I. Miles, O. Saritas, Evaluation of the United kingdom foresight programme, Final Report, DTI, London, 2006.13 K. Cuhls, L. Georghiou, Evaluating a participative foresight process:
accepted 1 february 2008 Abstract Foresight programmes are evaluated usually in terms of the achievement of initial objectives and the scale and nature of direct, anticipated impacts,
The research mainly involved a literature review of available documentation on past and present foresight programmes and their results. 2008 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
The networking effects of foresight programmes enhance collaboration and networking between organisations (universities, research institutes, firms and service-providers),
Typically, logic model approaches start with specific programme goals and objectives and attempt to identify paths to potential goal attainment by treating foresight programmes as systems comprised of a number of basic elements, namely context, actors, processes
it is more relevant to ask whether particular impacts in line with the generic Table 1 Grouping of foresight reported objectives and impacts a under‘intermediate'and‘lower level'goals Reported foresight programme objectives Reported
A conceptual framework of this nature sheds light on the dynamics of foresight programmes and helps identify the principles
and criteria that govern the design and implementation of foresight programmes capable of contributing to a more participatory‘knowledge society'.
and implementation of foresight programmes by adding design and implementation principles to the existing evaluation issues of efficiency,
the third round of the UK foresight programme, the second round of the Swedish foresight programme and the eforesee project in Malta.
The evaluation of the latest UK Foresight programme 5 sheds light on several direct and indirect impacts and highlighted several factors that affected the overall success of the UK foresight exercise.
It should also be noted that the literature on technology assessment programmes is also relevant to the case of foresight programmes.
I. Miles, O. Saritas, Evaluation of the United kingdom Foresight programme, Final Report, 2005.6 E. Arnold, S. Faugert, A. Eriksson, V. Charlet, From foresight to consensus?
assessing rationale, process and impact, Technological forecasting and Social Change 73 (7)( 2006) 761 777.9 A. Havas, Context, focus and coherence of foresight programmes, Lessons from the Czech republic and Hungary, Paper
New technology Foresight, Forecasting & Assessment Methods, Seville, May 13 14 2004.10 A. Havas, Terminology and Methodology for Benchmarking Foresight programmes,
From a different angle, there are fundamental differences between foresight programmes, on the one hand, and future-oriented academic or consultancy projects, on the other.
The type of intended outcomes always depends on the design (objectives) of a foresight programme, i e. if it is mainly a process-oriented exercise, a productorieente one,
however, does not imply that national (regional) factors can be neglected in actual prospective analyses (e g. strategic planning or foresight programmes).
For example, the UK Foresight programme both develops own analysis and commits external analysis. Its mandate is temporary,
Reducing the democratic deficit in institutional foresight programmes: A case for critical systems thinking in nanotechnology Denis Loveridge, Ozcan Saritas Manchester Institute of Innovation research, University of Manchester, Oxford Road, M13 9pl Manchester, UK a r
In this paper practical ways to reduce the deficit are proposed that ought to increase the responsiveness of Foresight programmes to society's values, concerns and expectations.
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.
Experiments such as the Futur programme 2 have revealed some of the problems that will have to be overcome for Foresight programmes to become inclusive.
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:
In this sense, the issue of inclusivity is not new. 1. 3. Some challenges to Inclusive foresight Creation of trust between all the parties involved is one of the major requirements of an effective Foresight programme, especially between the‘expert'community and the general public,
°‘Placing Foresight programmes in context and allowing participation in formulation ofline their content'°Choosing the methods to be used to enable the expression of public opinion with all its vagaries of expression concerning
Establish a baseline from what has been attempted to make Foresight programmes more inclusive in recent years The policy (or political) requirements:
Foresight programmes will become open to a far wider range of opinion than ever encountered before. While this is clearly the intention
Foresight programmes have been managed through a hierarchy of committees, in which the supra-committee is charged with overseeing the entire process
The rationales and objectives of foresight programmes are of course wider than just deciding how to distribute public funding to R&d,
This function is an important motivation for policy makers to initiate a foresight programme in the first place. 2) Policy strategic counselling by merging the insights generated in the context of policy informiin foresight activities with perspectives on the strategic positioning
Evaluation of the United kingdom foresight programme. Final report. Manchester: University of Manchester. Rhomberg, W c. Steindl, and M. Weber. 2006.
such as the‘Young Foresight'programme for schools in the UK, the German Futur project, and‘Jugend denkt Zukunft',a countrywide cooperation programme between German businesses and schools.
Loveridge (2008,135) addresses one of the persisting dynamics in foresight which is the narrowness in both participation and focus of institutional foresight programmes:‘
‘The question of participation in institutional Foresight programmes remains unresolved and largely hidden as the polity is unaware of their existence'.
the Socioeconomic Dimension, Foresight Center of NISTEP, Tokyo, Japan, 2001.5 A. Havas, Terminology and Methodology for Benchmarking Foresight programmes, For Society Transnational Foresight ERA NET, 2006.6 N. Borup, N
At one stage in the UK it was proposed that university block funding for research (QR) from the Higher education Funding Councils should be allocated differentially between fields according to their correspondence with priorities emerging from the foresight programmes.
Terminology and Methodology for Benchmarking Foresight programmes, For Society Transnational Foresight ERA NET, 2006. T. Ko nno la et al./
and quite often non-governmental organisation and civil society stakeholders 1. FTA, especially in the form of Foresight programmes, has come to be applied in the form of a mutual learning process,
Popper 10 relates methods to a yet wider account of the stages through which Foresight programmes typically pass.
With the rise of Foresight programmes, and‘‘fully fledged foresight''as an ideal, 8 FTA often involves much wider engagement and involvement of stakeholders,
12 D. Loveridge, O. Saritas, Reducing the democratic deficit in institutional foresight programmes: a case for critical systems thinking in nanotechnology, Technological forecasting and Social Change 76 (9)( 2009) 1208 1221.13 I. Miles, UK Foresight:
appropriate budget and techniques alone are insufficient to result in foresight program success. To be regarded as successful,
government led foresight programs need to focus on a clearly identified client, there needs to be a clear link between the foresight (topic and process) and the government's policy agenda''.
Based on experience of formal evaluation of foresight programs, it was claimed that‘‘lack of success had very little to do with the quality of the work that has been done and much more to do with initial and subsequent political positioning''.
‘‘while you can always tell when a foresight program starts, it is more difficult to tell where it ends''.
Experience from the UK foresight program points towards the value of a significant period of‘aftercare,
http://forera. jrc. ec. europa. eu/fta 2008/conclusions. html. 10 UK Foresight programme, Flood and Coastal Defence, 2004, http://www. foresight. gov
. uk/Ourwork/Completedprojects/Flood/index. asp. 11 UK Foresight programme, Tackling Obesities: Future Choices, 2007, http://www. foresight. gov. uk/Ourwork/Activeprojects/Obesity/Obesity. asp.
other than some postgraduate foresight programs (provided on the basis that foresight is an interdisciplinary field grounded in a variety of social science),
an environmental technologies action plan for the European union'',COM (2004) 38, European commission, Brussels. Loveridge, D.,Georghiou, L. and Nedeva, M. 1995),‘United kingdom Foresight programme, Delphi survey'',PREST
and refer to foresight programmes in the UK, Germany, The netherlands and Japan. In 1998, the Danish Board of Technology established an independent working group to analyse
2006) or have carried recently out scan-like exercises that were used solely to design foresight programs (Germany
research program involving three related studies that examined successful foresight programs. It analyzes the key factors that appear to determine whether or not foresight,
appropriate budget and techniques alone are insufficient factors to explain the success of foresight programs. The interview results indicate that success is defined ultimately as the impact of the foresight exercise on government policy,
Taken together, the results should help organizations establish the parameters for a successful foresight program. ANADA HAS DEVOTED considerable enerrg to understanding the whys and wherefoore of foresight,
This paper reports on two related studies that examiin successful foresight programs. It analyzes the key operational success factors that appear to determiin whether or not foresight,
it is insufficient as an indicator of success. Eight factors were identified as the critical keys to success in government-led foresight programs:
Integrate stakeholders into foresight programs. Take advantage of the existence of, or create, a national local academic receptor and training capacity.
Methodology The primary study methodology was interviews with the directors of successful foresight programs to learn from them what factors led to success and, of course,
how they defined success. The first step was then to identify successful foresight programs. Thirty experts from ten countries were sent a brief questionnaire
At the most basic level, success can be defined as attainnmen of the foresight programs goals. The problle is that,
Foresight programmes are evaluated usually in terms of the achievement of initial objectives and the scale and nature of direct, anticipated impacts.
Conceptually, this study seeks to find the most successsfu foresight programs and study them. The initial study
Which five countries do you believe have advanced the most, productive or successful foresight programs? Of the countries you have identified,
Please feel free to comment on any aspect of Canadda'foresight program or activity. Your advice and insights would be welcomed In the second phase,
How has evolved the foresight program over time? Do you have a foresight wish list? In the final phase, senior representative (s) from the nine foresight institutions identified during the first study were contacted by email and/or through direec telephone conversations to request additional information,
Results The definition of success Overall the studies provide a rich array of insights and observations-data on the most dynamic public foresight programs in the world.
where the foresight program was being supported, was terminated in 2008. Sponsors: Governments (both national and subnatiional and government agencies were the main sponsors of foresight exercises accounting for 95%of the sample.
but the clear message was that a successful foresight program had to connect in some meaningful manner to private sector actors.
Furthermore, many indicated that it was necessary to retain these involveement beyond the period of the actual projeect or initial foresight program,
Applying the critical success factors to Canada's foresight program Our studies have identified eight critical success factoors The strength of any model is its ability to assist
In this section, all eight criteria are appllie to the Canadian foresight program. At the outsse it should be noted that the methodologies that are being used during the program have been evaluated in the past
and have been found to be consistent with those associated with successful foresight programs. Thus this part of the paper applies only the eight critical success factors that are additional to the methodology factor.
Table 6 summarizes how we applied the critical success factoor to Canada's foresight program. As present (early 2010) there are some encouraging signs of a revival of interest by the Canadian government in a modest S&t foresight initiative so,
Canada was unable to develop a sustainable, integrated foresight program. While the reason (s) for the failure of the program (despite the success of the outputs) continue (s) to be debated in policy circles in Canada,
evident but not distinctly recognized The foresight program was able to test at least five novel approaches
and businesses to shift FTA ACTIVITIES from individual large-scale foresight programmes and projects, to investing in developing in-house competencies for coping with sudden change.
and businesses to invest less in individual large-scale foresight programmes and projects, and to opt more for developing in-house competencies for coping with sudden change.
< Back - Next >
Overtext Web Module V3.0 Alpha
Copyright Semantic-Knowledge, 1994-2011
