Introduction From priority-setting to societal challenges in future-oriented technology analysis Future-oriented technology analysis (FTA) is derived a term from a collective description given to the range of technology-oriented forecasting methods and practices by a group of futures researchers and practitioners
1. Called‘‘technology futures analysis''in its original form, the central aim was to bring into a single frame a family of methods
many of these methods have far wider application in futures work than in the domain of technology
and it is pertinent to ask why there should be a particular focus on technology. While this is a powerful undercurrent in the broader discourse of futures work it does not elsewhere form the central focus.
''3. On its own perhaps not but technology is rarely absent among drivers; as Linstone argued in the context of considering long waves,
‘‘Technology will play as significant a role in the 21st century as it did in the 20th''4. From the conceptual ground of the paper,
a biennial conference series developed, hosted by the Institute for Prospective Technological Studies (JRC-IPTS) of the European commission Directorate General Joint research Centre.
but the need to recognise the traditions of technology assessment, forecasting and other dimensions of futures studies remains important
However, they argue that this engagement has sometimes been perceived too narrowly as being synonymous with the identification of broad technological priorities for investment.
networking and visionbuillding not across the broad front of technological options but within specific sectors.
These roles are identifying promising technological pathways, engaging relevant stakeholders and creating common visions that move into action.
and rationalist technology-focused approaches towards recognition of broader concerns encompassing the entire innovation system including societal perspectives.
References 1 Technology Futures analysis Methods Working group, Technology futures analysis: toward integration of the field and new methods, Technological forecasting and Social Change 71 (2004) 287 303, in press. 2 T. J. Gordon, J. C. Glenn (Eds.
Science & Technology policy Planning Network (ASTPP), Frauenhofer Institute, Systems and Innovation research, Karlsruhe, 1999.7 L. Mermet, T. Fuller, R. van der Helm, Reexamining
. Johnston, Future-oriented technology analysis as a driver of strategy and policy, Technology analysis & Strategic management 20 (2008) 267 269.11 M. Keenan, R. Barre',C. Cagnin, Future-oriented technology analysis:
I. Miles, Impacts and implications of future-oriented technology analysis for policy and decision making, Technology analysis & Strategic management 21 (2009) 915 916.13 T. Ko nno la, J. Smith, A. Eerola, Introduction
MBS, University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester M13 9pl, UK Jennifer Cassingena Harper Malta Council for Science and Technology, Villa Bighi, Bighi, Kalkara
for Prospective Technological Studies (IPTS), Edificio Expo, C/Inca Garcilaso, 3, E-41092 Seville, Spain c Fraunhofer-Institute for Systems and Innovation research ISI
, Breslauer Straße 48,76139 Karlsruhe, Germany d CNAM, 292 rue Saint-martin, 75003 Paris, France e Dept of Science, Technology,
technology assessment, transition management, evidence-based policy and academic disciplines such as Innovation studies and Science and Technology studies 2. A number of classifications have been developed distinguishing types of Foresight with respect to approach, context and purpose 3
5. Based on these insights, Foresight practitioners do now deploy hybrid methodological frameworks where different approaches serve different purposes in specific phases in order to tailor Foresight to each specific purpose and context.
Innovation studies have pointed out how the dynamics of innovation systems are structured by the nature of the governing technological regimes that in turn co-evolve with socioeconomic and institutional framework conditions.
At the same time sectoral and technology specific determinants (technological regimes) significantly structure companies'search processes and thereby shape the dynamics of knowledge production 11.
and programming calls at the European level encompass also the work carried out by the new European research Council (ERC) and by intermediary coordinating institutions like ERA NETS, European Technology platforms (ETPS) and Joint Technology initiatives (JTIS)
which develop scientific and technological road maps. Federating EU instruments like Networks of Excellence (Noes) and large facilities
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 25,
Furthermore, Foresight processes are supposed to help designing new value networks that are based on the novel combinations of technologies, organisational partnerships and institutional arrangements.
e g. 35) may create pathdependdencie and locking-out alternative technological options 36. Here, Foresight can also contribute to the creative restructuring
As a third new element we suggest to broaden the analytical framework (originally designed for purely scientific environments) towards the realm of technological knowledge,
Extending the application of search regimes in the realm of technology does neither create special difficulties concerning the third dimension, complementarity.
It can be for instance through the use of facilities (e g. technological platform), or thanks to interdisciplinary or intersectoral cooperation (e g. research contracts between academia and industry).
Moreover, the combined analysis of scientific and technological knowledge brings a more original outcome in the sense that it provides an adequate framework for analysing researchers'coactivity,
and the technological network (formed by inventors) whose intensities reflect the institutional complementarity between industry and academia within a given techno-scientific area.
The European Technology platform (ETP)‘‘Plants for the Future''is a stakeholder forum for the plant sector,
‘‘Plants for the Future'',the above-mentioned European Technology platform is an example of coordinating institution for this collaboration.
Steering is done in an integrated manner through the Technology platform with industry as the dominant driving force.
The European Technology platform for Nanoelectronics European Nanoelectronics Initiative Advisory Council (ENIAC) was launched in 2004 with the mission to bring together all leading players in the field
One DG RTD service is specifically in charge of translating nano policy objectives into research programmes,‘‘Nano-and converging Sciences and Technologies''.
ENIAC is one among the few ETP to have been developed further in a Joint Technology initiatives (JTIS.
and technology development projects in Nanoelectronics, the nano JTI associates public bodies and funds (the European commission, Member States and Associated States) and private bodies funds through AENAS.
Nano excellence seems to be concentrated highly (role of‘technology platforms'to work at the nanoscale) in 200 clusters where Asia has a strong presence:
Even though there are a number of strong technological visions around many of them lack richness on the societal side.
Brown, K. Konrad, H. van Lente, The sociology of expectation in science and technology, Technology analysis & Strategic management 18 (3/4)( 2006) 285 298.7 B. De
insights from the FORLEARN mutual learning process, Technology analysis & Strategic management 20 (3)( 2008) 369 387.9 E. A. Eriksson, K. M. Weber, Adaptive foresight:
Towards a Theory of innovation and Interactive learning, Pinter, London, 2009.11 F. Malerba, L. Orsenigo, Technological regimes and sectoral patterns of innovative activities, Industrial and Corporate Change 6 (1
, Research policy 6 (1)( 1977) 36 76.15 A. Rip, R. Kemp, Technological change, in: S. Rayner, E. L. Malone (Eds.
Technological change and Industrial Dynamics, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK and Northampton, MA, 2001.18 L. Georghiou, J. Cassingena Harper, Challenging Europe's Research Rationales for the European research area
Available from the Science and Technology studies Unit, University of York, UK, 2001.21 E. Grande, The state and interest groups in a framework of multilevel decision-making:
London/Dover, 1984.29 W. B. Arthur, Competing technologies, increasing returns, and lock in by historical events, Economic Journal 99 (394)( 1989) 116 131.30 W. B. Arthur, Increasing Returns and Path Dependence in the Economy, University of Michigan Press
, Ann arbor, 1994.31 S. Jacobsson, A. Johnson, The diffusion of renewable energy technology: an analytical framework and key issues for research, Energy Policy 28 (9)( 2000) 625 640.32 A. Salo, T. Gustafsson, R. Ramanathan, Multicriteria methods for Technology foresight, Journal
of Forecasting 22 (2 3)( 2003) 235 255.33 M. Keenan, Identifying emerging generic technologies at the national level:
Presentation at the PRIME Winter School on Emerging Nanotechnologies, Grenoble, 4 8 february, 2008.48 A. Bonaccorsi, G. Thoma, Institutional complementarity and inventive performance in nano science and Technology research
Policy 36 (6)( 2007) 813 831.49 A. Rip, H. te Kulve, Constructive technology assessment and Socio-Technical Scenarios, 2008.50 A. Rip, Folk theories of nanotechnologists, Science
patterns of moral argumentation about new and emerging science and technology, Nanoethics 1 (1)( 2007) 3 20.
and technology that defines today's business environment. For more than 25 years, scanning has played an essential role in SRIC-BI's
The inherent unpredictability of technology development and commercialization processes, legal and regulatory developments, and changes in cultural factors and 0040-1625/$-see front matter D 2004 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. doi:
and technological environments is essential to maintaining the needed flexibility. Such monitoring of the external environment is the foundation of an open intelligence system.
and an acceleration of the advances in science and technology all are turning traditional hierarchical or linear markets, supply chains,
and technological forces. The most important tools for remaining afloat and thriving in the turbulence are a constant awareness of the changes going on around your organization
and technological environments. The data points can be events, developments, opinions, research findings, or products that participants believe to be early signals that portend significant changes.
Disruptive developments or technologies. Participating scanners cast their nets broadly to bring in signals of change from various domains,
Technology. The breadth of scope inherent in the diversity of the categories represents one of the most important strengths of the scanning process.
and technological environments. The scanning system captures and assembles the data points in the form of short abstracts,
when making technology decisions may be an appropriate strategy. The abstract is valuable because it questions conventional wisdom
Examples include abstracts that speculate about currently gestating technologies with the potential eventually to have an impact similar in scope to that of the Internet in the past 20 years.
and technology to explore ad hoc wireless-mesh networks that allocate spectrum on the fly. The networks are self-organizing
computing, and sensing technologies are dramatically expanding the capabilities of and domains in which continuous-monitoring concepts can operate.
An awareness of such new capabilities serves as a jumping-off point for generating ideas for new technology-based products and services.
When abstracts on particular topics (such as wireless technologies or privacy concerns) constitute clusters that cross industry-domain categories (such as health
and government), the analysts know that the technology or topic will have widespread impact (see Fig. 3). The second part of the meeting consists of identifying the topics
K. M. Patton/Technological forecasting & Social Change 72 (2005) 1082 1093 1089 backgrounds, from technology to specialties in consumer behavior, from engineering to anthropology,
Technology monitors! Strategy consultants! Principal consultants! Marketing and sales staff. Representation from a wide variety of academic and professional backgrounds is helpful as well.
and Technology, Villa Bighi, Bighi, Kalkara CSP 12, Malta 1. Introduction The predominant focus of foresight 1 is frequently national research policy and strategy,
The emergence of coordinating instruments such as technology platforms is normally crystallised around a technology roadmap; Futures 43 (2011) 243 251 A r T I C L E I N F O Article history:
It seeks to show an evolution away from a traditional focus on broad-based technological priority setting to a muchmore focussed and adapted set of applications.
The most popular group is one we have called analysing the future potential of technologies. This reflects a type of foresight which preselects one
or more areas of science or technology and uses foresight approaches to assess their potential and the actions needed to take them forward.
and demand fir technology or innovation. These almost always make reference to market opportunities or societal demand.
and capacity building Priority setting for S&t Network building Supporting policy or strategy development Analysing the future potential of technologies Fig. 1. Analysis of objectives of 50 foresight exercises. 1 Thanks
In science and technology policy an OECD report identified three types of priorities 8: thematic priorities referring to fields of science and technology;
mission-oriented priorities referring to socioeconomic or technological goals; and functional priorities referring to characteristics of the science and innovation system.
In dealing with priorities it is difficult to separate the output from either the process that generates it or from the process by
The process is typically a broader sociopolitical interaction of supply side technology or science push with demand side Pull in an unstructured process the various interest groups press their case
In the simplest form, for example the US Critical technologies Program which ran from 1989 to 1998,
if technologies chosen by eminent experts participating as a small elite group. Normally the full appellation of foresight would be reserved for a process that went beyond this to involve a systematic consideration of socioeconomic and technical drivers
Later critical technologies exercises in Europe such as The french Key technologies Programme and the Czech Foresight exercise introduced these key foresight characteristics 9, 10.
or at one level down listing around 100 key technologies. Functional priorities are normally far fewer in number
These multidisciplinary and cross-business function programs are aimed at technology leaps in strategic areas. Projects are not the focus of detailed selection effort the primary issue is one of addressing broad technology goals
and programme portfolios to meet these targets. Research is organised into a modest number of specific programmes.
These programmes are defined in general around technologies (such as adhesives or semiconductors), or around broad areas of functionality()TD$FIG 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%FP6 FP5 FP4 FP3 FP2
Substantial effort is put into the preparation of technology landscaping or foresight documents as an input to the strategy process 17.
This process could be seen as analogous to the emergence of technology platforms in industry-led public programmes.
the CEE region has probably been focussed the most upon the‘‘critical technologies''style of foresight with prominent examples including successive Russian exercises 21,22
which sought to examine the future of‘‘Key Research actors''in the European research area encompassing civil society, researchers, small and medium enterprises, universities, research and technology organisations, multinational enterprises, national and regional governments 23.
A key contention behind this exercise was that‘‘current policies are excessively technology-centric and may miss crucial emerging attributes of research and research actors in the knowledge society''.
society and technology which may impact upon the business and its innovative activities. Rollwagen et al. describe this process in Deutsche bank which they summarise as‘‘Foresight explores
as firms become increasingly dependent on complementary or external sources of technology, formulation of strategy, previously an internal activity, must at least in part nowbe carried out in the public arena.
and technology that may feature in priorities exercises but rather involves the mastery or areas such as training,
but by interacting with universities, technological institutes, consulting companies, suppliers and even competitors. The type of deficiencies that innovation policy seeks to correct include lack of integration also at the level of the policy framework itself,
and a disconnection between the development and application of new technologies and the societal and business issues which are wanted by the public and their political representatives.
technological lock ins and an inability to engage in the kind of networks now recognised as the environment in
technological knowledge and/or the capabilities to innovate. This can be by means of grants, loans, fiscal incentives, consultancy support,
and technology fields into regulatory foresight is not sufficient. Rather, it is argued that significant adjustments and developments are needed to the methodologies,
regulators of potential technological and/or socioeconomic situations which regulation may promote; and builders of clusters or platforms of the various kinds of linkages which can bind them together in future market and technology development. 5. Conclusion:
future for foresight in research and innovation policy Rationales for foresight activity have evolved in recent years to feature a range of research
Disruptive role encouraging an emphasis on crisis or breakthrough events which can completely change the current status quo.
References 1 Technology Futures analysis Methods Working group, Technology futures analysis: toward integration of the field and new methods, Technological forecasting and Social Change 71 (3)( 2004) 287 303.2 T. Kuwahara, K. Cuhls, L. Georghiou, Foresight in Japan, in:
the practice and its impacts, Technology analysis & Strategic management 20 (3)( 2008) 287 307.4 B. R. Martin, R. Johnston, Technology foresight for wiring up the national innovation system a review of recent
from trend based logics to open foresight, Technology analysis & Strategic management 20 (3)( 2008) 321 336.8 OECD, Choosing Priorities in Science and Technology, OECD, Paris, 1991.9 K
. Klusacek, Technology foresight in the Czech republic, International Journal of Foresight and Innovation policy 1 (1 2)( 2004) 89 105.10 K. Klusacek, Key technologies for the Czech National research Programme, in:
Paper Presented at the UNIDO Technology foresight Summit, September, Budapest, 2007.11 T. L. Saaty, The Analytical Hierarchy Process, Mcgraw hill, New york, 1980.12 Office of Science and Technology and PREST
London, May 1993.13 SQW/PREST 1994 Prioritisation Criteria, A Paper to the UK Technology foresight Steering Group. 14 M. Keenan, Identifying generic technologies at the national level:
) 471.17 R. Coombs, R. R. Ford, L. Georghiou, Generation and Selection of Successful Research projects, A Research Study for the Technology Strategy Forum, 2001.
Human and Societal Dynamics, IOS Press, 2006, pp. 92 109.22 A. Sokolov, Russian Critical technologies 2015, European foresight monitoring Network Brief, 79.
, S. Schneider, Improving the business impact of foresight, Technology analysis & Strategic management 20 (3)( 2008) 339.29 P. Becker, Corporate Foresight in Europe:
, G. Heimeriks, Technology foresight as innovation policy instrument learning from science and technology studies, in: C. Cagnin, M. Keenan, R. Johnston, F. Scapolo, R. Barre'(Eds.
for Prospective Technological Studies (IPTS), Edificio Expo, Calle Inca Garcilaso, 3, E-41092 Seville, Spain d Institute of Policy and Management, Chinese Academy
forecasting and technology assessment approaches foresight is perhaps the most comprehensive one suitable for providing policy support to address major societal challenges.
not only to identify the promising technological pathways, but also to engage relevant stakeholders and create common visions into action 2, 3. Furthermore,
foresight processes can also become a pertinent design phase for the creation of new value networks that are based on the novel combinations of technologies, organisational partnerships and institutional arrangements.
and rationalist technology-focused approaches towards the recognition of broader concerns that encompass the entire innovation system,
and final outcomes 8. The systemic understanding of innovation processes has challenged conventional technology driven forecasting practices and called for new participatory foresight approaches that address also the consideration of diverse perspectives, formation
not only to identify the promising technological pathways but also to engage relevant stakeholders and create common visions
foresight processes can often be seen as a pertinent design phase for the creation of newvalue networks that are based on novel combinations of technologies, organisational partnerships and institutional arrangements.
Foresight Canadae Informative Identification of emerging and frontier technology domains addressing subjects such as future fuels, bio-health innovation, geo-strategic systems, animal
Instrumental The outputs were used to contribute to a joint security technology initiative of Canada as well as strategic S&t investments in the Defence R&d Canada Centre for Security Science.
Foresight on Information society Technologies in the European research Areag 21 Informative Identification and SWOT analysis of socio-techno-economic trends, drivers and challenges;
and the priority setting of science and technology based on technology foresight. Extensive There was an extensive engagement of diversified stakeholders from government, academia and industry.
/Futures 43 (2011) 252 264 257 Table 1 (Continued) Project Outcomes Future perspectives Management Stakeholder engagement National Technology roadmap in Korea Informative Learning about the technology
In addition, TRM teams (in total 74 teams) were set up to draw TRMS for key technologies in the second stage.
Autonomous Each TRM team consists of around 10 technology experts from industries, academic circles and research circles.
and identified 182 future strategic technologies. Fixed The methodology was fixed at the beginning. Extensive There are broad engagement of diversified stakeholders from government, academia and industry.
NTFC aims to provide also necessary information for making five-year plan of science & technology development.
Consensual NTFC has identified lots of key technologies in 9 research fields based on the Delphi survey. Fixed The methodology was fixed at the beginning.
Technology foresight towards 2020 in China Informative TF2020 aims to provide necessary information for making long term strategy for science and technology development in China,
and identified 734 key technologies in 8 research fields based on the Delphi survey. Fixed The methodology was fixed at the beginning.
a term put forward by Castells 15 to describe a society built on technologies of information storage, retrieval,
characterised not only by convergence of technology and by exchange of information other many different networks,
and communication technologies (ICT) can make to the economy, society and personal quality of life, "and the ICT priority has the largest budget share of the current European RTD Framework programme (FP7:
Foresight on Information society Technologies in the European research area (2002 2005) was an FP5 IST Thematic Network coordinated by JRC-IPTS
5 Japan is the pioneer of technology forecasting and foresight, and has completed 8 times technology foresight activities
when over one thousand top scientists participated in the work ranging from technology selection, priority setting, subject arrangement, resource distribution,
and generated a number of debates on the future of information and communication technologies and the development of a knowledge society in Europe.
the‘‘Technology Trajectory''concept developed by FISTERA was used by industry and academia as a‘‘thinking tool''.
A review of FISTERA by NISTEP underlined the relevance of FISTERA's approach to formulate national science and technology policies also in Japan 24.
The Foresight project conducted in Canada through a series of collaborative projects aimed at emerging and frontier technology domains that could be important to national policy development process for the next ten years.
and Technology agenda that could be aligned with the US Department of Homeland Security as part of the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North america.
The outcomes of consensual and instrumental technology foresight activities in Asian countries such as Japan, Korea and China have played increasingly important role in the policy-making process for science & technology and innovation.
the 8th technology foresight provided important support for making the 3rd basic plan for science and technology of Japan.
and technology development by using the knowledge generated from roadmap activity. In the UK, the Development, Concept and Doctrine Centre (DCDC) a Directorate General of the Ministry of Defence (MOD) conducted a foresight process that produced as a key output a report‘‘the DCDC Global Strategic Trends Programme
, projects based on rivalling coalitions and different technological arrangements. 4. Conclusions In the past years, increasing attention has been paid to the relevance of foresight for policy-making by coming up with different characterisation and typology of different foresight projects (for instance, 7, 12,26, 27.
insights from the FORLEARN mutual learning process, Technology analysis & Strategic management 20 (3)( 2008) 369 387.7 T. Ko nno la, T. Ahlqvist, A. Eerola, S. Kivisaari
analysis of modular foresight projects at contract research organisation, Technological Analysis & Strategic management 21 (3)( 2009) 381 405.8 M. Cariola, R. Secondo, Evolution in the rationales of foresight
Current Trends, the State of Play and Perspectives S&t Intelligence for Policy-making processes, Institute for Prospective Technological Studies (IPTS), Technical Report EUR-20137-EN, Seville, 2001
Foresight on Information society Technologies in the European research area, available at: http://fistera. jrc. ec. europa. eu/(2009-11-10). 22 Future impacts of ICTS on Environmental sustainability Project, available at:
Foresight on Information society Technologies in the European research area (FISTERA) Key Findings, Institute for Prospective Technological Studies (IPTS), Technical Report EUR-22319-EN, Seville, 2009, available at:
id=1431 (2009-11-10). 24 A. Fujii, Foresight on information society technologies in Europe, in:
NISTEP Science & Technology trends Quarterly Review, no. 18,january 2006, pp. 24 34.25 F. Abadie, I. Maghiros, C. Pascu (Eds.),
. Introduction Future oriented technology analysis (FTA) is an umbrella term for a broad set of activities that facilitate decision-making and coordinated action, especially in science, technology and innovation policy-making.
This moves well beyond the narrow domain basic technology forecasting important though that this. Indeed, understanding the dynamics of technological change is just one part of a broader mandate.
This is in part because the innovation system is constituted by numerous social practices, networks, institutions, and stakeholders. The latter, for instance, extend well beyond the‘‘usual suspects''of R&d-performing firms and public bodies,
and practice often goes well beyond the narrow domain of technology forecasting. It is oriented to supporting the functioning and development of innovation systems,
Practically any source of insight into the dynamics of science and technology (S&t) their production, communication, application can be utilised as knowledge inputs into FTA.
Porter et al. 3 (the report of the Technology Futures analysis Methods Working group) reviewed many of the tools used
FTA's subfields include technology foresight, technology forecasting and technology assessment, and of course futures research with its emphasis on explicating long-term alternative development prospects.
Various approaches to prioritisation (such as key technologies analysis, plotting feasibility against impact of various actions, MCA,
which is associated with such factors as the combination of multiple scientific and technological knowledge bases in many 7 Naisbitt 36,
and convergent technologies) and the extensive and far-reaching implications of increasing capabilities to transform the natural and human environments (giving rise at one extreme to concerns about threats to human existence
and with large-scale use of new technological knowledge). Even technocratic FTA has to confront the likelihood that no single organisation will itself contain expertise on all of the matters that bear intimately on a specific set of S&t issues it will be necessary to go out to a wider set of communities.
and other technological solutions to the climate change crisis as opposed to change in lifestyle and corporate practice);
and impacts of development (for example, nuclear technology, or the location of renewable energy projects such as windfarms and biofuel plants).
Policymakers thus sought more transparency in decision-making, with foresight, technology assessment, and key technologies approaches coming to the fore, alongside other tools such as research evaluation and impact assessment.
Enlisting those involved in the process in action: the aim is embed to the knowledge that has been generated in the programme into theirownorganisations and practices.
Jaspers et al. 16 contrast two‘‘ideal types''technological knowledge management and participatory knowledge management (TKM and PKM, respectively.
and knowledge flows happening (e g. in technology transfer), that it is hard to shift. The critique of this terminology is mentioned here to highlight‘‘knowledge''as a property of knowing individuals.
it cannot simply be transferred like a document or technological artefact. People can gain knowledge from the act of interpreting, reading, reverse engineering texts and other artefacts;
The agents in question may well make use of technological aids and texts notably whiteboards and flip-charts on which diagrams
Often, something like the STEEPV approach in which people are asked to identify factors and issues under the headings social, technological, economic, environmental, political,
For instance, there is the distinction between technological and participatory KM (16; and another differentiation between KM strategies emphasising codification (these are centred ON IT systems, with extensive organisation of data and information resources,
The labels of these two dichotomies are imperfect technology can be and is used in PKM,
Technology Roadmapping and other ways of visualising future prospects are supported by improved tools, and Delphi and other methods for eliciting expert opinion are frequently put online.
This is not an issue of technology versus interaction, since IT can be used to support activity at all poles of Popper's diamond.
for example, with more qualitative analysis required to explore possible factors shaping take off points, ceilings, novel applications of the technology that is diffusing, and so on.
But qualitative speculation about how and how far new technologies may be used will also do well to be grounded in terms of available understanding (i e. models) of product cycles and diffusion curves.
''or face it directly (as implied by the slogan of‘‘anticipatory democracy''and the characteristics of constructive technology assessment).
and roadmapping conducted for ISTAG (the Information society Technologies Advisory Group) of the EC 26. The Ami work had focused on the benefits of the emerging ubiquitous IT systems,
SWAMI took a more critical approach to the social, economic, legal, technological and ethical implications surrounding such issues as privacy, control of information, and identity.
and vulnerabilities associated with the use of Ami technologies and services. The project received EC funding presumably
and trust Ami technology.''''12 The dark scenarios were developed, via workshop and expert group analysis,
on the basis of posits about technology development (how realistic these are given current knowledge and activities) and about possible outcomes (have similar things actually occurred).
Technology Futures analysis Methods Working group, Technology futures analysis: toward integration of the field & new methods, Technological forecasting and Social Change 71 (3)( 2004) 287 303.4 R. Johnston, Historical review of the development of future-oriented technology analysis, in:
Scenarios of US and Global Society Reshaped by Science and Technology, Oakhill Press, Greensboro, 1997 (available at http://www. josephcoates. com/2025 pdf. html (accessed 29/07/2009)).
. Kivisaari, R. Koivisto, Management of foresight portfolio analysis of modular foresight projects at contract research organisation, Technological Analysis & Strategic management 21 (3)( 2009) 381 405.15 E. Eriksson
Overtext Web Module V3.0 Alpha
Copyright Semantic-Knowledge, 1994-2011