see Day and Schoemaker 2006; Hambrick 1982) and to investigate their likely evolution and impact on the organisation (foresight techniques:
Wiltbank et al. 2006. The major evidence of this scepticism may be the fact that today foresight is addressed not specifically by most MBA curricula;
Wiltbank et al. 2006. In order to explore the relationships between environmental uncertainty, foresight, and strategic decision-making, we performed a multiple-case study of corporate organisations.
and response options to drivers of change (Ruff 2006). Such system aims at encompassing and integrating analyses of future changes in the macro environment into market and product issues.
and P. J. H. Schoemaker. 2006. Peripheral vision. Boston, MA: Harvard Business school Press. Dill, W. R. 1958.
Ruff, F. 2006. Corporate foresight: Integrating the future business environment into innovation and strategy. International Journal of Technology management 34, nos. 3 4: 278 95.
and S d. Sarasvathy. 2006. What to do next? The case for non-predictive strategy. Strategic management Journal 27, no. 10: 981 98.
Moreover, FTA supports one to deal with complexity (Saritas 2006) to process and interpret weak signals, wild cards (Amanatidou et al. 2012;
Saritas, O. 2006. Systems thinking for foresight. Phd thesis, Manchester Institute of Innovation research. Shelton, C. 1997.
Phaal, Farrukh, and Probert 2006. As a process methodology, roadmapping consists of several modules. Modularisation allows one to form a tailored‘response chain'to answer different kinds of research and development problems (see, e g.
The building services roadmap was realised in three phases in 2006 2007. In the first phase, a large background review was completed.
and D. R. Probert. 2006. Technology management tools: Concept, development and application. Technovation 26, no. 3: 336 44.
Markard 2006. Among the various approaches to capture the essentials of innovation systems, the technology delivery system(‘TDS')has demonstrated enduring value by capturing
The data from both DWPI and Factiva show a small peak in 2005 and suddenly decrease in 2006.
Actually, the data from Compendex also grow slower in 2006. We Are downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:05 03 december 2014 850 Y. Guo et al.
we observe that the Japanese government did cancel solar energy subsidies in 2006. After 2006, DWPI patents resume growth,
although the data in 2009 and 2010 were collected not completely by Thomson Reuters at the time of the downloading.
This could help us to identify potential partners with complementary interests at different places along this technology development progression, thereby serving‘Open innovation'purposes (Chesbrough 2006.
Chesbrough, H. W. 2006. Open innovation: A new paradigm for understanding industrial innovation. In Open innovatiion Researching a new paradigm, ed. H. W. Chesbrough, W. Vanhaverbeke,
Markard, J. 2006. Technological innovation systems and the multilevel perspective: Towards a combined framework for the analysis of innovation processes.
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.
2007) and reduced the burdens of cost and time (Gordon and Pease, 2006. Combining methods has been recognized as a precondition of successful foresight
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 (2006), The 3rd Science and Technology Basic Plan, Government of Japan, Tokyo.
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:
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.
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.
Welp, M.,de la Vega-Leinert, A.,Stoll-Kleemann, S. and Jaeger, C. C. 2006),‘Science-based stakeholder dialogues:
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
'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:
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),
PAGE 52 jforesight jvol. 15 NO. 1 2013 Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (2006),‘Next generation networks:
2006). ) In FISTERA, many national foresight exercise reports were scanned and important ISTS were listed and scouted. In Delphi Austria, an analysis of the Japanese, German, French, British Delphi studies was conducted to separate
Fujii, A. 2006),‘Foresight on information society technologies in Europe''''Science & Technology trends Quarterly Review, No. 18, available at:
Anal. 14 (2006) 227 249.64 M. K. B. Lüdeke, Bridging Qualitative and Quantitative Methods in Foresight, Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, 2006.
1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
2006 2007 2008 2009 Application Priority Corporate Non-corporate Inventor Literaturecitation Patentcitation IPC IPC-TOP5 IPC-TOP10 MC MC-TOP5
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Inf. 9 (2006) 160 166.18 C. M. Chu, Using technology life cycle to analysis the developing trend of thin-film photovoltaic industry, Ph d. dissertation, National Central
to be held in Laxenburg (IIASA), April 2006 (http://www. tfit-wg. ubi. pt/globalization). Tessaleno Devezas is Associate professor with Habilitation in the Faculty of engineering, University of Beira Interior (UBI), P-6200-001 Covilha,
Sci. 52 (2006) 514 528.42 J. H. Kwakkel W. L. Auping, E. Pruyt, Dynamic scenario discovery under deep uncertainty:
Sci. 52 (2006) 514 528.32 D. G. Groves, R. J. Lempert, A new analytic method for finding policy-relevant scenarios, Glob.
European commission DG RTD, Directorate E Unit E. 4, Brussel. 7. Prelude EEA (2006) Prelude (PROSPECTIVE Environmental analysis of Land use Development in Europe) scenarios.
temporal harmony and dissonance in nanotechnology networks, Time Soc. 15 (2006) 121 139.45 M. Aaltonen, Multi-ontology, sense-making and the emergence of the future, Futures 41 (2009
towards a user's guide, Futures 38 (2006) 723 739.51 E. Wollenberg, D. Edmunds, L. Buck, Using scenarios to make decisions about the future:
monitoring weak signals efficiently in corporate decision-making, Futures 38 (2006) 908 924.73 C. Prell, K. Hubacek, M. S. Reed, C. Quinn, N. Jin, J
Futures 38 (2006) 350 366.77 P. De Smedt, Can Negotiating the Future Influence Policy and Social change?
In 2006, the Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety (BMU) established the Nanokommission a stakeholder commission on nanotechnologies as part of the federal government's high-tech strategy.
Zur politischen Ökonomie der Nanotechnologie, Prokla 36 (2006) 473 496.14 M. Kaiser, S. Maasen, M. Kurath, C. Rehmann-Sutter, Governing future technologies.
Res. 8 (2006) 153.43 D. Barben, E. Fisher, C. Selin, D. H. Guston, Anticipatory governance of nanotechnology:
Stud. 11 (2)( 2006) 61 74.21 T. Postma, F. Liebl, How to improve scenario analysis as strategic management tool?
impact on policy and decision-making the 2006 FTA INTERNATIONAL SEVILLE SEMINAR, Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 75 (2008)( 2008) 457 461.4 In:
and was held again in 2006 and 2008. These conferences, organized by IPTS, aimed to bring together academics,
From April 2005 to April 2006, the Globalisation Council held 15 meetings. The meetings typically lasted for two days, from lunch to lunch.
In light of the Globalisation Council's work, in April 2006, the government presented an overall strategy for Denmark in the global economy:‘
which was initiated by a passage in the Parliament in November 2006 as part of the national budget negotiations for 2007.
a cross-cultural study between Singapore and New zealand, Industrial Marketing Management 36 (2006) 293 307.18 R. K. Moenaert, A. de Meyer, B. J. Clarysse, Cultural
M. B. A. van Asselt, Practicing the scenario-axes technique, Futures 39 (6)( 2006) 15 30.31 M. Van der Steen, M. van der Vlist,
Reflexive governance For Sustainable development, Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham, UK, 2006, http://www. eelggarenvironment. com/Bookentry contents. lasso?
Impact on policy and decision-making The 2006 FTA INTERNATIONAL SEVILLE SEMINAR Fabiana Scapolo a,, Alan L. Porter b c, d, Michael Rader e a European commission Directorate General Joint research Centre, Brussels, Belgium b R&d for Search Technology, Inc
) 1 that took place on the 28th and 29th of September 2006. The Seminar was sponsored
10.1016/j. techfore. 2008.03.001 The six articles included in this Special issue were presented in 2006. The overarching theme was the impact of fta approaches on policy and decision-making,
and learning Another very important theme addressed by the FTA 2006 International Seminar relates to FTA evaluation, impact and learning.
and goal attainment levels. 3. FTA on specific issues Two themes of the 2006 FTA International Seminar put FTA into contexts.
and he addresses the above listed shortcomings. 4. Concluding remarks We note some of the issues presented in the concluding session of the 2006 FTA INTERNATIONAL SEVILLE SEMINAR.
These stem from an address4 given by The chair and a Member of the Technical Committee of the 2006 FTA Seminar
Lente, The Sociology of expectations in Science and Technology, Technology analysis & Strategic management 18 (2006) 285 298.18 P. den Hertog, R. Smits, The Co-evolution of Innovation theory, Innovation Practice
Management Decision 44 (2006) 1441 1460.2 M. Beer, R. A. Eisenstat, The silent killers of strategy implementation and learning, MIT Sloan Management Review
what is still to be explored, Journal of Management 32 (2006) 673 719.15 K. A. Meers, Contextual barriers to strategic implementation:
the case of Procter & gamble, R&d Management 36 (2006) 333 346.8 R. Rohrbeck, K. Ho lzle, H. G. Gemu nden, Opening up for competitive advantage how Deutsche telekom
towards an agenda, R&d Management 36 (2006) 223 228.10 C. Edquist, Systems of Innovation Technologies, Institutions and Organizations, Routledge, Oxon, 1997.11 D. Rigby, C
a new challenge for a regional approach to innovation systems, European Planning Studies 15 (2006) 195 215.17 H. A. von der Gracht, C. R. Vennemann,
R&d Management Conference (RADMA), Lisboan, Portugal, 2004.41 C. Jasner, Walk of pain, Mckinsey Wissen 17 (2006) 44 49.42 W. G. Dyer
Jennifer. harper@gov. mt. Professor Ron Johnston is at the Australian Centre for Innovattio Ltd (ACIIC), Faculty of engineering, University of Sydneey Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia;
Saritas, 2006. Scapolo and Porter (2008) propose 13 families grouping more than 50 FTA METHODS, building on a typology proposed during the first FTA conference in Seville by the Technology Future Analysis methods Working group (see Table 1). Keenan
Technology watch, tech mining (Porter and Cunningham, 2005), web mining (van de Lei and Cunningham, 2006) Descriptive Bibliometrics
multipath mapping (Robinson and Propp, 2006) Scenarios Scenario management, quantitatively based scenarios, different emphases and dark scenarios (Punie et al.
2006), science theatres, video (Steyaert et al. 2006; Decker and Ladikas, 2004) Valuing/decision-aiding/economic analyses Cost-benefit analysis, SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities,
threats) and scorecard analyses (Sripaipan, 2006), analytical hierarchy process, data envelopment analysis, multicriteria decision analyses Combinations Scenario-simulation (gaming),
trend impact analysis Introduction Science and Public policy February 2010 5 Six functions of FTA for policy-making are:
These functions were an important outcome of the Second International Seville Seminar on Future-oriented technology analysis held in 2006.
I Maghiros and S Delaitre 2006. Dark scenarios as a constructive tool for future-oriented technology analysis: safeguaard in a world of ambient intelligence (SWAMI.
Paper presennte at the Second International Seville Seminar on Future-oriented technology analysis, held 28 29 september 2006, Seville, Spain.
Saritas, O 2006. Systems thinking for foresight, Phd thesis. PREST, Manchester Business school, University of Manchester. Scapolo, F and A l Porter 2008.
Sripaipan, C 2006. Foresight in a nonprofit organisation: a case of the Technology Promotion Association (Thailand Japan.
held 28 29 Septembbe 2006, Seville, Spain. Steyaert, S, S Eggermont and H Vandebosch 2006.
Towards the desired future of the elderly and ICT: policy recommendations based on a dialogue with senior citizens.
Van de Lei, T E and S w Cunningham 2006. Use of the internet for future-oriented technology analysis.
Paper presented at the Second International Seville Seminar on Future-oriented technology analysis, held 28 29 september 2006, Seville, Spain
Most of the broader governmental horizon scans were initiated by ministries of defence or their agencies (Development, Concepts and Doctrine Centrre 2006;
such as the Department for Environment, Food and Rural affairs (DEFRA) in the UK (DEFRA, 2006), the Ministry of Economic Affairs of The netherlands (Ministerie van Economische Zaken, 1998), The french Department of Transport
'Écologie, de l'Energie, du Développement durable et de l'Aménagement du territooire 2006). Horizon scanning also appears in departtment of health (and ageing), e g. in New zealand, Australia4 and Canada,
trend monitoring, trend research and strategic early warning (Schwartz, 2006; 2008). ) The Government office of Science in the UK started its national horizon scanning in 2004.6 This activity covers a wide range of S&t forecasts (Delta Scan) and future developments across all policy domains (Sigma Scan.
Denmark started a horizon scan process in 2006, focusing on the societal needs of the future and Emerging s&t.
Belgium and Switzerland (Habeggeer 2009) while other countries are building up scan-based policy documents (Finland (Academy of Finland and TEKES, 2006), Canada (Smith,
2006) or have carried recently out scan-like exercises that were used solely to design foresight programs (Germany
2006) instrumeen that deliberately challenge policy-makers to look at the uncertainties and the unexpected and deveelo resilient policies towards sustainability.
cultural and social respeects The horizon scan was mandated by the Danish parliament in 2006 to feed directly into the research agenda setting.
2006), also due to more general problems around the interaction of scientific advice, government and society (De Wit, 2005) it is clear that horizon scanning is seen as a valued but also vulnerable learning process (DEFRA,
2006) which seems to be embedded in important decision-making processes in at least three European countries. For the OECD DASTI horizon scan it was clear from the beginning that the results of the scan would be used as an important input for the process of priorittisin new research themes for the Danish fouryeea cycle of the research funding councils
2006). ) The procees involved many stakeholders who have been influenced by the discussions and issues that were selected.
and evoking important questiion around the future than in providing clear-cut Joint horizon scanning Science and Public policy February 2010 17 answers (Medina Vasquez, 2006).
References Academy of Finland and TEKES, 2006. Finnsight 2015, the outlooo for science technology and society.
Barre, R and M Keenan 2006. Evaluation, Impact and Learning, Anchor paper Theme 2. Paper presented at Second joint horizon scanning Science and Public policy February 2010 18 International Seville Seminar on Future-oriented technology analysis:
Impact of fta Approaches on Policy and Decision-making, held 28 29 september 2006, Seville, Spain. Cassingena Harper, J 2006.
FUTURREG (Futures for Regional development: Report on futures tool, horizon scanning. Availabbl at<http://www. cs. um. edu. mt/gpac1/Teaching/Foresight/Papers/Horizonscanning. doc>,last accessed 1 october 2008.
UK government, 2006, Horizon scanning and Futures Team, Sciennc Economics and Statistics DG, 2006. Looking back at looking forwards, Next steps for Horizon scanning and Futurres DEFRA 2006.
Available from<http://horizonscanning. defra. gov. uk/Viewdocument image. aspx? Doc id=192>,last accessed 1 june 2009.
Development, Concepts and Doctrine Centre (DCDC) 2006. The DCDC's Global Strategic Trends Study, 2007 2036, third editiion Swindon, UK:
Eriksson, E A and M Weber 2006. Adaptive foresight Navigating, the complex landscape of policy strategies. Paper presented at Second International Seville Seminar on Future-oriented technology analysis:
Impact of fta Approaches on Policy and Decision-making, held 28 29 september 2006, Seville, Spain. European commission, Directorate-General for Research Scientiifi and Technological foresight 2006.
Creative system disrupttion towards a research strategy beyond Lisbon, Report of the Key technologies Expert Group. Available from<ftp://ftp. cordis. europa. eu/pub/foresight/docs/key-technologiesrepportpdf>,last accessed 1 june 2009.
Medina Vasquez, J 2006. Map of levels of complexity and indetermiinatio for foresight studies. Paper presented at Second International Seville Seminar on Future-oriented technology analysis:
Impact of fta Approaches on Policy and Decision-making, held 28 29 september 2006, Seville, Spain Ministère de l'Écologie, de l'Energie, du Développement durable
et de l'Aménagement du territoire, 2006. L'aménagement en 50 tendances. Available from<http://www. rechercheinnovvationequipement. gouv. fr/article. php3?
Netherlands Organization for Scientific research 2006. Science Valued! NWO Strategy 2007 2010. Available from<http://www. nwo. nl/files. nsf/pages/NWOA 6PXJ9W ENG/$file/wetens chap gewaarderd lowres eng. pdf>,last accessed 1 june 2009.
Office of the Deputy Prime minister, UK 2006. All Our Futures: The challenges for local governance in 2015.
Rollwagen, I, J Hofmann and S Schneider 2006. Criteria for improovin the business impact of foresight at Deutsche bank:
Impact of fta Approaches on Policy and Decision-making, held 28 29 september 2006, Seville, Spain. Schwarz, J O 2006.
Die Zukunft der Zukunftsforschung im Deutschen Management: eine Delphi Studie. Available at<http://www. jan-schwarz. de/downloads/executivesummary. pdf>,last accessed 1 june 2009.
Smith J 2006. What Broad Security Challenges May Canada Face by 2015? Technology foresight directorate of the office of the national science advisor.
which is reflected in a 29%world market share (worth US$130 billion) in 2000 (Aho Expert Group, 2006).
The EPIS-Delphi was implemented as an internetbaase real-time Delphi (RT Delphi)( Gordon and Pease, 2006;
2006). ) Step 3: Design of scenarios for the future The sector analysis carried out as the first step of the process
References Aho Expert Group 2006. Creating an Innovative Europe: Report of the Independent Expert Group on R&d
Gordon, T J and A Pease 2006. Delphi 2: An efficient,‘round-less'Delphi. Technological forecasting and Social Change, 73 (4), 321 333.
Ilmolaa, L and O Kuusibb 2006. Filters of weak signals hinder foresight: monitoring weak signals efficiently in corporate decisiionmaking.
Price waterhouse coopers 2006. Global Entertainment and Meddi Outlook: 2006 2010. Global Overview. New york: Pricewaterhouusecooper LLP Rafi, F and P Kampas 2002.
How to identify your enemies before they destroy you? Harvard Business Review, 80 (11), 115 123.
and evaluation in generral Barre and Keenan (2006) concluded that an Jonathan Calof is recognized as one of the leaders in intelliggenc and business insight.
Similarly, Amanatidou and Guy (2006) have pointed out the direct and indirect benefits of FTA: Foresight programmes are evaluated usually in terms of the achievement of initial objectives and the scale and nature of direct, anticipated impacts.
2006) looked at FTA from the corporate perspective and identified several criteria (content and process) for improving the effectiveness of foresight studies (see Table 4). Survey process From the preceding discussion,
designed and delivered in the period 2005 2006 was a survey of foresight leaders around the world identified from international meetinngs followed by an expert analysis that delved more deeply into best practices.
Over the years the program went through numerous changes, in the host organization (from National Reseaarc Council 2002 2004, to Privy council office 2005 2006, to Industry Canada 2007 2008.
as early as in 2005 2006, it enabled the authhor to predict the demise of the Canadian foresight effort.
to the point in 2006 2007 where the only substantive client was the NSA and the science community,
and Keenan (2006), research in this area is limited: Pleas from sponsors of FTA ACTIVITIES for better accounts of demonstrable impacts are as old as FTA itself.
Effie and Ken Guy 2006. Interpreting foresight procees impacts: steps towards the development of a framework conceptualising the dynamics of‘foresight systems'.
'Paper presented at the Second International Seville Seminar on Futuureoriented Technology analysis, held 28 29 september 2006, Seville, Spain.
Barré, Remi and Michael Keenan 2006. Evaluation, impact and learning. Paper presented at the Second International Seville Seminar on Future-oriented technology analysis, held 28 29 september 2006, Seville, Spain.
Buetschi, D and M Nentwich 2000. The role of PTA in the policy making process, EUROPTA Final Report.
Rollwagen, Ingo, Jan Hofmann and Stefan Schneider 2006. Criterri for improving the business impact of foresight at Deutsche bank:
Paper presented at the Second International Seville Seminar on Future-oriented technology analysis, held 28 29 september 2006, Seville, Spain.
Eight categories of infectious diseases have been identified as potential threats (World health organization, 2006. These are: B Nares Damrongchai is at the APEC Center for Technology foresight, National science Technology and Innovation policy Office, 73/1 Rama 6 Road, Rajdhevee, Bangkok 10400, Thailaand Email:
From 2006 2009 he was a policy researcher at the APEC Center for Technollog Foresight, Bangkok, Thailand.
'The technology roadmapping method has been used in the present authors'previous region-wide studies (APEC CTF, 2006.
, NEMS based Biochip) Figure 1. Examples of converging technologies, APEC Center for Technology foresight (www. apecforesight. org) 2006 Source:
as was evident in the APEC leaders'declaration (APEC, 2006). However, the applicatiio of these new technologies in developing economies needs to be undertaken with great care,
References APEC Center for Technology foresight 2006. Future Fuel Technollogy Summary Report of an APEC-wide Foresight study.
APEC Leaders'Declaration, APEC, 2006. 14th APEC Economic Leaders'Meeting, Ha Noi Declaration, Ha Noi, Viet nam, 18 19 november 2006.
Available at<http://www. apec. org/apec/leaders declarations/2006. html>,last accessed 20 february 2010. Nordmann, Alfred 2004.
World health organization 2006. Assessing vaccine-preventable diseases burden and immunization impact. Available at<http://www. who. int/immunization monitoring/burden/en/>,last accessse August 2008
2006), influenced by the altered role of the technology user as an important stakeholder. Confronted with almost unlimited choices,
such as the rise of living labs, which are user-driven innovation environmments and the launch of the European Network of Living Labs (ENOLL) in 2006.
Lievrouw, 2006. This social constructivist vision aims to make technollog development more user-and human-centred.
Lievrouw, 2006. In the SCOT perspective, it is assumed that negotiatiio between certain social groups influences the construction and emergence of new technologies (Bijker and Law, 1992;
This and other approaches try to focus on technological developmeen from a mutual shaping or interactionism point of view (Lievrouw, 2006.
and a more latent level that are quite difficult to grasp (Rosted, 2006). As a result, userdriive innovation requires an interdisciplinary approach.
Hansson (2006) distinguishes two types of user-driven innovattio methods: voice of the customer methods and lead-user methods.
which refers to‘general application service performance'(Soldani, 2006: 1), received a lot of attention in the past, it seems that Qoe has driven now taken over
and companies to gain an insight into the main drivers and constraints in service innovation and into the conditions for meeting social and user requirements (Lievens and Pierson, 2006).
Methodological framework The common methodological framework covered three main research stages in the innovationdevellopmen process (Lievens and Pierson, 2006.
which took place at the end of 2006, participants imagined they were in the year 2010 and were restricted therefore not by current legislation
Hansson, E 2006. Understanding User-Driven innovation. Nordeen Unpublished report. Available at<http://www. norden. org/pub/velfaerd/naering/sk/TN2006522. pdf>,last accessed Februuar 2008.
Lievens, B and J Pierson 2006. Project Outline: GBO project 2006 ROMAS: Research on Mobile Applications and Services (interrna document.
Lievrouw, L 2006. New media design and development: diffusions of innovations v social shaping of technology.
In The Handbooo of New Media, L Lievrouw and S Livingstone (eds. pp 246 265.
Rosted, J 2006. User-driven innovation: an introduction. Presentattio at the Northern Dimension Learning Forum on User-Driven innovation.
Soldani, D 2006. Means and methods for collecting and analysing Qoe measurements in wireless networks.
Proceedings of the International Symposium on a World of Wireless, Mobile and Multimedia Networks (WOWMOM. 2006.61), held 26 29 june 2006, Niagara-falls, Buffalo-NY, USA.
Lepori (2006) gives a longteer analysis of public research policy primarily with respect to universities and public research organizations.
Griessen and Braun (2006) deal with the problems of political coordination of innovation policies in Switzerland.
Lepori B 2006. Public research funding and research policy: a long-term analysis for The swiss case. Science and Public Policcy 33 (3), 205 216.
, University of Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia 3fabiana Scapolo, European commission Joint research Centre, Science Advice to Policy Unit, Brussels, Belgium*Corresponding author.
Gu and Lundvall 2006; Mu and Qu 2008; Simon and Goldman 1989; Saich 1989; Suttmeier 1980;
Zhou and Leydesdorff 2006. Surprisingly little attention has been paid, however, to how decisions are taken and priorities set in Chinese S&t policy (see,
and with it its S&t policy, changed radically (Gu and Lundvall 2006; Simon and Goldman 1989),
Gu and Lundvall 2006: 15) The next phase, of deepening, occurred with the 14th Congress of the CCPCC (in 1992),
The latest MLP was presented in February 2006 and lasts until 2020. It proposed guidelines which are expressed in 16 Chinese characters:
'and‘basic research'(Cao et al. 2006; Schwaag Serger and Breidne 2007. So-called mega-engineering and mega-science projects are aimed at‘leapfrogging'in key areas,
and diffusiio of agricultural technologies 11th Five-Year Plan Mega-science Program 2006 Promote four top scientific areas Mega-engineering Projects 2006 Promote technology
Table 3. Allocations for S&t by Central Government in main S&t programs (in million RMB) Item 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
the Case 973 Program (in million RMB) Item 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Total 589 686 800 897 983
is to strengthen China's higher education system by funding around 40 universities out of a total of around 2, 000 regular institutions of higher education in China (Marginson 2006).
again reinforcing the focus on missions rather than institutional development (Suttmeier et al. 2006). Overall, institution-and capacity-building have received much less attention and focus than mission or excellence as priorities
and Lundvall (2006) who argue that the investments in S&t have not been supported sufficiently by institutional development.
The planning process was surrounded by relatively public and heated debates concerning the fundamental choice of development strategy to be pursued in the plan (see also Gu and Lundvall 2006.
Cao, C.,Simon, D. and Suttmeier, R. P. 2006)‘ China's 15-year science and technology plan',Physics Today, 59:38 45.
Gu, S. and Lundvall, B.-A°.(2006)‘ China's innovation system and the move towards harmonious growth and endogenous innovation'.
Marginson, S. 2006)‘ The Angloamerican university at its global high tide',Minerva, 44:65 87. Mu, R. and Qu, W. 2008)‘ The development of science and technology in China:
Suttmeier, R. P.,Cao, C. and Simon, D. 2006)‘ Knowledge innovation and the Chinese Academy of Sciences',Science, 312/5770: 58 9. US Embassy Beijing.
Zhou, P. and Leydesdorff, L. 2006)‘ The emergence of China as a leading nation in science',Research policy, 35:83 104.
Overtext Web Module V3.0 Alpha
Copyright Semantic-Knowledge, 1994-2011