This special issue of TFSC presents a provocative alignment of papers designed to begin the probing of these fundamental questions about the future and future-oriented technology analysis (FTA.
and shape future developments. The challenge of joining forces to develop more robust future-oriented support to decision making has been addressed in the series of International Seville FTA Conference organized by the Institute of Prospective Technological Studies, one of the Joint research Centers
of the European commission. Building on the success of the 2004 and 2006 events, the third edition of the Conference in October 2008
if this technique can be developed more widely conjures up exciting possibilities for the anticipation of future innovation system developments.
another Finnish team, bring this novel focus on tools further into the interface with policy approaches in their timely paper on the Role of Technology barometer in Assessing Past and Future development of National Innovation system.
and complementing these with information from future-oriented stakeholder surveys, the Technology barometer can be regarded as a new tool for managing strategic investments in R&d,
The existence of the Technology barometer is itself a provocative approach to innovation policy futures. From Germany
and surprises of future developments and better manage complex decisions involving conflicting societal interests. The paper by Loveridge and Saritas:
they develop the case for ensuring that foresight offers a democratic rather than just a technocratic input to the future and to the policy processes
An application to prospecting futures of the responsible development of nanotechnology, a research project exploring potential co-evolutions of nanotechnology and governance arrangements.
Priority areas for Australia's future features an excellent case example of the importance and learning being experienced from the application of novel FTA METHODOLOGIES to explore the possibilities offered by the use of nanotechnologies to contribute to new and improved approaches to energy conversion,
sustainable imaginative futures that can enable our species to apply its intuitive ingenuity to face the challenges of today and those anticipated over the horizon:
and many strategic decision-making processes to align future R&d priorities and innovation strategies with sustainability goals. He holds a Dr. Tech. and a Lic.
We consider a possible, radically decentralized context for the conduct of future design. A case study of new technology architecture in the information technology domain is presented.
10.1016/j. techfore. 2009.07.014 Contents lists available at Sciencedirect Technological forecasting & Social Change alternative views of the future,
This review suggests an important avenue for research in this article, and in future research: creating software solutions to help innovative organizations develop new technologies within an open innovation environment.
or the mode 2 of future knowledge production. The hierarchical random graph model is missing a model of the actor.
and possible future research which might be performed to strengthen the method for technology analysis. The hierarchical random graph approach structured evidence of an existing technological network
Repeated trials and a more complete analysis based on an evolving network are desirable items for future research.
infrastructure organizations are confronted with an increasing amount of future uncertainty 3 that calls for a fundamental reconsideration of the former success model, at least in three respects:(
& Social Change Foresight has its strengths in addressing broad ranges of future conditions by adopting participatory and discursive approaches.
Yet, in particular Technology foresight has often been restricted to identifying future context conditions in order to scrutinize the robustness of specific strategies
or as a means to identifying more sustainable futures. More specifically, it has focused on fostering cooperation
therefore not only inform the identification of future context conditions but may also be applied to future system options and preference structures.
Such a methodological framework is likely to depart in style and content from the currently dominant forms of strategic decision making in infrastructure sectors 5. While in conventional approaches
newly emerging technological solutions and potential future interest conflicts associated with the implementation of specific system configurations.
Following a widely shared definition, foresight aims at improving future-oriented decision making through the early detection and assessment of emerging trends and drivers of change 18.
In its applications it has contributed to the analysis of future development options of nations regions, sectors and companies mainly by focusing on perspectives associated with new technology development.
Many applications focused on exploring broad ranges of possible future context conditions. Additionally, strategic options were assessed in relation to specific scenarios 21.
1) Exploratory context scenarios analyze a set of possible future framework conditions relevant for organizations, regions or communities.
Mannermaa 22 calls these hermeneutic studies, that aim at explicating a subjective understanding of possible future social realities.
context factors like economic, demographic and settlement development, future political culture and environmental regulations. They select the most influencing
participants adopt roles of different future stakeholder groups representing either future citizens or industry representatives define their assumed preferences
While we may imagine solutions that seem attractive to a majority of the stakeholders in a future regional setting,
(iii) enable pro-actively addressing future conflicts of interest and (iv) profit from new technical options potentially emerging in the course of the lifetime of an infrastructure system.
It rather circumscribes promising search directions for future system configurations and thus allows escaping the path dependencies encountered in conventional planning processes.
Political actors of the region were keen on developing a perspective for the future of the sanitation system to avoid singular investments,
In the following step, a set of options was developed by the core team, based on varying technical and organizational characteristics of a future wastewater system:
ii) In the second workshop, participants carried out the same assessments by taking the perspective of typical future citizens or industry representatives.
In contrast, the industry's stakeholders favor besides low tariffs, additionally low levels of bureaucracy as well as voice and participation in the associations decision board. 4. 4. Exploring the trade-off landscape The virtual future stakeholder groups
However, some caveats about the performance of these future technologies in more densely populated villages were raised also.
the core team recommended that the introduction of onsite treatment facilities should be considered seriously in future maintenance and expansion plans.
While the RIF process in the Kiesental resulted in little surprise with the already prior favored idea for a future sanitation system,
One consequence was departed that decision makers from their initially strong position that only one big technical system was able to solve all future problems in the region.
Change 75 (4)( 2008) 462 482.8 A. Salo, K. Cuhls, Technology foresight past and future, J. Forecast. 22 (2 3)( 2003) 79 82.9 P
, Futures 41 (2009) 80 86.14 F. W. Geels, The hygienic transition from cesspools to sewer systems (1840 1930:
Change 65 (1)( 2000) 115 123.22 M. Mannermaa, Futures research and social decision making: alternative futures as a case study, Futures 18 (5)( 1986) 658 670.23 L. Börjeson, M. Höjer, K. Dreborg, T. Ekvall, G. Finnveden, Scenario types
and techniques: towards a user's guide, Futures 38 (7)( 2006) 723 739.24 A. Marchais-Roubelat, F. Roubelat, Designing action based scenarios, Futures 40 (1)( 2008
) 25 33.25 K. Cuhls, From forecasting to foresight processes new participative foresight activities in Germany, J. Forecast. 22 (2 3)( 2003) 93 111.26 F. Berkhout
, J. Hertin, Foresight futures scenarios, Developing and Applying a Participative Strategic planning Tool, Greener Management International (37 Special issue on Foresighting for Development), 2002, pp. 37 52.27 G
Future-focussed thinking: combining scenario planning with decision analysis, J. Multi-Criteria Decis. Anal. 8 (1999) 311 321.28 M. P. e Cunha, P. Palma, N. G. da Costa, Fear of foresight:
knowledge and ignorance in organizational foresight, Futures 38 (8)( 2006) 942 955.29 W. Xiang, K c. Clarke, The use of scenarios in land-use planning, Environ.
Environ. 8 (5)( 2003) 323 342.40 K. Chatterjee, A. Gordon, Planning for an unpredictable future:
An Investigation into the Long-term challenges and Opportunities for the UK's Strategic Highway Network, Highway Agency for England, London, 2003.42 Office of Science and Technology, Intelligent Infrastructure Futures, Foresight Directorate
the future of transport, Futures 40 (10)( 2008) 865 872.52 G. Munda, Social multi-criteria evaluation:
Res. 158 (3)( 2004) 662 677.53 J. J. Winebrake, B. P. Creswick, The future of hydrogen fueling systems for transportation:
an approach to develop future potentials, Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 59 (2)( 1998) 111 130.64 A. Fink, O. Schlake, A. Siebe, Erfolg durch Szenario-Management:
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.
The aim is to produce justified outlooks and proposals of future developments, typically reported as scenarios, visions, roadmaps and action recommendations.
All these future-oriented approaches try to illustrate and manage the future in an explicit and systematic way by identifying,
assessing, analysing, combining and interpreting existing data, information and expert opinions. Creating shared understandings among the stakeholders about the possible future developments is also important in each field;
in risk assessment the focus has typically been in negative outcomes whereas in foresight exercises the positive developments like innovation possibilities has Technological forecasting & Social Change 76 (2009) 1163 1176 Corresponding author.
the increasingly complex world creates new types of risks that shouldn't be bypassed with the examination of future opportunities, creation of shared visions and assessment of desired impacts.
A systematic, participatory, future intelligence gathering and medium-to-long-term visionbuilldin process aimed at present-day decisions and mobilising joint action.
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,
Anticipation considers previous analysis and aims at defining possible and/or desired futures. Methods like Delphi, SWOT analysis, benchmarking
In the action phase, technology roadmaps, backcasting, narrative scenarios and others are useful methods to disseminate the visions of the future.
Possible and potential futures are examined by applying, for instance, scenario, backcasting or roadmapping methods. Among other methods and practices in the field are constructive technology assessment
It is also crucial to study what the future might be, will the technology be needed usable
One newapproach thatwidens the traditional field of risk assessmentmight open fromthe future-oriented, or foresighting, impact assessment (FIA) currently under development at VTT.
and that they require proactive anticipation of the future worlds. Organisations have to consider alternative developments of influence factors
and acting towards the future success and exclusively on the current success. The process begun from very general phenomena of politics, society,
The project states that a good modelling tool would help to model the future interdependencies supported by an integration of the scenario work and the systematic risk assessment. 3. 2. Managing opportunities,
and management of future uncertainties and risks in companies that are giving rise to new business 29.
For instance three alternative futures were created for the opportunities in order to evaluate their business potential after 5 10 years in a medium-size company.
It will focus on the potential production and the future safety of the production systems as well as on the related uncertainties.
The tools to apply the future-oriented risk assessment are developed during this process, and they are at this preliminary stage as follows:
the future is linked in that way to present situation. Risk assessment procedure in CES is designed on the basis of brainstorming sessions between power plant operators and managers as well as climate change experts.
Scientific knowledge concerning natural changes constitutes different scenarios of the future and social knowledge can also be formulated into various scenarios depicting the potential futures.
A strategy to handle this multiplicity requires selection. In the context of the Nordic hydropower production and distribution, for instance, the most threatening scenarios are selected for the risk estimation and evaluation process.
The analysis of this small amount of project material indicates that systematic risk assessment methods tend to direct the analysis towards instrumental, consensual and exclusive analysis of the future.
in order to illustrate the potentiality of the future and possible future risks. The challenge of making a bridge between foresight
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.
relevant collaborative networks and future actions. o Diverse future perspectives refer to understanding diverse ideas, opinions and perspectives in priority-setting,
identifyyin and fostering alternative and competing coalitions and value networks as well as exploring alternative futures and generating rivalling visions.
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.
This development is needed especially to manage the new emerging risks, such as those that nanotechnologies, population aging,
Foresight methods and activities approve the uncertainty linked to the different futures and take also the different pathways to the possible futures.
The weaknesses, threats opportunities and strengths of the different futures are identified and ways how to cope
and/or exploit these potentials are identified. The core benefit of risk assessment methods is absolutely the strict systemic character of the risk analysis techniques.
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.
The future target, e g. a scenario, may not have a sufficient level of detail. It was noticed also that both processes
IRRIIS and CES especially reveal the gap between the future-oriented analysis and the technological system stressed risk assessment processes.
In our view, the most promising benefit in integrating risk assessment and FTA APPROACHES seems to be the aspect of creating safety and opening up new future possibilities.
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.
Since future and risks are always ontologically unknown to us, there exist no facts about the future
and risks are always contingent. Therefore, we are forced to collect and construct the knowledge create an understanding and share it in networks of people.
Futures and safe situations, or at least safety predispositions, are created by people. That is why network building is the crucial part of assessment processes and methodologies.
and creating the best possible knowledge of the future and risks, and being all the time aware of the possible threats and opportunities of the complex world,
As a result, it has been discovered that both approaches seek to manage the uncertainty of potential futures,
and to create knowledge to help decision making in defining management strategies concerning the changes the future may cause.
A good modelling tool would be helpful to model the future interdependencies. Roadmap, SWOT analysis
Either way, both approaches may benefit methodologically from each other in developing better methods for assessing the futures.
The new approach future-oriented impact assessment (FIA) is seen also promising in integrating methodologically risk assessment into the whole innovation process.
the future risk assessment shows up as a methodology that should increasingly adapt supplementary elements from many different approaches such as FTA.
References 1 M. Rader, A l. Porter, Fitting future-oriented analysis methods to study types, in: C. Cagnin, M. Keenan, R. Johnston, F. Scapolo, R. Barré (Eds.
To identify possible future developments, driving forces, emerging technologies, barriers, threats and opportunities related to a broader socio-technoeconnomi system.
Outlooks, proposals of the future developments, scenarios, visions, roadmaps, action recommendations. Time horizon 0 5 years 5 50 years Phases Scope definition, risk identification, risk estimation (probability, consequences), risk evaluation The pre foresight phase
SWOT analysis, benchmarking, expert panels (new knowledge creation) Technology roadmaps, backcasting, narrative scenarios (visions of the future) Constructive technology assessment,
/Technological forecasting & Social Change 76 (2009) 1163 1176 5 European commission, Thinking, Debating and Shaping the Future:
and using future-oriented expert information, including the links between foresight knowledge, corporate strategy and innovation policy.
Frontiers of futures research: What's next? Theodore J. Gordon, Jerome C. Glenn*,Ana Jakil American Council for the United nations University, 4421 Garrison Street N w.,WASHINGTON DC 20016, United states Received
accepted 1 november 2004 Abstract This paper describes some important frontiers of futures research with the aim of identifying new opportunities for improving the value and utility of the field.
These frontiers include the exploration and/or the reexamination of (a) Potential for integrating new technology with futures research methods,
Futures research methodology; New technologies; Decision making; Uncertainty; Nonlinear systems; Futures methodology issues 1. Introduction There are many methods and approaches to the study of the future.
While futures research methods are internally coherent and used systematically, there is no assurance that the evolution of such methods 0040-1625/$-see front matter D 2005 American Council for the United nations University.
Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. doi: 10.1016/j. techfore. 2004.11.008*Corresponding author. E-mail address:
observing, and interpreting the future directions and consequences of societal, economic, and technological change, but also the methodological approaches used in their analysis vary greatly.
There are few attempts to aggregate futures data and build current work on proven prior work. The result, for better or worse, is that the field lacks the consistency and coherence that mark more scientific fields.
if addressed, may improve the quality of the enterprise 1. 2. Integrating new technology with futures research methods New technologies carry great potential for improving
and refining the conceptualization and application of futures research methods. For example, the Internet has made participatory approaches among geographically dispersed people practical.
Just forty years ago, computers were not much of a factor in futures research. The Delphi method was accomplished with pencil and paper in 1963,
forty years from now nearly all futures methods will be conducted in software, through networks, with diverse and changing sets of people, continually cross-referencing data,
Hence, the image of a few bright people, using a few interesting methods to forecast the future,
may be replaced by the image of many people interacting with many combinations of methods to shape the future by blurring the distinctions between research and decision making.
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.
The examples mentioned above represent only a small part of the immense potential of new technology in futures research.
Some future developments of importance are currently unknown but discoverable. Others however are intrinsically unknowable. No matter the size of the model or the computer that runs it, some developments are beyond current discovery
Some of these undiscoverable events may turn out to be the most important aspects of the future.
However, just when then does an idea about the future move from wild speculation to plausible and worthy of consideration?
How does vision of the future and perceptions of reality change? Or, more importantly, how do breakthroughs really happen
Thus, we and others argue that instead of using forecasting methods to produce single-value deterministic images of the future,
its behavior resembles random motion or noise), then prediction of the future of the system (interest rates,
it is no longer adequate to say bchoose a policy that brings the expected future close to the desired future.
Q In chaos, the expected future is a chimera, and disorder can mask valid normative visions.
the analyst can identify the future limits of operation of a system and set plans to accommodate those limits, saying, in effect,
Since futures research has as its primary raison d'e tre informing policymaking, a better understanding of the mechanics of decision making would be useful.
This assumption moves us into the realm of psychology. 7. The assumption of reductionism There is an implicit assumption in some methods of futures research that reducing a problem to its elements improves the forecasts produced by the method.
and futures research will be important and powerful. It will give new salience to agent modeling since the implicit rules of behavior of ever smaller groups will be known with increasing accuracy.
and challenges that may give new vitality to futures research. Certainly as they and other directions are explored the field will gain new thinking
Thus, these frontiers will serve as important orientation in the elaboration of the second edition of Futures research methodology 2. 1 (CD-ROM) to be published by American Council for the United nations University early in 2005.
Futures research methodology Version 2. 0 (CD-ROM), American Council for the United nations University, 2002. For further information see:
He is the founder and Board member of The Futures Group International and member of the Board of the Institute for Global Ethics, UK.
He is the innovator of several methods of futures research and author of several books and hundreds of articles dealing with the future research methodology, space, and innovation.
and has 35 years experience in futures research with governments, UN organizations, corporations, universities, and nonprofit organizations.
or edited 12 books on the future. He can be contacted at jglenn@igc. org. Ana Jakil is interning with Millennium Project for the American Council for the United nations University.
She is currently writing her Phd thesis on the futures research methodology for exploring complex emergencies. She can be contacted at ana. jakil@univie. ac. at.
Along with increasing significance of innovation in socioeconomic development grows the need to utilize future-oriented knowledge in innovation policy-making.
Besides technological development decision-makers need all-inclusive knowledge of future developments of society, economy and impacts of science and technology.
In addition to performance analysis based on ex-post indicators the barometer includes the questionnaire of the views and visions of the future development by relevant national actors.
and gives perspectives for the future development of barometer. 2009 Published by Elsevier Inc. Keywords: Innovation policy Science and Technology indicators Barometer Future-oriented knowledge 1. Introduction A growing number of different international comparison systems of the economic and innovation performance of nations have emerged within a decade 2
. The role of performance comparisons has become increasingly important in the era of globalization when competition is not only between multinational and other enterprises but also between economies and innovation systems.
and not on examination of future development. Gradually this debate led in The Finnish association of graduate engineers (TEK) to the decision to develop an own national performance comparison.
as well as a future-oriented survey exploring future visions of relevant national actors like industries, policy-makers and politicians, research community and future generations,
industrial and business barometers in its attempt to grasp future developments. The purpose of a technology barometer is to give data of how favorable and competitive the Finnish innovation environment is assessed to be now and in the future.
The future development of the economy and innovation system will be derived in part from the path dependent historical context
and accordingly future-oriented knowledge shall be interlinked properly to the past development path. In technology barometer this challenge is solved by dividing the exercise first into a comparison of the performance of the Finnish innovation system with selected nations on a basis of available international indicators
The combination of the indicator-based comparative study and the future-oriented survey into one instrument creates a unique platform for the further analyses of the economic
/Technological forecasting & Social Change 76 (2009) 1177 1186 3. 2. Survey study of future visions In addition to indicator-based comparison the technology barometer instrument includes a survey about people's expectations regarding the future development trends.
The third group Politicians consists of members of the Finnish Parliament's Committee for the Future, provincial leaders,
as well as their expectations for the foreseeable future. By doing this, the survey complements and diversifies the results of the indicator study by allowing the mutual comparison of the four respondent groups'views
what will be the content of knowledge-intensive jobs retained by Finland in future and how should Finland direct
The second themeof discussion ismore comprehensive and concerns the future development of innovation and business activities.
has generated a vivid national discussion of the strengths and weaknesses as well as the future directions of the Finnish economy and innovation system.
but furthermore the related national comparative examination gives additional and more detailed insights into the discussion of the future development of the national economy and innovation system.
Moreover, the process of developing Finnish national strategic centres for science, technology and innovation is underway in the technology fields with future importance for businesses and the society.
What future development possibilities does the technology barometer instrument offer? Technology barometer is going to be developed towards an instrument that analyzes innovation systems as far-reaching socioeconomic technical complexes.
there is also a need to increase the proactive and future-oriented elements in technology barometer. More future-oriented evaluative schemes and templates are needed
in order to grasp and understand the wider systemic challenges of the innovation practices. One new approach to be integrated in the barometer structure in the future can be oriented the future concept of impact assessment
which is currently under the development at VTT. This approach seeks to combine evaluative ex-ante impact assessment
Revolution or a History of the Future, 1991 New york, XXXX. 11 M. Castells, The Rise of Network Society, The Information age:
and explains one of the methods the future online survey in more detail. The German Foresight process of the BMBF delivers results on different levels:
broader future fields as well as single future topics. Both kinds are selected relevant and according to a set of criteria.
The future fields are all crosscutting issues based on science and technology. All of them are specifically knowledge dynamic fields. 2009 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
and technology and was broadened to look into the future of the next 10 to 15 years and even further.
not only look at the future themes but also the innovation system and the actors working in the fields. A bibliometric analysis provided further input in this process.
First future science and technology trends were mentioned and documented in mind maps 12. In order to address crosscutting issues (objective no. 2 of the whole process
and future sustainability were necessary. The online survey was designed as a check if the topics that were already found as future-relevant for German science
and technology landscape are really relevant and if theymeet the criteria of the process. In order to keep it simple and user-friendly,
From single persons, we know that the scientific curiosity about the future fields and topics was the major motivation for participation.
These are unaccepted the most research topics for the future. The first examples are both related to nuclear research,
the topics that were defined as future fields and future topics for BMBF were worked out in different papers. For this, a last assessment by the international Monitoring Panel (second wave of partly standardised interviews) took place to validate the results.
/Technological forecasting & Social Change 76 (2009) 1187 1197 3. 4. Some results In the end, eight new future fields (broader fields) with a different perspective as well as single future topics in all 20
future fields were recommended for consideration. They cannot be summarised here but the eight future fields which should be considered with a different perspective were:
Decoding ageing: ageing is based on many factors and concerns the whole lifecycle of (human beings. The field concentrates on human beings.
in order to address the critical challenges of the future. This future field needs a new dimension in research on systemic change,
including very different disciplines. Complexity, modelling and simulation: new aspects to handle complexity with modelling
generating insights regarding the dynamics of change, future challenges and options, along with new ideas, and transmitting them to policy-makers as an input to policy conceptualisation and design.
enhancing the capacity for change within a given policy field by building a common awareness of the current situation and future challenges,
but was promoted by the coming year 2000 and the demand for knowledge about the future.
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
, 2000, pp. 78 92.8 Horizon scan Report, Towards a Future Oriented Policy and Knowledge Agenda, COS, The hague, 2007, www. horizonscan. nl. 9 K. Cuhls
An Attitudinal Perspective, Technological forecasting and Social Change, vol. 25,1984, pp. 281 292.16 K. Cuhls, K. Blind, H. Grupp, Innovations for our future.
, H. Grupp, Innovations for our future. Delphi'98: 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
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.
Overtext Web Module V3.0 Alpha
Copyright Semantic-Knowledge, 1994-2011