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.
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
The High level Expert Group appointed by the European commission crystallized these trends by defining foresight as follows 5:
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,
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 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.
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 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.
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 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.
In practice to succeed to build the solid bridge between the foresight and risk analysis methods new case studies would be needed.
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.
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.),
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
Raija Koivisto has over twenty years experience in safety, security, risk assessment and foresight related research 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
Foresight and roadmma exercises are aimed at supporting planning and priority-setting of R&d and have become indispensable elements of policy-making.
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,
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 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 foresight search activities were flanked by a monitoring process. With the assistance of an international panel
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
We analyse the expected impacts along the five functions of Foresight for policy-making that recently emerged in the Foresight debate 1
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.
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.
References 1 Forlearn, http://forlearn. jrc. ec. europa. eu/guide/1 why-foresight/functions. htm, access:
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
, 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:
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:
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.
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:
Discussions pointed to recent approaches to strengthen capacities for scenario planning and foresight within governments. Examples include:
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
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
Received 17 november 2008 Received in revised form 15 july 2009 Accepted 27 july 2009 The democratic deficit (the‘deficit'hereafter) in present institutional Foresight(‘Foresight'hereafter) lies in its participation regime.
The notions of‘situations'and Critical systems Heuristics (CSH) are combined into a metaphor to suggest how the deficit in Foresight might be reduced.
Foresight Inclusivity Critical systems Heuristics Nanotechnology 1. Institutional Foresight Institutional Foresight programmes(‘Foresight'hereafter) now occupy a prominent position in the minds of public policy makers.
Despite this belief, almost all Foresight implied wider dimensions Technological forecasting & Social Change 76 (2009) 1208 1221 Corresponding author.
Because of their overt techno-economic purpose Foresight has relied on the opinions of a relatively narrow body of technologically oriented people.
how this may be reduced, through widening participation in public Foresight, is the purpose of this paper. 1. 1. History Current Foresight studies attempt to create collective anticipations, usually related to technology,
in Foresight narrow consultation needs to be recognised as a possibility but one that is employed sparingly.
but so far Foresight has depended on expert technological opinion where inclusivity has been interpreted as seeking opinions from a larger number of the typical experts.
from defining its purpose to implementing the outcome then becomes a major challenge. 1. 2. The case for Inclusive foresight Widening the scope of consultation and making Foresight into a much wider social process,
is prompted by (a) recognition of the restriction to participation in current Foresight (b) the lessons learned from the corporate sector regarding the benefits of stakeholder inclusion
and process needs if Foresight programmes are to be extended into the social sphere without becoming chaotic 3. Foresight ought to be concerned with three questions:
So far, Foresight has concentrated on the first two questions related to science and technology and has paid relatively little attention to the third.
In an example of foresight in this connection, Loveridge 7 outlined the way that computer and communication technologies might evolve into‘information technology',with its widespread adoption throughout society,
providing another incentive for widening the scope and transparency of consultation and participation in Foresight.
All foresight has political dimensions simply because it is either agenda setting or is pounced upon as a means of prioritizing activities private and public.
The practicalities of bridging the gap between Foresight and the public political sphere are not of concern here where the emphasis is on outlining a practical process for widening participation in Foresight in a polity that largely does not know Foresight exists
and probably does not care whether it exists or not. The political machinations that follow Foresight are known well enough to be called‘common ground
'and include the call for sponsors to‘champion'the outcome of Foresight to see its outcomes through the labrynthine political undergrowth to some form of implementation.
Indeed, the requirement for a‘championing department'is now common practice in the UK Government's Foresight activity.
The political view of Foresight was revealed in a short succinct article by The british politician Enoch Powell 8:
the element of desirability in the earlier quoted triple set of concerns Foresight needs to address.
what are and what are not desirable future situations°Prioritising the choices that have to be made among the outcomes of Foresight Avoid the assumption that people have infinite plasticity toward new technology Increase trust between policy makers, business and the general public,
more Inclusive foresight All of the above expectations require contributions to Foresight to be made from a wider range of participants (than the conventional expert community),
2. 2. New groups of people to include Inclusivity ought to mean wider participation in the formulation of Foresight
though that brings severe practical concerns in the running of the Foresight. It is to these that the following sections are director. 1211 D. Loveridge,
O. Saritas/Technological forecasting & Social Change 76 (2009) 1208 1221 2. 3. Coping with social inclusion Wider participation in Foresight faces severe but not insurmountable obstacles.
The conscious and subconscious influence of the postmodern mindset on inclusivity in Foresight is considerable:
and credible to Foresight sponsors and their audience Systemic in order to understand how systems work and behave.
This will inform the profiles of stakeholders/experts/lay people to be involved in Foresight, and will portray their relationships. 3. How Inclusive foresight might be achieved The steps that might be taken towards Inclusive foresight are:
All the experiments that have been made spread Foresight well beyond the conventional sphere of technology alone. 3. 1. Policy requirements for inclusivity For policy purposes the minimum conditions for Inclusive foresight then seem to be:
as it lies at the heart of Foresight Environment of knowledge development: 7. Trust between organisers and all participants, even among those whose opinions may not be deemed to be‘influential'8. Establishment of a new balance between participants with special expertise
which the guiding principles of Foresight are laid clearly out so that individual participants feel that their participation is valued Simplicity of participation and transparency of outcome:
The influence of inclusivity on the output of Foresight will need to be as clear as possible
and technology have been the traditional focus for Foresight: even there inclusivity has not often been an important feature.
There is evidence that the participants in Foresight come from the left-hand arm of the VALS 1 typology:
The evidence for this lies in the age, occupation, gender and background of the majority of Foresight participants who have been middle-to late-middle aged, professional managers and scientists, male and university graduates.
which is the eventual destination of all Foresight. In the political sphere the implications of the distribution of behavioural styles will feed right through to prioritisation and the identity of key concerns.
Foresight sponsors have the task of bridging the outcome into the political world so that they must ensure that inclusivity addresses the influence that the distribution of behavioural styles has on the study's credibility,
Methodological issues The behavioural aspects of inclusivity also have implications for the methods used in Foresight:
though they have been worked out privately. 3. 2. 4. Pilot studies Nontraditional Foresight procedures need to be proved,
these are all behavioural components of participants in Foresight. CSH also seeks to give a voice in the decision making process to those who suffer the consequences.
like Foresight, differs from the deductive procedures of applied science that are concerned with well defined problems,
or diminishing civil and personal liberty. 3. Measurement of an improvement in participation in Foresight should be simple
23.1217 D. Loveridge, O. Saritas/Technological forecasting & Social Change 76 (2009) 1208 1221 5. Foresight's democratic deficit and nano artifacts The root of Foresight's deficit lies
The public and corporate worlds The public acceptance of nano artifacts Public participation in Foresight. Much of this interaction concerns the current drive toward regulation
technological feasibility and artifact desirability of a nano artifact. 1218 D. Loveridge, O. Saritas/Technological forecasting & Social Change 76 (2009) 1208 1221 participation in Foresight relating to these issues.
and patenting are major themes for Foresight relating to the dynamic evolution of nano artifacts and the situations that arise as a result.
Foresight then needs to appreciate how public acceptance or rejection of nano artifacts may shift according to the nature of the artifacts presented to the public.
Public participation in Foresight is necessary for this kind of adaptive behaviour to occur. Consensus is not necessarily the best arbiter in many circumstances,
The principles of precaution and parsimony are likely to be ever present in Foresight where public participation
Foresight needs to follow how the critical mass evolves as this is a critical part of its context that follows from the kind of processes that enable public participation some
as practiced, institutional Foresight contains a democratic deficit characterised by exclusivity as the extent of public participation is restricted.
and the Emerald Group Publishing, for their permission to use significant extracts from their paper‘Inclusive foresight'in‘Foresight:
European knowledge society foresight: The EUFORIA Project synthesis report, Report to the European Foundation for the Improvement of Living Conditions, Working Conditions and Industrial Relations, October, 2003.2 K. Cuhls, Government foresight activities
the Futur process, Second International Conference on Technology foresight Tokyo, 27 28,february 2003. 3 D. Loveridge, P. Street, Inclusive foresight, Foresight:
1978 95, Futures 14 (3)( 1982) 205 239 June 13 D. Loveridge, Foresight seven paradoxes, International Journal of Technology management 21 (7/8
)( 2001) 781 791.14 D. Loveridge, Foresight: The Art and Science of Anticipating the Future, Routledge, NY, 2009.15 H. G. Daellenbach, Systems thinking & Decision making:
only its odds 5 then this implies a shift from deterministic approaches to foresight and strategy towards the creation of circumstances and conditions which enhance the chance of success. Good preparation
foresight, engagement, and integration, The Handbook of Science and Technology studies, 2007.2 H. te Kulve, A. Rip, Engagement Requires Investment in Pre-engagement:
Andersen and Borup's paper addresses the issue of foresight and strategy processes of national research councils and research programmes.
Also that a more formal use of foresight elements could improve the legitimacy and impact of the strategic considerations of research councils and research programmes.
the paper draws lessons not only for other small countries and regions hoping to use foresight,
but also highlights principles for using foresight for priority setting more generally. Weber et al. discusses the trade-offs between policy impacts of FTA with the experience gained from the innovation policy foresight
and strategy process conducted in the city of Vienna. The paper gives a comprehensive review of the foresight and the assessment of its impacts on policy.
With the case of the city ofvienna, it is demonstrated that short-term, medium-term and long-term success of policy translation may vary.
and outcomes of the foresight and strategy process were translated successfully into policy decisions immediately after the exercise.
foster collaboration between the two main funding agencies the Academy of Finland and the Finnish funding agency for technology and Innovation (Tekes) and promote foresight and innovation activities at large.
what policy developments have taken place after to the publication of foresight results. The exercise has identified through its panels about 6 10 focal competence areas and, for each of these,
http://www. tandfonline. com/loi/ctas20 Foresight and strategy in national research councils and research programmes Per Dannemand Andersen a & Mads Borup a a Department of Management Engineering, Technical University
Per Dannemand Andersen & Mads Borup (2009) Foresight and strategy in national research councils and research programmes, Technology analysis & Strategic management, 21:8, 917-932, DOI:
8 november 2009,917 932 Foresight and strategy in national research councils and research programmes Per Dannemand Andersen*and Mads Borup Department of Management Engineering
Technical University of Denmark, Produktionstrovet 424, DK-2800 Kongens Lyngby, Denmark This paper addresses the issue of foresight and strategy processes of national research councils and research programmes.
We also argue that a more formal use of foresight elements might improve the legitimacy and impact of the strategic considerations of research councils and research programmes.
public research organisatioons foresight; science and technology and innovation policy studies 1. Introduction The setting of priorities in science
and programmes that do not use foresight exerciise in their work. The analysis in this paper builds on the basic observation that all research councils
and research programmes foresight or not do strategic thinking and set up smaller or larger, formal or informal,
Our analysis makes a departure in the contemporary foresight literature and the discipline of strategy.
if more formal use of foresight elements might improve strategic consideration by research councils and research programmes. 2. Foresight and strategy processes in Research strategy and priority-setting processes have probably always been used by research communities,
but the area has attracted increased interest in the last 10 or 20 years. However a significant difference between today's knowledge-based economies and the industrial economies of 30 or 50 years ago is that technological development has become crucial for economic development
We see foresight as a specific type of strategy activity. Foresight is a part of the much larger area of strategy activities in general,
and of the range of methods and systematic approaches existing in the strategy field. With its long-term perspective and its emphasis on connecting perspectives of different knowledge areas and different actors and stakeholders, foresight differs from corporate strategic planning,
which typically looks three, five or maybe eight years ahead and involves only a very limited number of stakeholders.
An oft-cited definition of foresight in science and technology was formulated by Ben Martin as‘the process involved in systematically attempting to look into the longer-term future of science, technology,
the economy and society with the aim of identifying the areas of strategic research Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:09 03 december 2014 Foresight
but it is acknowledged generally that foresight is concerned with a broader, cross-societal discussion of the future prospects for science and technology and with implementing the results of such discussions in priorities for public expenditures on research.
Hence, foresight challenges traditional-thinking (or Mode 1-oriented) research communities in at least two ways. First, foresight exercises include future societal and economic needs and possibilities in the setting of priorities.
Using foresight the focus is shifted from science-internal quality terms and evaluating past performance to identifying possibilities in the future.
but usually foresight involves a cross-societal discussion of needs, possibilities and priority-setting. Therefore, it seems obvious why many traditional research communities take a reluctant stance on foresight exercises. 2. 1. Rationale
and objectives for foresight The rationale for carrying out public foresight exercises is often related to the political goal of increasing economical competitiveness by means such as technological or societal innovation.
With roots in evolutionary econommic and their understanding of national innovation systems, Georghiou and Keenan compiled a list of‘common stated goals for foresight,
and M. Borup 2. 2. Foresight approaches and methods Whereas the rationale for foresight gets its legitimacy from the tradition of evolutionary econoomi foresight,
Foresight and similar future-oriented technology analysis methodds such as trend extrapolation, scenarios, Delphi analysis, focus groups, cross-impact analyses and roadmapping, can be found in traditional business-school
and lists of approaches and methood for foresight have been suggested by different authors in review articles on foresight and future-oriented technology assessment methods (Technology Futures analysis Methodsworking Group 2004).
2. 3. Foresight seen in different strategy perspectives Strategy, strategic planning or strategic management is established a well academic discipline that is taught at most business schools
Foresight is not to the same extent established as an academic discipline. Rather, foresight is a field of practice with origins in several other more or less established academic disciplines such as evolutionary economy, strategy, technology assessment or social studies of science, futures studies.
Most foresight practice in Europe has been focussed on public policy making and especially policy making in science and technology
even though by some authors the term‘foresight'has also been used regarding prospective thinking in corporate strategy.
Literature describes how foresight has changed scope since the 1960s from the first generation of technology-oriented forecasting to the current third-or fourth-generation activities that also include wider social dimensions (Reger 2001;
Some authors have suggested that foresight has emerged from the convergence of the three disciplines and practices of policy development, strategic planning and futures studies (Gavigan et al. 2001),
different approaches to foresight and strategy coexist. There exists no clear and generally accepted distinction between foresight and strategy,
but it seems generally accepted Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:09 03 december 2014 Foresight
and strategy in national research councils and research programmes 921 that the field of foresight is indebted more to the field of strategy than vice versa.
In this article we anticipate that the literature has refined a more view on what strategy is than on
what foresight is and based on this assumption we will discuss how different understandings of strategy
and decision processes affect the understanding of foresight. Concepts such as strategy methods priority-setting and foresight are not always familiar to scientists.
Large parts of the science community often associate such terms with administration, bureaucracy, political intervention in science and similar, negatively associated terms,
However, foresight seen in the light of three of the traditions are described in the following:(
whether foresight or strategy processes can be designed as a so-called decision machine, which, if designed well enough
Also, the definition of foresight given by Martin 1995, cited above, gives probably unintentionally the impression that he understands foresight as a rational-analytical process,
but the idea of the rational decision has been challenged for decades by decision theorists (Lindblom 1959;
To these authors there seems to be a relationship between Martin's definition of foresight
and Lampel 1998), the premises of foresight are as follows: Foresight is about priority-setting and there exists identifiable positions for research activities.
The context of science is strategic research and emerging technologies, and it is economical and competitive (and not to better understand nature and humankind).
It is obvious that such elements are present in foresight and strategy processes. Delphi studies and other judgemental methods can be perceived as a systematic way of dealing with political interests,
In this perspective the premises for foresight might be that: Foresight and strategy are also about priority-setting;
The context is not related to any particular understanding of science or technological development but to powers and political interests in the affected areas of science and technology;
Whereas the Porter-inspired understanding of foresight focuses on the strategic environment, a contrasting understanding focuses on an organisation's internal resources,
and utilised foresight from this perspective (Eerola et al. 2004; Karlsen and Karlsen 2007. In this perspective the premises for foresight might be that:
The focus is less on priority-setting as a result of a foresight process and more on knowledge creation and knowledge sharing by the various actors during the process;
Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:09 03 december 2014 Foresight and strategy in national research councils and research programmes 923 Foresight and strategy focus on competencies and visions for defining future development;
Whatever priority-setting research councils undertake in this perspective it is based on competeenc (scientific strengths or weaknesses),
but quite a few also included thoughts on education and on the potential industrial and societal Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:09 03 december 2014 Foresight and strategy in national research councils and research programmes 925 impacts of the suggested research.
but the Ministry did not approve this Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:09 03 december 2014 Foresight and strategy in national research councils and research programmes 927 suggestion.
Actor dialogues, partnershhip consensus seeking Advisory Council for Energy Research Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:09 03 december 2014 Foresight
and strategy in national research councils and research programmes 929 Although there is a rich and growing application-oriented literature on foresight in science
One presenttatio was intended to initiate a discussion of how foresight methods could enrich strategy processes within the councils and programmes.
As the two strategy cases were analysed in the context of foresight parameters for comparing the case studies draw partly from contemporary discussions of foresight typology.
The case studies revealed many different rationales for and understandings of the strategy processse that were undertaken (see Table 2). In the case of the Technical research Council a variety of rationales
Furthermore, the scientific community is not always familiar with common foresight terminology; in some cases such‘business-school language'even disturbs meaningful strategic discussion.
For example, Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:09 03 december 2014 Foresight and strategy in national research councils and research programmes 931 a full Delphi survey could be applied,
In any case it is a long-term venture to improve academia's and the science communities'understanding of foresight and of strategy in general.
and Foresight section at thetechnical University of Denmark's Department for Management Engineering. His main areas of research are technology foresight, strategy in science and innovation, technological innovation, the interaction between industry and science,
and Foresight section at the Technical University of Denmark's Department for Management Engineering. His areas of work are systems of innovation and governance of research and innovation in the fields of eco-innovation and energy innovation.
Nordich2energy foresight complementary contribution of expert views and formal analyses. In Proceedings from the EU US Scientific Seminar:
New technology foresight, forecasting and assessment methods, 13 14 may, Seville, Spain. EU DG Research. 2005. Final Report.
Third generation foresight integrating the socioeconomic dimension. In The approach to and the potential for new technology foresight, The Proceedings of an International Conference on Technology foresight, Tokyo, Japan. http://www. nistep. go. jp/achiev/ftx/eng/mat077e/html/mat077oe
. html. Georghiou, L, . and M. Keenan. 2006. Evaluation of national foresight activities: assessing rationale, process and impact.
Expert groups as production units for shared knowledge in energy foresight. Foresight (Emerald) 9, no. 1: 37 49.
Lindblom, C. E. 1959. The science on muddling through. Public Administrative Review 19:79 88. Lundvall, B.-Å..1992.
Foresight in science and technology. Technology analysis & Strategic management 7, no. 2: 139 68. Martino, J. P. 1983.
Overtext Web Module V3.0 Alpha
Copyright Semantic-Knowledge, 1994-2011