Identifying expected areas of future innovation by combining foresight outputs Yoshiko Yokoo and Kumi Okuwada Abstract Purpose This paper attempts to examine the efficacy of combining outputs from a foresight exercise by different
Keywords Foresight, Combination, Delphi method, Scenario, Innovation, Sustainable development, Forward planning Paper type Case study 1. Introduction The situation surrounding science and technology has undergone a radical change in recent years.
Driving towards Sustainable growth and Quality Jobs''was formulated in 2009 (Executive Office of the President, 2009),
Securing our Economic growth and Prosperity''in 2011 (National Economic Council, 2011. The European commission released‘‘Innovation Union''as a flagship initiative in Europe 2020 (European commission, 2010.
In Japan, the status of science and technology policy in the national grand strategy has changed significantly as its GDP growth rate stagnates in the face of intensified international competition and a falling birth rate and aging population.
PAGE 6 jforesight j VOL. 15 NO. 1 2013, pp. 6-18, Q Emerald Group Publishing Limited, ISSN 1463-6689 DOI
Since 1996, science and technology policy has been carried out under the Science and Technology Basic Plans which are formulated every five years.
In the Second and Third Basic Plans, which started in 2001 and 2006 (Government of Japan, 2001,2006),
strategic prioritization was the basic principle in drawing up related policies except for those related to basic research.
2011) the focus on a problem-solving approach becomes more apparent: solving global or national issues through the effective application of science and technology.
and cognitive science) have been given attention since the mid-2000s. This indicates that science and technologies are becoming interrelated
European commission, 2004. It is expected that converging technologies will trigger innovation and lead to the solution of social issues in the future.
and they are all qualitative (European commission, 2009). In recent years, the development of the internet has broadened the potential of exercises:
it has enabled the enhancement of foresight objectives (Cachia et al. 2007) and reduced the burdens of cost and time (Gordon and Pease, 2006.
Combining methods has been recognized as a precondition of successful foresight since a variety of combinations have been discussed
2008). ) Meta-analysis on foresight methods shows the trends of combination (Popper, 2008: B scenario is used often with literature review, expert panel,
and trend extrapolation/megatrends; B the Delphi method is used often with literature review, expert panel, and brainstorming;
VOL. 15 NO. 1 2013 jforesight jpage 7 Scenario requires extensive knowledge of the field under investigation,
and information from other sources is expected to be interpreted (Mietzner and Reger, 2005). The Delphi method is regarded as one of the useful information sources for scenario (Loveridge, 1999.
The Delphi method is discussed also from the viewpoint of a combination with road mapping (Kanama et al. 2008).
) According to the meta-analysis mentioned above, around 20-39 percent of Delphi exercises are combined with scenario.
The exercise was conducted by the National Institute of Science and Technology policy from 2008 to 2010.
Figure 1 Overview of the 9th Foresight PAGE 8 jforesight jvol. 15 NO. 1 2013 2. 1 Setting global or national challenges The first step of the exercise
and selected 24 priority issues (National Institute of Science and Technology policy, 2009). The results of the preliminary discussion clearly indicated the importance of systematic integration in other words,
Questionnaires from the viewpoint of a time span of 30 years until 2040 were carried out twice,
Delphi topics that were forecasted to be realized by 2025 were extracted and reframed as a form of scenes. 2. 3. 3 Future society as discussed by the younger generation.
VOL. 15 NO. 1 2013 jforesight jpage 9 2. 4 Workshop Workshops were held in eight local regions in Japan,
In this way, all PAGE 10 jforesight jvol. 15 NO. 1 2013 the Delphi topics are given scores by scenario according to their similarity,
Figure 2 The procedure of analysis VOL. 15 NO. 1 2013 jforesight jpage 11 4. 2 Overall view Relations between the scenarios
The scenarios and Delphi areas Figure 3 Distribution of relevant topics by scenario theme PAGE 12 jforesight jvol. 15 NO. 1 2013 closely related are grouped together in reference to the results
the group of clusters Figure 4 Overall view of scientific and technological areas VOL. 15 NO. 1 2013 jforesight jpage 13 related to health and medical care on the right side
bdelphi areas with strong focus PAGE 14 jforesight jvol. 15 NO. 1 2013 all the people living in the society benefit from it.
Figure 5 Relation between directions of future innovation and base technology areas VOL. 15 NO. 1 2013 jforesight jpage 15 5. 2 Examination of relationship between scenario descriptions
and show the framework Figure 6 Ratio of topics that are related to several scenarios PAGE 16 jforesight jvol. 15 NO. 1 2013 toward its realization.
References Cachia, R.,Compano, R. and Da Costa, O. 2007),‘Grasping the potential of online social networks for foresight'',Technological forecasting and Social Change, Vol. 74 No. 8
Cuhls, K.,Bode, O.,Ganz, W. andwanke, P. 2008‘‘‘‘The BMBF Foresight process'',paper presented at the 3rd International Seville Seminar on Future-oriented technology analysis, October 16-17, Seville.
European commission (2004), Converging technologies Shaping the Future of European Societies, European commission, Brussels. European commission (2009), Mapping Foresight:
Revealing how Europe and Other World Regions Navigate into the Future, European commission, Brussels. European commission (2010), Europe 2020:
A Strategy for Smart, Sustainable and Inclusive Growth, European commission, Brussels. Executive Office of the President (2009), A Strategy for American Innovation:
Gordon, T. and Pease, A r. T. 2006),‘Delphi: an efficient,‘round-less',almost real time Delphi method'',Technological forecasting and Social Change, Vol. 73, pp. 321-33.
Government of Japan (2001), The 2nd Science and Technology Basic Plan, Government of Japan, Tokyo.
Government of Japan (2006), The 3rd Science and Technology Basic Plan, Government of Japan, Tokyo.
Government of Japan (2011), The 4th Science and Technology Basic Plan, Government of Japan, Tokyo.
Kanama, D.,Kondo, A. and Yokoo, Y. 2008),‘Development of technology foresight: integration of technology roadmapping and the Delphi method'',International Journal of Technology intelligence and Planning, Vol. 4 No. 2, pp. 184-200.
VOL. 15 NO. 1 2013 jforesight jpage 17 Loveridge, D. 1999),‘Foresight and Delphi processes as information sources for scenario planning'',Ideas In progress Paper No. 11, Policy
Mietzner, D. and Reger, G. 2005),‘Advantages and disadvantages of scenario approaches for strategic foresight'',International Journal of Technology intelligence and Planning, Vol. 1 No. 2, pp. 220-39.
National Economic Council (2011), Strategy for American Innovation: Securing our Economic growth and Prosperity, National Economic Council, Council of economic advisors, Office of Science and Technology policy, WASHINGTON DC.
National Institute of Science and Technology policy (2009),‘Emerging fields in science and technology for the 4th Science and Technology Basic Plan'',Research Material No. 168, National Institute of Science and Technology policy, Tokyo.
National Institute of Science and Technology policy (2010),‘The 9th Science and Technology foresight'',NISTEP Report No. 140-142, National Institute of Science and Technology policy, Tokyo.
National science Foundation (2002),‘Converging technologies for improving human performance'',National science Foundation, Arlington VA. National science Foundation (2005),‘Managing nano-bio-info-cogno innovations:
converging technology society'',National science Foundation, Arlington, VA. Popper, R. 2008),‘How are selected foresight methods?''''Foresight, Vol. 10 No. 6, pp. 62-89.
Corresponding author Yoshiko Yokoo can be contacted at: yokoo@nistep. go. jp PAGE 18 jforesight jvol. 15 NO. 1 2013 To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail:
reprints@emeraldinsight. com Or visit our web site for further details: www. emeraldinsight. com/reprints Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner.
DOI 10.1108/14636681311310114 VOL. 15 NO. 1 2013, pp. 19-28, Q Emerald Group Publishing Limited, ISSN 1463-6689 jforesight j
Cagnin and Loveridge (2011) discuss challenges as well as detailed models and processes. They describe how a business can become more and more receptive to foresight results,
Specifically with respect to research policy development in Germany, Meister and Oldenburg (2008) argues that both foresight and subsequent transfer activities have to be constructed as dialogue processes involving all relevant stakeholders.
2006) have investigated this area for science-based stakeholder dialogues. Their analysis is relevant because the motivation and the challenges of those dialogues tie in with those of transferring foresight results,
2006) contrast science-based stakeholder dialogues with other types of dialogues. In an overview, they cover:
PAGE 20 jforesight jvol. 15 NO. 1 2013 B multi-stakeholder dialogues for governance on an international level, for example in the environmental area;
2006) for the four types of dialogues in their discussion be applied to strategic dialogues? Welp et al.
2006) consider three theoretical frameworks to derive effective methods and techniques in a range of dialogue situations.
Firstly, strategic dialogues have helped to overcome the necessarily limited perspective of individual units within an organization such as a federal ministry by connecting units with each other in a loose network where ideas can VOL. 15 NO. 1 2013 jforesight jpage 21
2006) with relevance to strategic dialogues Model/framework Relevance to strategic dialogues Rational actor paradigm (RAP) The RAP assumes that all individuals maximize their personal benefit without communication with,
2006) is a useful internal exercise for the facilitators of a strategic dialogue but not suitable in discussions with stakeholders since many of the issues are politically sensitive and/or inconsistent with the self-image of stakeholders.
The‘‘dialogue''aspect is in line with the definition of Bohm (1996) who draws a clear distinction between‘‘discussion''as an exchange of views aimed at winning an argument
since they have had already a stake in shaping them PAGE 22 jforesight jvol. 15 NO. 1 2013 be discussed
foresight is more radical than day-to-day activities of Figure 1 VOL. 15 NO. 1 2013 jforesight jpage 23 research policy makers,
Fisher and Ury, 1991; Susskind and Movius, 2009) can already be useful at this stage in that discussions
and guiding questions in workshop are framed in terms of needs and interests rather than positions. Thus, a constructive framework for further discussions throughout the process can be established. 4. 2 Step 2:
''Again, we draw on insights from the Harvard Negotiation Project (Fisher and Ury, 1991. 4. 3 Step 3:
and Ury (1991) use during negotiations: it does not claim to be objective or to represent a consensus,
Hence, step 5 of a PAGE 24 jforesight jvol. 15 NO. 1 2013 strategic dialog might be a survey of earlier national funding activities and a gap analysis between those activities and the potential support
Scenarios and exploration in depth Given that future-looking activities of the BMBF often span time periods of ten to 20 years it can be fruitful to engage all stakeholders in building normative and/or exploratory scenarios as a guide and framework
VOL. 15 NO. 1 2013 jforesight jpage 25 For the BMBF, a wealth of structured information has been generated that allows formulating a future vision and recommendations for research policy initiatives,
of which is given by Warnke and Cuhls (2011). For the focus area‘‘Produzierenkonsumieren 2. 0''(Production Consumption 2. 0), the strategic dialogue involved seven organizational units within the BMBF drawn from the full range of BMBF departments concerned with research policy.
PAGE 26 jforesight jvol. 15 NO. 1 2013 5. 2 Strategic dialogue to generate a joint vision for forward-looking projects Another strategic dialogue was conducted for a so-called‘‘Forward-looking Project''in the framework
Forward-looking Projects are designed to map out scientific and technological developments over a period of ten to 15 years in specific areas
Also, they result in the creation of new informal VOL. 15 NO. 1 2013 jforesight jpage 27 networks within the BMBF, between BMBF units and external stakeholders,
D. 1996), On Dialogue, Routledge, New york, NY. Cagnin, C. and Loveridge, D. 2011),‘A business framework for building anticipatory capacity to manage disruptive and transformative change and lead business networks towards sustainable development,
''paper presented at the Fourth International Seville Conference on Future-oriented technology analysis, May 12-13, Seville. Fisher, R. and Ury, W. 1991), Getting to Yes Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In, Penguin, New york, NY.
German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (2010a),‘BMBF Foresight'',available at: www. bmbf-foresight. de (accessed May 1, 2011.
German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (2010b),‘Zukunftsbild Morgenstadt'',available at: www. bmbf. de/pubrd/morgenstadt. pdf (accessed May 1, 2011.
Meister, H. and Oldenburg, F. 2008),‘Foresight und Innovation: Zukunfts denken Heute gestalten'',Beteiligung ein Programm fu r Wirtschaft, Politik und Gesellschaft, Physica Verlag, Heidelberg, pp. 119-38.
Susskind, L. and Movius, H. 2009), Built to Win: Creating A World-Class Negotiating Organization, Harvard Business school Press, Boston, MA.
Warnke, P. and Cuhls, K. 2011),‘Embedding systemic priorities into the STI landscape. Experience from the German BMBF-Foresight process,
''paper presented at the Fourth International Seville Conference on Future-oriented technology analysis, May 12-13, Seville. Welp, M.,de la Vega-Leinert, A.,Stoll-Kleemann, S. and Jaeger, C. C. 2006),‘Science-based stakeholder dialogues:
theories and tools'',Global Environmental change, Vol. 16, pp. 170-81. Corresponding author Frauke Lohr can be contacted at:
frauke. lohr@grolman. com PAGE 28 jforesight jvol. 15 NO. 1 2013 To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail:
and innovation system to assess the implications of new technologies and wider socioeconomic changes (Martin and Johnston, 1999;
Rappert, 1999; Saritas et al. 2007; Georghiou and Cassingena-Harper, 2011. Such approaches are built often into prioritisation exercises,
where national governments formulate strategic responses that take into account the existing and anticipated developments in the sciences
and Technology policy-makers and politicians are keen to find an answer to the challenging question of where they should be investing their resources to produce economic, environmental and social dividends.
2011; Ko nno la a et al. 2011). ) The provenance and scope of the grand challenges are discussed in the article, below;
they are understood broadly in terms of DOI 10.1108/14636681311310123 VOL. 15 NO. 1 2013, pp. 29-39, Q Emerald Group Publishing Limited,
ISSN 1463-6689 jforesight j PAGE 29 Martin Rhisiart is based in the Faculty of business and Society, University of Glamorgan, Pontypridd, UK.
2010). ) This article will use‘‘grand challenges''as the main term for these developments. This article presents some recent experience of how national research and innovation systems use futures to construct responses (such as new investment priorities) to emerging global challenges and opportunities.
which has become stronger (broader and deeper) since the 1990s. Climate change and environmental consciousness have reinforced a concern with the global and holistic.
In a more tangible sense, the European union Sustainable development Strategy (2006) although not couched at the time in precisely the same language of PAGE 30 jforesight jvol. 15 NO. 1 2013‘‘grand challenges''set out a similar framework for addressing the critical
The Lund Declaration of 2009 1 (the outcome of a conference on‘‘New worlds New Solutions''held under the Swedish Presidency of the EU) crystallised several important aspects related to the mobilisation of scientific,
which emphasised that it needed to address a series of Grand challenges (European commission DG Research, 2008,
and the increasing shift towards addressing societal needs was identified in the first report of the European research area Board (European commission DG Research, 2009).
A further milestone in the explicit recognition of directing research and innovation resources towards grand challenges came with the publication of a report on the European Technology platforms by DG Research (European commission DG Research, 2010.
In summary, over the last five years or so, an increasingly consensual view has emerged that Europe needs to direct its investment
It draws on the project outputs VOL. 15 NO. 1 2013 jforesight jpage 31 (interim
and results described in the case study. 3. 2 Scope and context of the exercise In the second half of 2010,
the 12-month exercise has had the aim of identifying up to 20 priority areas for the allocation of public funding of research and development over five years.
6 Opportunities that this presents PAGE 32 jforesight jvol. 15 NO. 1 2013 1. validation of the trends/drivers in national context;
the potential impact they might have on The irish national context over the coming ten to 15 years,
2 What are the challenges for Ireland that you expect these drivers to raise in the next 10-15 years?
VOL. 15 NO. 1 2013 jforesight jpage 33 outcomes from the consultation and the empirical evidence gathered, with an emphasis on connectivity between the external environment and the national issues identified.
''PAGE 34 jforesight jvol. 15 NO. 1 2013 4. 3 An emerging set of grand challenges for Ireland research needs and implications A set of 12 challenges was provided for consideration
VOL. 15 NO. 1 2013 jforesight jpage 35 Figure 1 Distribution of drivers and trends on an impact versus likelihood matrix Table IV Most likely and highest
and will continue to be so for at least ten years while renewable energy makes an impact on energy supply The challenge for Ireland is to achieve greater energy security
and engineering and science skills PAGE 36 jforesight jvol. 15 NO. 1 2013 The project undertaken provided a national view on grand challenges that had been discussed in other settings.
Some of the challenges constructed through the methodology are aligned well with the larger themes discussed within Europe during recent years.
it was put forward that Ireland could pilot new approaches for dealing with challenging areas such as energy and healthcare. 5. Conclusions With the increasing recognition of the concept of grand challenges over recent years,
Some of the major themes frequently cited in this regard VOL. 15 NO. 1 2013 jforesight jpage 37 are climate change
and commitments PAGE 38 jforesight jvol. 15 NO 1 2013 are necessary to develop and sustain a successful innovation system.
References European commission DG Research (2008), Challenging Europe's Research: Rationales for the European research area (ERA), Report of the ERA Expert Group, European commission, Brussels. European commission DG Research (2009), Preparing Europe for a New Renaissance.
A Strategic View of the European research area, First Report of the European research area Board 2009, European commission, Brussels. European commission DG Research (2010),‘Strengthening the role of European Technology platforms in addressing Europe
's Grand Societal Challenges'',Report of the ETP Expert Group, European commission, Brussels. European union Sustainable development Strategy (2006), Review of the European union Sustainable development Strategy Renewed Strategy, available at:
http://register. consilium. europa. eu/pdf/en/06/st10/st10917. en06. pdf Georghiou, L. and Cassingena-Harper, J. 2011),‘From priority-setting
to articulation of demand: foresight for research and innovation policy and strategy'',Futures, Vol. 43 No. 3, pp. 243-51.
Georghiou, L.,Cassingena-Harper, J. and Scapolo, F. 2011),‘From priority-setting to societal challenges in future-oriented technology analysis'',Futures, Vol. 43 No. 3, pp. 229-31.
Ko nno la A t.,Scapolo, F.,Desruellec, P. and Mu, R. 2011),‘Foresight tackling societal challenges:
Martin, B. R. and Johnston, R. 1999),‘Technology foresight for wiring up the national innovation system. Experiences in Britain, Australia and New zealand'',Technological forecasting and Social Change, Vol. 60 No. 1, pp. 37-54.
Rappert, B. 1999),‘Rationalising the future? Foresight in science and technology policy co-ordination'',Futures, Vol. 31 No. 6, pp. 527-45.
Saritas, O.,Taymaz, E. and Tumer, T. 2007),‘Vision 2023: Turkey's national technology foresight program:
mrhisiar@glam. ac. uk VOL. 15 NO. 1 2013 jforesight jpage 39 To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail:
Keywords Priority-setting, Russia, Natural resources, Long term planning, Foresight project planning, Innovation, Technology led strategy, Sciences Paper type Research paper 1. Introduction In recent years
In the last ten to 15 years, Japan (National Institute of Science and Technology policy, 2010), Finland (University of Joensuu, 2010), the UK (Loveridge et al.
1995), Norway (Nordic Innovation Centre, 2007), Canada (National research council Canada, 2005) and other developed countries have accumulated significant experience with such projects.
Many international organisations, including the European commission (2004a, b, 2003), the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (2006), the United nations Industrial Development Organization (2007),
and OPEC (OPEC Secretariat, 2010), have PAGE 40 jforesight j VOL. 15 NO. 1 2013, pp. 40-53, Q Emerald Group Publishing Limited,
This study was implemented in the framework of the Programme of Fundamental Studies of the Higher School of economics in 2011. been active in the development of long-term strategies for the rational use of natural resources and in the sphere of environmental protection.
while the mineral resources sector's share of total Russian exports is as high as 80 per cent (Russian Federation, 2009).
In 2007, the RF Ministry of Education and Science initiated the National S&t Foresight until 2025 to identify S&t priorities (Sokolov, 2008a,2009.
Therefore for this additional investigation the RF Ministry of Education and Science initiated the second cycle of the National S&t Foresight until 2030.
VOL. 15 NO. 1 2013 jforesight jpage 41 2. Methodology The methodology of the paper includes several steps:
2025 (FS1) The aim of this foresight study was the identification of the most important and well-developed S&tareas in Russia in the long-term perspective.
PAGE 42 jforesight jvol. 15 NO. 1 2013 This study was based on another foresight study devoted to the identification of national S&t priorities and a corresponding list of critical technologies (Sokolov, 2008b.
and implement the federal goal-oriented programme‘‘S&t priorities for Development of the Russian S&t Sector in 2007-2012''.
VOL. 15 NO. 1 2013 jforesight jpage 43 B expert panels; B data analysis; and B discussion and dissemination of results.
2030 (FS2) The aim of this study was an evaluation of required resources and possible innovation projects for the most important S&t fields.
2030 was based on the FS1 results and also on a renewed version of the National S&t priorities and Critical technologies.
PAGE 44 jforesight jvol. 15 NO. 1 2013 B prevention and liquidation of emergencies related to natural and technogene emergencies;
two top scores) Technology area 1 Technologies for accelerated and efficient recovery of damaged lands, landscapes and biodiversity 97.6 2019 Contributing to dealing with social problems (76.3
and recycling of consumer and industrial waste 96.7 2016 Contributing to dealing with social problems (79.5 percent) Improving positions on international markets (40.9 percent) Technologies for processing
and affected area) 96.1 2014 Contributing to dealing with social problems (73.8 percent) Improving positions on international markets (47 5 percent) Technologies for forecasting the state of the lithosphere
oil-and gas-saturated zones 95.7 2018 Improving positions on international markets (78.1 percent) Contributing to dealing with social problems (25 percent) Technologies for environmentally safe mining
and biomaterials 94.0 2018 Contributing to dealing with social problems (82.6 percent) Improving positions on international markets (50 percent) Technologies for processing
This index shows the relative importance of each topic according to aggregated expert opinion VOL. 15 NO. 1 2013 jforesight jpage 45 New objectives of the study also demanded adjusting evaluation criteria for the technology groups (accordingly to the FS1 results.
B combined solid minerals extraction and deep processing systems (2010-2015; Table II Characteristics of most developed technology groups in the‘‘Rational Use of Natural resources''thematic area Technology group Index of R&d levela Cumulative effectb Monitoring and control systems,
2013 B integrated information systems for evaluating the current state and forecasting the future state of the environment, based on Russian meteorological and natural resources satellites (2015-2020);
and B an atmospheric pollution monitoring system, capable of the early detection of conditions potentially leading to natural or anthropogenic environmental emergencies (2015-2020.
Thus, the major development areas relating to the‘‘Rational Use of Natural resources''field for the period until 2030 were described in the course of the exercise
and technology groups with the best prospects and conditions for further development were identified, together with the most promising markets (and their specific segments)
the identification of such priorities was the objective of FS3. 3. 3 Innovation priorities for the Russian natural resources sector (FS3) Innovation priorities for the Russian natural resources sector for the period until 2025
The innovation priorities until 2025 for the development of the Russian natural resources sector was developed on the basis of identification of the most important problems and challenges regarding the natural resources sector's management system and necessary conditions for S&t development.
VOL. 15 NO. 1 2013 jforesight jpage 47 As a result of this study, the innovation priorities and corresponding tasks were formulated for each structural component of the natural resources sector.
2025 underlined the importance of improving the infrastructure and increasing the budget for R&d funding and training;
Figure 2 The overall structure of the study PAGE 48 jforesight jvol. 15 NO. 1 2013 The results of both projects have become an important information source for the follow-up FS3 project devoted to innovation
Figure 3 The general scheme of the structure of projects interrelation VOL. 15 NO. 1 2013 jforesight jpage 49 B design of large-scale innovation projects;
and promote solving the key problems identified in the FS2 framework FS3 An identification of innovation priorities for the Russian management system in natural resources until 2030 The innovation priorities
Also, suggestions for amendments to strategic documents of RF Ministries were proposed Update of the list of innovation priorities PAGE 50 jforesight jvol. 15 NO. 1 2013 create an adequate management system for the sector.
Also the RF Geologic Strategy and Water Strategy were developed on the basis of the innovation priorities for the Russian natural resources sector Direct (high) VOL. 15 NO. 1 2013 jforesight jpage 51
References European commission (2003),‘Innovation policy: updating the Union's approach in the context of the Lisbon strategy'',COM (2003) 112, European commission, Brussels. European commission (2004a),‘Science and technology, the key to Europe's future guidelines for future European union
policy to support research'',COM (2004) 353, European commission, Brussels. European commission (2004b),‘Stimulating technologies for sustainable development:
an environmental technologies action plan for the European union'',COM (2004) 38, European commission, Brussels. Loveridge, D.,Georghiou, L. and Nedeva, M. 1995),‘United kingdom Foresight programme, Delphi survey'',PREST
, University of Manchester, Manchester. National Institute of Science and Technology policy (2010),‘The 9th Science and Technology foresight Survey contribution of science and technology to future society.
The 9th Delphi survey'',NISTEP Report No. 140, National Institute of Science and Technology policy, Tokyo. National research council Canada (2005),‘Looking forward:
S&t for the 21st century'',Foresight Consolidation Report, available at www. nrc-cnrc. gc. ca/Nordic Innovation Centre (2007),‘Foresight in Nordic innovation systems'',Nordic Innovation
Centre, Oslo. OPEC Secretariat (2010),‘OPEC long-term strategy'',OPEC, Vienna. PAGE 52 jforesight jvol. 15 NO. 1 2013 Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (2006),‘Next generation networks:
evolution and policy considerations'',Draft Summary Report, OECD Foresight Forum, Budapest. Russian Energy Strategy: 2030 (2009), Russian Energy Strategy:
2030, Russian Federation, Moscow. Russian Federation (2009), On the Current State and Utilisation of Mineral resources of the Russian Federation in 2009, State Report, Russian Federation, Moscow.
Sokolov, A. 2008a),‘Science and technology foresight in Russia: results of a national Delphi'',3rd International Seville Conference on Future-oriented technology analysis (FTA), 16-17 october, Seville, Book of Abstracts.
Sokolov, A. 2008b),‘Russian critical technologies 2015'',Collection of EFMN Briefs, Part 1, Directorate-General for Research Co-operation, European commission, Brussels. Sokolov, A. 2009),‘The future
of science and technology: the Delphi study results'',Foresight, Vol. 10 No. 3 (in Russian. United nations Industrial Development Organization (2007), Technology foresight Summit Workbook, United nations Industrial Development Organization, Budapest.
University of Joensuu (2010),‘Foresight for the development of forest sector in Finland till 2020'',Future Forum on Forests of Finland.
Future challenges to the Finnish Forest Sector, University of Joensuu and Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry of Finland, available at:
www. metsafoorumi. fi Further reading Georghiou, L.,Cassingena Harper, J.,Keenan, M.,Miles, I. and Popper, R. 2008), The Handbook of Technology foresight:
Concepts and Practice, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham. Corresponding author Anna Sokolova can be contacted at: avsokolova@hse. ru VOL. 15 NO. 1 2013 jforesight jpage 53 To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail:
reprints@emeraldinsight. com Or visit our web site for further details: www. emeraldinsight. com/reprints Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner.
Overtext Web Module V3.0 Alpha
Copyright Semantic-Knowledge, 1994-2011