptions

where companies Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:02 03 december 2014 Navigating foresight in a sea of expectations 779

referring to the efforts other governments have planned (Berube 2006. 5. Conclusion Foresight exercises can be seen as formal articulations of possible futures,

This involves studies of technology Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:02 03 december 2014 780 H. van Lente assessment, foresight, intermediary organisations, politics of knowledge production and philosophy of technology.

References Antonelli, C. 1989. The role of technological expectations in a mixed model of international diffusion of process innovations:

and M. Meeus. 2011. Arenas of expectations for hydrogen technologies. Technological forecasting and Social Change 78, no. 1: 152 62.

Berkhout, F. 2006. Normative expectations in systems innovation. Technology analysis & Strategic management 18, nos. 3 4: 299 311.

Berube, D. M. 2006. Nanohype: The truth behind the nanotechnology buzz. Newyork: Promotheus Books. Borup, M.,N. Brown, K. Konrad,

and H. Van Lente. 2006. The sociology of expectations in science and technology. Technology analysis & Strategic management 18, nos. 3 4: 285 98.

Braun, E. 1995. Futile progress: Technology's empty promise. London: Earthscan. Brown, N. 2003. Hope against hype:

Accountability in biopasts, presents and futures. Science Studies 16, no. 2: 3 21. Brown, N.,B. Rappert, anda.

Webster, eds. 2000. Contested futures: A sociology of prospective techno-science. Aldershot: Ashgate. Brown, N,

. and M. Michael. 2003. A sociology of expectations: Retrospecting prospects and prospecting retrospects. Technology analysis & Strategic management 15, no. 1: 3 18.

and O. Saritas. 2011. FTA and equity: New approaches to governance. Futures 43, no. 3: 279 91.

and A l. Porter. 2001. On the future of technological forecasting. Technological forecasting and Social Change 67, no. 1: 1 17.

and T. Pinch. 1993. The golem: What you should know about science. Cambridge: Cambridge university Press.

and T. Pinch. 1998. The golem at large: What you should know about technology. Cambridge: Cambridge university Press.

and F. Scapolo. 2008. The impact of foresight on policy-making: Insights from the FORLEARN mutual learning process, Technology analysis & Strategic management 20, no. 3: 369 87.

and L. Marz. 1996. Visions of technology: Social and institutional factors shaping the development of new technologies.

and J. R. Park. 2001. Why promising technologies fail: The neglected role of user innovation during adoption.

and S. Marvin. 2006. Negotiating contested visions and place-specific expectations of the hydrogen economy.

and I. Miles. 2011. Methods and tools contributing to FTA: A knowledge-based perspective. Futures 43, no. 3: 265 78.

and J. C. Stein. 1992. Herd on the street: Informational inefficiencies in a market with short-term speculation.

A. Smit. 2000. Failed technology futures: Pitfalls and lessons from a historical survey. Futures 32, no. 9/10: 867 85.

and A. Jakil. 2005. Frontiers of futures research: What's next? Technological forecasting and Social Change 72, no. 9: 1064 9. Grin, J,

. and A. Grunwald, eds. 2000. Vision assessment: Shaping technology in 21st century society. Towards a repertoire for technology assessment.

Groenveld, P. 1997. Roadmapping integrates business and Technology research Technology management 40, no. 5: 48 55. Guice, J. 1999.

Designing the future: The culture of new trends in science and Technology research Policy 28, no. 1: 81 98.

and R. Johnston. 2008. Future-oriented technology analysis as a driver of strategy and policy. Technology analysis & Strategic management 20, no. 3: 267 9. Havas, A. 2003.

Evolving foresight in a small transition economy. Journal of Forecasting 22, nos. 2 3: 179 201.

and P. Martin. 2003. The drugs don't work: Expectations and the shaping of pharmacogenetics. Social Studies of Science 33, no. 3: 327 64.

Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:02 03 december 2014 Navigating foresight in a sea of expectations 781 Hellsten, I. 2002.

and J. Turner. 2001. Developing collaborative solutions to the aging aircraft avionics problem through technology roadmapping.

and A. Johnson. 2000. The diffusion of renewable energy technology: An analytical framework and key issues for research.

Kappel, T. A.,2001. Perspectives on roadmaps: How organizations talk about the future. Journal of Product innovation Management 18, no. 1: 39 50.

and A. Salo. 2007. Diversity in foresight: Insights from the fostering of innovation ideas. Technological forecasting and Social Change 74, no. 5: 608 26.

Konrad, K. 2006. The social dynamics of expectations: The interaction of collective and actor-specific expectations on electronic commerce and interactive television.

and M. Meyer. 2002. Technological generalizations and leitbilder the anticipation of technological opportunities. Technological forecasting and Social Change 69, no. 6: 625 39.

and K. Blok. 2006. Slow technologies and government intervention: Energy efficiency in industrial process technologies. Technovation 26, no. 9: 1029 44.

Mackenzie, D. 1990. Inventing accuracy: A historical sociology of nuclear missile guidance. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

and H. van Lente. 2008. Where are the politics. Perspectives on democracy and technology. Science, Technology and Human Values 3, no. 5: 559 81.

and S g. Winter. 1982. An evolutionary theory of economic change. Cambridge, MA: Harvard university Press. Porter, A. 2004.

Technology futures analysis: Toward integration of the field and new methods. Technological forecasting and Social Change 71, no. 3: 287 303.

Reger, G. 2001. Technology foresight in companies: From an indicator to a network and process perspective.

and R. Kemp. 1998. Technological change. In Human choice and climate change, ed. S. Rayner and E. L. Malone, 327 99.

and S. Talma. 1998. Antagonistic patterns and new technologies. In Getting new technologies together, ed. C. Disco and B. J. R. Van der meulen, 285 306.

and J. F. G. Bunders. 2008. Exploring the future of ecological genomics: Integrating CTA with vision assessment.

Rosenberg, N. 1982. On technological expectations. In Inside the black box: Technology and economics, ed. N. Rosenberg, 104 19.

and S. Schneider. 2008. Improving the business impact of foresight. Technology analysis & Strategic management 20, no. 3: 337 49.

Salo, A a. 2001. Incentives in technology foresight. International Journal of Technology management 21, nos. 7 8: 694 710.

and S. Kuhlmann. 2011. Tailoring foresight to field specificities. Futures 43, no. 3: 232 42.

and A. Rip. 1996. The past and future of constructive technology assessment. Technological forecasting and Social Change 54, nos. 2 3: 251 68.

and S. J. Ball-Rokeach, eds. 2004. Technological visions. The hopes and fears that shape new technologies.

and M. Hopkins. 2006. Towards a method for evaluating technological expectations: Revealing uncertainty in gene silencing technology discourse.

Unruh, G. C. 2000. Understanding carbon lock in. Energy Policy 28, no. 12: 817 30. Van der Duin, P. 2006.

Qualitative futures research for innovation. Phd thesis (Delft University of Technology), Delft: Eburon. Van Lente, H. 1993), Promising technology.

The dynamics of expectations in technological developments. Phd thesis (University of Twente), Delft: Eburon. Van Lente, H. 2000.

Forceful futures: From promise to requirement. In Contested futures. A sociology of prospective techno-science, ed. N. Brown, B. Rappert and A. Webster, 43 64.

Van Lente, H. 2006. Prospective structures of science and science policy. In Innovation, science, and institutional change:

Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:02 03 december 2014 782 H. van Lente Van Lente, H,

. and S. Bakker. 2010. Competing expectations: The case of hydrogen storage technologies. Technology analysis & Strategic management 22, no. 6: 693 709.

and Van Asselt, M. B. A. 2011. Accommodating or compromising change? A story about ambitions and historic deterministic scenarios.

Vergragt, P. J. 1988. The social shaping of industrial innovation. Social Studies of Science 18, no. 3: 483 513.

and Sorensen, K. H. 2002. Shaping technology, guiding policy: Concepts spaces and tools. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

and Mcclees, C. 1997. Motorola's technology roadmap process. Research Management 30, no. 5: 13 19.

Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:02 03 december 2014

< Back - Next >