The similarities and development challenges of foresight, Technology analysis (TA) and risk assessment methodologies are discussed in the light of the empirical material gathered from projects performed at VTT.
Foresight methodology Technology assessment Technology analysis Risk assessment Risk analysis Roadmapping 1. Introduction The practices in foresight, technology assessment and industrial risk assessment processes are in many ways parallel.
Foresight exercises, in turn, usually identify the possible future developments, driving forces, emerging technologies, barriers, threats and opportunities related to a broader socio-techno-economic system.
depending on the issues examined and the purpose of the foresight exercise. Technology assessment (TA) has ingredients of both of these approaches
whereas in foresight exercises the positive developments like innovation possibilities has Technological forecasting & Social Change 76 (2009) 1163 1176 Corresponding author.
In particular, the aim of this paper is to examine the possibilities of integrating systematic risk assessment with interactive foresight
and its multidisciplinary technology foresight team, consisting of researchers with experience on foresight, technology assessment and risk assessment studies,
On the other hand, the development of foresight and technology assessment methodologies is expected to benefit from the experiences of the industrial risk assessment tradition:
however, a straightforward task to be carried out by the VTT foresight team only. Feedback from the international FTA COMMUNITY and cross-border cooperation is needed to direct the development efforts effectively,
new businesses, climate adaptation) and some recent methodological considerations of the VTT foresight team (especially modular foresight/risk assessment process design that allows flexible tailoring of the process for varying needs and objectives.
Foresight and risk assessment activities are considered increasingly important throughout the R&d value chain, stressing the need for a flexible, integrative approach.
and positions these projects according to important foresight design dimensions. o Section 4 paves the way towards a modular and integrative approach by discussing the common and complementary features of risk assessment
umbrella term for technology foresight, technology forecasting and technology assessment 1. As noted in Könnölä et al. 2, the gradual paradigm shift in the innovation research
and technology oriented forecasstin practices and called for new participatory and systemic foresight approaches 3. Also the R&d functions are moving from the basic science
the locus of foresight activities has tended to shift from the positivist and rationalist technology-focused approaches towards the recognition of broader concerns that encompass the entire innovation system,
The High level Expert Group appointed by the European commission crystallized these trends by defining foresight as follows 5:
Eerola and Väyrynen 6,(see also 7), describe foresight exercises with the help of the SECI model as dynamic shared knowleddg creation processes that go repeatedly through externalisation, combination,
Network building and participation in the foresight process provide an opportunity to affect the future developments and to create more desirable futures.
Foresight is defined as a process involving iterative periods of open reflection, networking, consultation and discussion, leading to the joint refining of future visions 9. Pre foresight, recruitment, generation,
action and renewal are mentioned as the phases of the foresight process 9. The process starts with the pre foresight phase where rationales and objectives,
project team and methodology design are defined. The recruitment phase builds the network of experts, stakeholders and others meaningful to the process.
whether the foresight process has helped to achieve its objectives. The nature of foresight methodologies varies from creative to the evidence based and from expertise to interaction based working methods.
Fig. 1 illustrates this variety (known as Popper's diamond) by, for instance, defining the scenario methods the most creative and literature review evidence based,
Popper 9 lists and describes 33 different foresight and assessment methods altogether. A tentative systemic framework of the potential FTA METHODS by Saritas 10 is shown in Fig. 2;‘
and Institute of Prospective Technological Studies (IPTS) have launched a FOR-LEARN On-line Foresight guide developed during the project FOR-LEARN in 6th Framework programme project of the European commission.
The guide introduces a methodological framework for foresight studies. According to the framework the following functions can be distinguished in a Foresight exercise 42:
Diagnosis: Understanding where we are Prognosis: Foresighting what could happen Prescription: Deciding what should be done Specific methods to fulfill specific functions are illustrated also in the guide,
and risk assessment methodologies by analysing the foresight design dimensions of three research projects. 3. Prospective projects illuminating possible synergies
The results of this analysis are presented in the following section. 3. 1. Integrated Risk Reduction of Information-based Infrastructure Systems (IRRIIS) A case study of the use of foresight
and show the fruitful link between the foresight and risk assessment methods. 1168 R. Koivisto et al./
/Technological forecasting & Social Change 76 (2009) 1163 1176 The INNORISK Managing opportunities, risks and uncertainties project is a 3-year (2006 2009) joint research project between the Corporate Foresight
opportunity recognition (the fuzzy front end), conceptualisation and commercialisatiion Foresight and risk assessment are essential parts of each stage.
Herein the foresight methodologies considering the possible changes in the society may be helpful. A major challenge is,
forthcoming) propose a taxonomy of foresight activities at a contract research organisation like VTT (see the taxonomy framework in Fig. 4). The axes of the taxonomy are described in the Box 1. According to Könnölä et al. 2 most of the VTT's foresight activities position themselves to the consensual
and therefore not always productive, to apply systematic risk assessment methods together with more loosely formulated foresight approaches
The challenge of making a bridge between foresight and technical risk analysis methods lies perhaps mostly on people's experience of using different methods in these two parallel traditions.
but does not understand that it is the most usable only in the prescription phase of the foresight process.
abstract level strategic design goes towards foresight methods and concrete level case studies follow the technical risk assessment tradition. 4. Towards an integrated approach 4. 1. Risk assessment
Both processes start with the scope definition/pre foresight phases, where the scope and objectives of the analysis are defined.
but it is expressed not normally in engineer-style descriptions as in Box 1 2. Instrumental vs. informative outcomes o Instrumental outcomes refer to the use of foresight to support the specific foreseen decision making situation,
for example related to resource allocation or the formation of strategic partnerships/joint actions. o Informative outcomes refer to the use of foresight to improve the understanding of present and future challenges of the innovation system and its parts.
Thus, the informative outcomes do not refer to the expectations that foresight activity would necessarily lead to specific actions.
and accuracy of the analysis. The foresight process as well as the risk assessment process is a knowledge making process.
SECI and SLC models give foresight and risk analysis studies a common theoretical ground. Both models organise the knowledge making in three dimensional space generating the knowledge from personal and proprietary to common sense and public,
scanning or mapping like methods are used in the early phases of the foresight or risk analysis processes
The same idea goes to foresight exercises where wild cards and weak signals reveal the potential future or give tips for the future. 4. 2. Contingent
and holistic processes Foresight activities and methodologies may have benefits that will support the risk analysis methods and activities in the development towards a more holistic approach.
Foresight methods and activities approve the uncertainty linked to the different futures and take also the different pathways to the possible futures.
Although the somehow vague character is needed in the foresight exercises seeking for the unknown future, foresight studies may also benefit the systemic process common to the risk analysis processes.
Risk assessment methods are fixed traditionally approaches, e g. focused on a certain industrial plant or specific chemical or event (Fig. 5). They typically are short-term studies,
The studies related to new emerging risks may be the core case studies where the integration of foresight and risk assessment traditions will be profitable at least the integration process would be easiest to carry on in this environment,
because emerging risks field is closest to the foresight exercises compared to the picture 5. To build the bridge between foresight
Here the use of resilience engineering would certainly benefit from the traditions the foresight tradition would offer.
and CES) show that it is not easy to integrate systematic risk assessment and foresight methods. In IRRIIS project the results show that risk assessment methods are too detailed for analysing loosely constructed scenarios.
For instance, scenario analysis may be just a little part of the whole foresight process and, therefore, conducting risk assessment only to the produced scenarios may be difficult.
Another option may be to keep the risk assessment approach in the process during the whole foresight exercise.
The holistic future-oriented technology assessment or foresight methodologies tend to assess and create the future simultaneously. The same idea belongs also to the holistic risk management where safety is created in the process by evolving the intrinsic safety potential of the process.
PPA/POA and risk map methods were applied in a foresight process. A new risk analysis framework was created.
and Signpost foresight methods were integrated in the risk assessment process. Risk analysis methods and climate change scenarios were integrated. How case studies contributed to risk management methodology?
In practice to succeed to build the solid bridge between the foresight and risk analysis methods new case studies would be needed.
, Management of foresight portfolio: analysis of modular foresight projects at contract research organisation. Technology analysis & Strategic management 21 (3)( 2009) 381 405.3 R. Smits, S. Kuhlmann, The rise of systemic instruments in innovation policy, Int. J. Foresight Innov.
Policy 1 (1)( 2004) 4 32.4 K. Smith, Innovation as a systemic phenomenon: rethinking the role of policy, Enterp.
Innov. Manag. Studies 1 (9)( 2000) 73 102. Table 2 The main characteristics, differences, similarities and future expectations.
Time horizon 0 5 years 5 50 years Phases Scope definition, risk identification, risk estimation (probability, consequences), risk evaluation The pre foresight phase
Foresight for Europe, Final Report of the High level Expert Group for the European commission, April 24, 2002, European commission, Brussels, 2002.6 A. Eerola, E. Väyrynen, Developing technology forecasting and technology assessment
, Foresight in Nordic countries, in: L. Georghiou, J. Cassingena Harper, M. Keenan, I. Miles, R. Popper (Eds.),
The Handbook of Technology foresight, PRIME Series on Research and Innovation policy, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK, 2008.8 I. Nonaka, H. Takeutchi, The Knowledge-creating Company, Oxford university Press, New york, 1995.9
I. Miles, M. Butter, G. Sainz de la Fuenta, Global Foresight outlook GFO 2007. Mapping Foresight in Europe and the Rest of the World.
EFMN European foresight monitoring Network, 2009, Available at http://www. foresight-network. eu/files/reports/efmn mapping 2007. pdf (Read July 8th 2009.
10 O.,Saritas, Systems thinking for Foresight, Ph d. Thesis, PREST, Manchester Business school, University of Manchester, 2006.11 E. Braun, Technology in context.
Technology assessment for managers, Routledge, London, 1998.12 R. Fairman, C. D. Mead, P. W. Williams, Environmental risk assessment approaches, experience and information sources, European Environment
1999.42 JRC and IPTS FOR-LEARN On-line Foresight guide in http://forlearn. jrc. ec. europa. eu/guide/4 methodology/framework. htm (read May 28th 2009).
Raija Koivisto has over twenty years experience in safety, security, risk assessment and foresight related research at VTT.
In 2007 she entered VTT's Technology foresight and technology assessment team. Dr. Annele Eerola is Senior Research scientist and Deputy Technology manager of the knowledge centre‘Organisations, Networks and Innovation systems'at VTT.
including the links between foresight knowledge, corporate strategy and innovation policy. She graduated in Helsinki University of Technology and holds a Phd from Helsinki Swedish School of economics and Business administration
and Team Leader of Technology foresight and Technology assessment team at VTT. His research is focused on technology foresight, technological transformation of societies, innovation systems and economic geography.
He holds a Phd in human geography from the University of Turku, Finland. Dr. Sirkku Kivisaari works as Senior Research scientist in VTT.
Jouko Myllyoja is Research scientist in Technology foresight and Technology assessment team at VTT. His main focuses of interests are commercializing environmental technologies and sustainable development.
Her main research interests concern technology foresight, service research and sustainable development. 1176 R. Koivisto et al.//Technological forecasting & Social Change 76 (2009) 1163 1176
and improved computer translation will allow more international foresight activities to build collective intelligence through participatory feedback systems far more complex than the current futures research methods.
Foresight and roadmma exercises are aimed at supporting planning and priority-setting of R&d and have become indispensable elements of policy-making.
In order to reach this aim it is essential to strengthen the links between foresight activities, policy development, and actual technological development.
risk analysis, and foresight approach into one anticipatory methodological concept of strategic policy intelligence. In principle, this concept could be applied in the study of different kinds of societal objects and objectives, related to national innovation system, regions, research programmes or societal actors, engaging private enterprises and public organizations.
His recent research work is related to the rationales of innovation policy, foresight of technologies (e g. transition towards sustainable energy systems), intellectual property rights,
and Team Leader of Technology foresight and Technology assessment team at VTT. His research is focused on technology foresight
technological transformation of societies, innovation systems and economic geography. He holds a Phd in human geography from the University of Turku, Finland.
The methodology combination of a national foresight process in Germany Kerstin Cuhls a,, Amina Beyer-Kutzner b, Walter Ganz c, Philine Warnke d a Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation research (ISI), Breslauer Str. 48,76139 Karlsruhe, Germany
the Federal German Ministry for Education and Research (BMBF) launched a new foresight process which aimed at four specific targets.
The German Foresight process of the BMBF delivers results on different levels: broader future fields as well as single future topics.
Some of the results of this foresight process will be integrated directly into national policy activities, others are just more indirectly filtered into the innovation system of the specific sectors in the country.
Foresight process Fully fledged foresight Bibliometrics Strategic partnerships Research alliances 1. Introduction In September 2007, the Federal German Ministry for Education and Research (BMBF) launched a new foresight process
The BMBF Foresight process as it was called, subtitle Implementation and Further development of a Foresight process, was conducted by a consortium comprising the Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation research (Fraunhofer ISI) and the Fraunhofer Institute for Industrial Engineering (Fraunhofer IAO).
Other institutions like the Technical University of Berlin, the Institute for Nanotechnology (INT) of the Research centre Karlsruhe, the RWTH Aachen, the Austrian Research centres Gmbh (ARC), Systems Research Division Dept
The process linked both foresight and monitoring in its integrated approach. The process had impacts along the six functions of Foresight for policy-making that recently emerged in the Foresight debate (informing policy,
facilitating policy implementation, embedding participation, supporting policy definition and reconfiguring policy structures, as well as the symbolic function, see 1). Accordingly,
the German BMBF Foresight process addressed all these dimensions, albeit with different emphases and in different stages with a new combination of methods.
The process was considered to be the major approach of a German ministry in science and technology foresight.
and technology foresight processes on a national level 13,16, 17,28, 29. Even as follow-up of the High-tech Strategy of the government 2, administrated in the same ministry,
several sector foresight activities were performed (e g. in Health, Environmental issues or Information and Communication) and formulated in roadmaps.
& Social Change 2. Objectives of the national foresight process The BMBF itself in a call for tender formulated four specific targets.
They were derived from previous foresight experiences and formulated by the responsible department (Referat. The BMBF Foresight process aimed at:
1) Identification of new focuses in research and technology 2) Designation of areas for crosscutting activities 3) Exploration of fields for strategic partnerships 4) Derivation of priority activity lines
. In order to address objectives 1 and 2, in the foresight approach, well-known search strategies as well as other methods from innovation research,
from international foresight activities 3 were taken into consideration, as well as new, creative methods. The themes to be investigated,
The foresight search activities were flanked by a monitoring process. With the assistance of an international panel
the BMBF portfolio and information gathered from within BMBF about specific foresight activities in the specialist divisions.
some new foresight and working techniques were applied. In the plenum session, a guided fictive time travel served as a mind opener.
/Technological forecasting & Social Change 76 (2009) 1187 1197 3. 2. Search phase of the process The second phase of the foresight process encompassed a further national and international search, interviews with Monitoring Panel participants,
During this second phase of the foresight process, the 14 topics were confirmed, renamed, split, converged and newly formulated.
the whole foresight process did not start with asking for the demand as e g. the predecessor process Futur 13,14
In order to save time, no Delphi survey like in some of the previous German foresight activities was planned 16,17.
The principle of the concept of the online survey questionnaire is shown in Fig. 4. The first page of the online survey explained the BMBF Foresight process and the online survey in general.
The challenge for the BMBF Foresight process from 2009 onwards was the design of concrete strategies to address some of the topics identified.
However, this is far from straightforward as foresight outcomes tend to challenge established configurations by pointing to long-term issues that reach across boundaries of scientific disciplines, industrial sectors and departments in industry, research institutes
the foresight process as such is finished as a project, but the process of integration is continued still.
We analyse the expected impacts along the five functions of Foresight for policy-making that recently emerged in the Foresight debate 1
and impacts of the BMBF Foresight process? How does it fit into the recent developments in Foresight methodology,
such as the concepts of adaptive and Embedded foresight, and how does expected the impact relate to these conceptual developments?
Direct outputs in the sense of deliverables were three reports to BMBF as well as a scientific report at the end of the whole process.
As the BMBF Foresight process can be called a fully fledged foresight process (in the sense of Georghiou et al. 31),
Informing policy is one of the major features of the B MBF Foresight process. Gaining an overview about topics that are relevant for
The current BMBF Foresight process is about science and technology it needs experts who are able to understand
Foresight is performed never in a vacuum but is a living system. Therefore, every foresight exercise has an impact on the system the foresight is performed in, in this case the BMBF and the policy as well as the innovation system.
It can be doubted, however, whether the policy system can be directly reconfigured by such a foresight process.
Nevertheless, even if this is not directly intended the system will react and change. There will therefore be an effect on the policy system itself,
In the BMBF Foresight process, an impact is expected on the interdisciplinary or interdepartmental collaboration concerning new
and especially crosscutting topics (objectives 1 and 2). The question of adaptive foresight remains 19, p. 472.
Whether the BMBF Foresight process will be successful in balancing participatory elements and closed internal processes will depend on different factors.
Adaptive foresight is designed to help decision-makers develop strategies. You can do a research project using many of the ideas from AF
Exactly this is the basis of the BMBF Foresight process. It is not a research process as such but a Service contract for the consortium.
In this sense, the BMBF Foresight process is not an inherent, completely embedded process because intentionally, two institutions are performing the methodological part of the process that are regarded as neutral in having no direct thematic stakes in the process (although indirectly,
The BMBF Foresight process is intended to keep a certain distance to lobbies of topics on the one hand, but integrate them with a neutral perspective on the other hand.
the BMBF Foresight process worked undercover and was publicised not as much as the predecessor processes in order to make the identification of new topics possible
foresight was relatively new for German communities and for the ministry itself. It did not have to fight high expectations
so that at different stages of the process the previous work of BMBF (such as in the identification of the starting topic fields) as well as the foresight and other futureorieente processes planned in BMBF were taken into account.
Further on in the continued foresight, BMBF will be involved more directly the more the topics to be focused on are identified,
and from foresight studies 22 27 and took into account knowledge from 15 years of foresight in Germany and internationally 4, 5, 6, 17,21, 28 31.
This can be a lesson for other foresight activities, too. Of course, BMBF and its different departments will have the last word in the decisions.
References 1 Forlearn, http://forlearn. jrc. ec. europa. eu/guide/1 why-foresight/functions. htm, access:
, Berlin 2006.3 K. Cuhls, Methoden der Technikvorausschau-eine internationale Übersicht, IRB, Stuttgart, 2008.4 Science and Technology foresight Center, Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports
National Institute of Science and Technology policy (NISTEP (Ed.),Kagakugijutsu no chûchôki hatten ni kakawaru fukanteki yosoku chôsa (The 8th Science and Technology foresight Survey Future science and Technology
in Japan, Delphi Report) Report no. 97, NISTEP, Tôkyô, 2005.5 Science and Technology foresight Center, Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT), in:
National Institute of Science and Technology policy (NISTEP (Ed.),Kyûsoku ni hattenshitsutsu aru kenkyû ryûiki chôsa (The 8th Science and Technology foresight Survey Study on Rapidlydevellopin Research area
) Report no. 95, NISTEP, Tôkyô, 2005.6 Science and Technology foresight Center, Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT), in:
National Institute of Science and Technology policy (NISTEP (Ed.),Kagakugijutsu no chûchôki hatten ni kakawaru fukanteki yosoku chôsa (The 8th Science and Technology foresight Survey, Needs Survey
Der Foresight-Prozess des BMBF, 1. Bericht an das BMBF, Karlsruhe, Stuttgart, 2008.10 K. Cuhls, W. Ganz (Eds.
Der Foresight-Prozess des BMBF, 2. Bericht an das BMBF, Auf der Suche, Karlsruhe, Stuttgart, 2009.11 K. Cuhls, Identification of priorities, Foresight methodologies
Participatory Priority Setting for Research and Innovation policy, IRB Publishers, Stuttgart, 2004.14 K. Cuhls, L. Georghiou, Evaluating a Participative Foresight process:‘
new foresight on science and technology, Technology, Innovation and Policy, Series of the Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation research ISI no. 13, Physica, Heidelberg, 2002.17 Bundesministerium für Forschung und
Cagnin, F. Scapolo, The impact of foresight on policy-making: insights from the FORLEARN mutual learning process, Technology analysis & Strategic management, Special issue FTA Seminar 2006,2008, pp. 369 387.19 E. A. Eriksson, K. M. Weber, Adaptive foresight:
Navigating the Complex Landscape of Policy strategies, Technological forecasting & Social Change, vol. 75,2008, pp. 462 482.20 J. C. Harper, K. Cuhls, L. Georghiou, R. Johnston
, Future-oriented technology analysis as a Driver of strategy and Policy, Technology analysis & Strategic management, vol. 20,2008, pp. 78 83,1. 21 K. Cuhls, Changes in conducting foresight in Japan, in:
/Technological forecasting & Social Change 76 (2009) 1187 1197 22 P. Warnke, G. Heimeriks, Technology foresight as innovation policy instrument:
Future-oriented technology analysis, Strategic intelligence for an Innovative economy, Springer, Berlin, 2008, pp. 149 162.24 S. Kuhlmann, R. Smits, The rise of Systemic Instruments in Innovation policy, Int. Journal of Foresight
, Strategic intelligence for an Innovative economy, Springer, Berlin, 2008.26 A g. Pereira, R. von Schomberg, S. Funtowicz, Foresight Knowledge Assessment, International Journal of Foresight and Innovation policy, vol
Current Trends, the State of Play and Perspectives, EUE 20137 EN, IPTS Technical Report Series, Brussels, 2001.28 K. Cuhls, Foresight in Germany, in:
L. Georghiou (Ed.),The Handbook of Technology foresight, Concepts and Practice, PRIME Series on Research and Innovation policy, 2008, pp. 131 152.29 K. Cuhls, K. Blind, Knut
new foresight on science and technology, Technology, Innovation and Policy, Series of the Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation research ISI no. 13, Physica, Heidelberg, 2002.30 Science and Technology foresight Center, Ministry
National Institute of Science and Technology policy (NISTEP (Ed.),Comprehensive analysis of Science and Technology Benchmarking and Foresight report no. 99, Tôkyô:
The Handbook of Technology foresight, Concepts and Practice, PRIME Series on Research and Innovation policy, 2008.32 S. Kuhlmann, et al.
Kerstin Cuhls is coordinator of the business area Foresight and Futures research in the Competence Center Innovation and Technology management and Foresight at the Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation research in Karlsruhe, Germany.
She manages the consortium that runs the BMBF Foresight process for the German Federal Ministry for Research and Education.
Amina Beyer-Kutzner is responsible for the BMBF Foresight in the Federal Ministry for Research and Education
Philine Warnke is scientific project manager in the Competence Center Innovation and Technology management and Foresight at the Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation research in Karlsruhe, Germany.
Before, she worked as senior researcher in the area of foresight for the Institute for Prospective Technological Studies of the European commission (JRC-IPTS.
for example, provided by the European foresight monitoring Network1 or the Foresight and Governance Project of the Woodrow wilson Center,
A limited relevance for decision-making in policy processes is recognized by a review of practice in the broader area of foresight:
and impact of foresight exercises 31. Several studies report effective outcomes in terms of individual learning. Using scenarios can increase participants'perceptions of their strategic communication and conversation skills.
Discussions pointed to recent approaches to strengthen capacities for scenario planning and foresight within governments. Examples include:
The UK government has institutionalized a Comprehensive foresight Programme which is based in the Government office for Science based in the Department for Innovation, Universities and Skills.
In Finland, a national foresight reporting mechanism has been institutionalized, requiring the Prime ministers Office to release one report per electoral period addressing a range of long-term issues.
For example, the UK Foresight programme both develops own analysis and commits external analysis. Its mandate is temporary,
and report on it, for example through submitting yearly or multi-annual foresight reports. The institutional arrangements in Finland are trend-setting in this regard
Whether specific foresight units should be located physically within departments for the environment for food, for energy or transport for example,
http://www. foresight. gov. uk/Horizon%20%Scanning%20centre/Fanclubnews/Feb2008. asp (accessed 7th july 2008.
an overview of techniques, Foresight 9 (1)( 2007) 5 25.9 R. Bradfield, G. Wright, G. Burt, G. Cairns, K. Van der Heijden, The origins
)( 2006) 1 14.12 E. A. Eriksson, M. Weber, Adaptive foresight: navigating the complex landscape of policy strategies, Technol.
The Impact of foresight on Policy-making: Insights from the FORLEARN Mutual learning Process, Institute for Prospective Technological Studies, 2006, Joint research Centre/European commission. 32 G. P. Hodgkinson, G. Wright, Confronting strategic
Paper prepared at the invitation of the Woodrow wilson International Center for Scholars Foresight and Governance Project, 2002.34 L. Fuerth, Strategic Myopia, the Case for Forward Engagement, The National Interest, Spring
She has authored co several scenario and foresight publications at the European and international level. Teresa has worked in environmental policy issues for over 20 years
She is a member of the Global Agenda Council on Strategic foresight of the World Economic Forum. 1207 A. Volkery, T. Ribeiro/Technological forecasting & Social Change 76 (2009) 1198 1207
Overtext Web Module V3.0 Alpha
Copyright Semantic-Knowledge, 1994-2011