Futures 43 (2011) 243 251 A r T I C L E I N F O Article history:
Contents lists available at Sciencedirect Futures journal homepage: www. elsevier. com/locate/futures 0016-3287/$ see front matter 2010 Elsevier Ltd.
All rights reserved. doi: 10.1016/j. futures. 2010.11.003 the planning and emergence of knowledge-based clusters is informed often by a vision;
new demand-side innovation policies such as the use of innovative public procurement and regulation to pull through innovations requires a shared vision on the part of purchasers and suppliers.
and shape the future of their innovation environment 6. Firms are increasingly playing a role in defining innovation policy due to the rise of demand side approaches and the convergence of corporate and structural foresight.
The most popular group is one we have called analysing the future potential of technologies. This reflects a type of foresight which preselects one
Beyond this if we expand the vision to innovation policy the focus is very much upon using foresight methods to achieve alignment of the principal stakeholders around an agenda for the future.
and capacity building Priority setting for S&t Network building Supporting policy or strategy development Analysing the future potential of technologies Fig. 1. Analysis of objectives of 50 foresight exercises. 1 Thanks
L. Georghiou, J. Cassingena Harper/Futures 43 (2011) 243 251 244 can see a polarisation of approaches between, on the one hand,
This paper also recommended that that the output from the prioritisation process should provide strategic advice about how to change the future rather than just a simple list of priorities for expenditure,
L. Georghiou, J. Cassingena Harper/Futures 43 (2011) 243 251 245 issue is how actionable such lists are.
and is likely to have increased an role in future programmes. L. Georghiou, J. Cassingena Harper/Futures 43 (2011) 243 251 246 relevant to end-users (e g. personal computing.
Programmes are couched not in terms of particular areas of scientific discipline or expertise, nor are targeted they directly on specific business units in the corporate structure.
which sought to examine the future of‘‘Key Research actors''in the European research area encompassing civil society, researchers, small and medium enterprises, universities, research and technology organisations, multinational enterprises, national and regional governments 23.
L. Georghiou, J. Cassingena Harper/Futures 43 (2011) 243 251 247 success for business at least is defined very clearly in market terms,
By collaborating in their thoughts about the future, organizationsmay be placed better to anticipate the actions of their customers, suppliers and others, such as regulators,
J. Cassingena Harper/Futures 43 (2011) 243 251 248 actors which are important for innovation.
future for foresight in research and innovation policy Rationales for foresight activity have evolved in recent years to feature a range of research
J. Cassingena Harper/Futures 43 (2011) 243 251 249 engineering major changes required in EU research and innovation policy in the coming years.
and innovation policy offers a robust future for these approaches. For the community which has developed them the challenge is to ensure that their standards of rigour
http://www. efmn. eu. 23 M. Akrich, R. Miller, Synthesis Paper The Future of Key Research actors in the European research area, Commission of the European communities, EU 22961 EN
Future-oriented technology analysis Strategic intelligence for an Innovative economy, Springer, 2008.25 A. Havas, Devising futures for universities in a multilevel structure:
A First Overview, Commission of the European communities, EUR 20921, October 2002, p. 10.30 L. Georghiou, The UK Technology foresight Programme, Futures 28 (4)( 1996) 361.31
L. Georghiou, J. Cassingena Harper/Futures 43 (2011) 243 251 250 35 V. Brummer, T. Ko nno la, A. Sahto, Foresight
, Futures 36 (10)( 2004) 1063 1075.37 K. Blind, Regulatory foresight: methodologies and selected applications, Technological forecasting and Social Change 75 (2008) 496 516.38 J. Edler, L. Georghiou, Public procurement and innovation resurrecting the demand side, Research policy
L. Georghiou, J. Cassingena Harper/Futures 43 (2011) 243 251 251
Foresight tackling societal challenges: Impacts and implications on policy-making§T. Ko nno la A f. Scapolo b, 1, P. Desruelle c, 2, R. Mud, 3 a Impetu Solutions
Foresight can be seen as a crucial function to prepare for the future; not only to identify the promising technological pathways,
While foresight is used commonly in connection with the public-Futures 43 (2011) 252 264 A r T I C L E I N F O Article history:
Whereas the paper reports some findings on the future of challenges especially related to sustainability, security and information society,
Contents lists available at Sciencedirect Futures journal homepage: www. elsevier. com/locate/futures 0016-3287/$ see front matter 2011 Published by Elsevier Ltd. doi:
10.1016/j. futures. 2010.11.004 sector agenda setting, it is also ever more common practice in business, nongovernmental and international organisations.
Furthermore, the focus on long-term developments and emphasis on the system level analysis, for instance, mean that it has not been easy to evaluate the impacts of the foresight project (for instance,
in order to prepare for the future not only to identify the promising technological pathways but also to engage relevant stakeholders
and codify information that allow a better understanding of the future drivers and challenges, develop visions,
and with what methods the project develops understanding of the future. Foresight activities often focus on the production of consensual future perspectives that refer to the creation of common understanding on priorities, relevant collaborative networks and future actions.
These outcomes can be addressed in view of consensual or diverse future perspectives 9: T. Ko nno la et al./
/Futures 43 (2011) 252 264 253 Consensual future perspectives refer to the creation of common understanding on priorities, relevant collaborative networks and future actions.
/Futures 43 (2011) 252 264 254 Table 1 Selected foresight projects addressing societal challenges. Project Outcomes Future perspectives Management Stakeholder engagement Nordic ICT Foresighta 17 Informative Evaluations of key ICT applications, Nordic scenario set in context of ICT development, scenario
future-oriented elaboration of factors affecting the Nordic business and development environment in ICT. Fixed Structured discussion and the generation of new ideas in the workshops Autonomous Creative brainstorming and ideation in the different scenario and roadmapping workshops.
/Futures 43 (2011) 252 264 255 Table 1 (Continued) Project Outcomes Future perspectives Management Stakeholder engagement UK DCDC Global Strategic Trends Programme
Informative Identification of cross-dimensional analysis of the future context of defence in the next 30 years.
Foresight Canadae Informative Identification of emerging and frontier technology domains addressing subjects such as future fuels, bio-health innovation, geo-strategic systems, animal
/Futures 43 (2011) 252 264 256 Table 1 (Continued) Project Outcomes Future perspectives Management Stakeholder engagement FISTERA:
futures challenges, applications and priorities for developing the information society in the EU. Instrumental Outputs contributed to prepare the FP7 (Framework programme) ICT programme.
Future Impact of ICTS on Environmental Sustainabilityh 22 Informative Explore how ICTS will influence future environmental sustainability (time horizon:
Policy recommendations were validated thought interviews of about twenty experts in ICT or environmental policy The 8th Japanese technology foresight program Informative Understanding future S&t challenges.
and needs analysis. Innovation 25 in Japan Informative The final report of‘‘innovation 25''has set out 5 scenarios for future Japan,
/Futures 43 (2011) 252 264 257 Table 1 (Continued) Project Outcomes Future perspectives Management Stakeholder engagement National Technology roadmap in Korea Informative Learning about the technology
and identified 182 future strategic technologies. Fixed The methodology was fixed at the beginning. Extensive There are broad engagement of diversified stakeholders from government, academia and industry.
National Technology foresight in China Informative Understanding future S&t developments and needs. NTFC aims to provide also necessary information for making five-year plan of science & technology development.
/Futures 43 (2011) 252 264 258 Sustainability: since the Brundlandt Commission 13, many alternative definitions of sustainability have been proposed
informative processes that create understanding on common priorities, relevant collaborative networks and/or future actions.
/Futures 43 (2011) 252 264 259 and future challenges of the innovation system and its parts. However, specific short-term actions are expected not necessarily after the projects.
/Futures 43 (2011) 252 264 260 considered extremely challenging due to high uncertainties related to the issue.
In the Nordic H2 Energy Foresight the major challenge was to create shared understandings on future hydrogen-based energy systems between different stakeholder groups representing five different countries.
National Technology foresight in China and Technology foresight towards 2020 in China as well as National Technology roadmap in Korea were all strongly informative processes that were initiated to capture experts'views on future S&t challenges Hence,
and instrumental outcomes) Priorities foresight can be characterised as consensual and instrumental processes that create common understanding on priorities, networks and/or future actions as well as support the specific foreseen decision-making situation.
/Futures 43 (2011) 252 264 261 Information society. FISTERA highlighted priority application areas where R&d investments should be intensified in the future,
and generated a number of debates on the future of information and communication technologies and the development of a knowledge society in Europe.
the European project‘‘Future Impact of ICTS on Environmental sustainability''aimed to explore (qualitatively) and to assess (quantitatively) the ways in which ICTS would influence future environmental sustainability (time horizon:
2020). ) The findings of the project showed that a large degree of uncertainty existed on impact of ICTS on the environment,
The Nordic ICT Foresight was designed to provide a relevant platform to discuss in a structured way the future of ICT in Nordic countries.
hence this would suggest that foresight projects with open-ended diverse visions of the future are not common in these countries.
/Futures 43 (2011) 252 264 262 3. 5. Innovations foresight (diverse perspectives and instrumental outcomes) Innovations foresight can be characterised as instrumental processes with diverse
while preparedness for the future can be promoted through the diversity of activities within such instruments (e g.,
Most of the projects we analysed have important informative functions in sense that they aim to provide new knowledge for better understanding of issues and of their future implications and challenges.
/Futures 43 (2011) 252 264 263 foresight is ever more important to position foresight as one of the key supporting tools for policy-making to anticipate how major societal challenges ahead can be addressed such as those tackled in this paper, e g. security, sustainability and information society challenges.
we consider that another relevant future avenue might be to enhance the international foresight collaboration in terms of exchange of experiences and the implementation of common foresight projects.
reflections from a hydrogen foresight project, Journal of Cleaner Production 15 (2007) 259 265.4 L. Georghiou, The UK technology foresight programme, Futures 28 (4)( 1996) 359
in Europe, Futures 36 (10)( 2004) 1063 1075.9 T. Ko nno la, V. Brummer, A. Salo, Diversity in foresight insights from the fostering of innovation ideas
a co-evolutionary view Futures 20 (6)( 1988) 606 620.15 M. Castells, The Rise of the network society.
/Futures 43 (2011) 252 264 264
Methods and tools contributing to FTA: A knowledge-based perspective A. Eerola A i. Miles b a VTT Technical research Centre of Finland, Espoo, Finland b Manchester Institute of Innovation research, Manchester united Kingdom 1
Futures 43 (2011) 265 278 A r T I C L E I N F O Article history:
Contents lists available at Sciencedirect Futures journal homepage: www. elsevier. com/locate/futures 0016-3287/$ see front matter 2011 Published by Elsevier Ltd. doi:
10.1016/j. futures. 2010.11.005 2. FTA and knowledge management Talking about FTA in terms of‘‘knowledge''may seem to risk dealing in oxymorons.
After all, the future has not yet been created, so how can there be have knowledge about it
unless we believe in divinely inspired prophets or gods (and even then there are many problems and paradoxes to confront)?
and what their implications may be for future circumstances. Take a simple example. We may not be able to know what the world population will be in 2050.
what the future will hold, of course, and even if our models are fit for purpose, there are always factors that lie outside of these models that may intervene.
and about future prospects. Methods like Delphi are designed to elicit evidence about expert judgement concerning such prospects.
Bell and Olick 2 reframe the discussion about‘‘knowledge of the future''by arguing that we posit the future
‘Knowing'the future is thought better of as knowing about future possibilities, rather than knowledge of the future.
and systems may evolve into the future. We can establish and know things about posits.
whose knowledge of the future may well be far less than omniscient, and whose acts of creation are undertaken for the purpose of learning.
whose far-future and cosmological‘‘novels''such as Star Maker (1937) dramatise these notions (even introducing ideas of a multiverse).
I. Miles/Futures 43 (2011) 265 278 266 beyond organising exchanges among (more or less closely associated) experts.
I. Miles/Futures 43 (2011) 265 278 267 As with other practices, FTA ACTIVITIES involve several phases,
the (iv) translation and (v) interpretation of this knowledge to create understanding of its implications for the future of the organisation in question (further posits.
and selection of what might be the preferable future given one or other sets of criteria.
and the key future or futures that have been posited (and possibly some other possibilities). Roadmapping has become a very popular tool used at this stage,
and near future concerning actions to shape the future. Various approaches to prioritisation (such as key technologies analysis, plotting feasibility against impact of various actions, MCA,
I. Miles/Futures 43 (2011) 265 278 268 Many of the individual methods may be associated with more than one of the five steps,
which can contribute important contributions to debate about future prospects and possibilities. Unfortunately for every study of this sort there are typically,
I. Miles/Futures 43 (2011) 265 278 269 programmes and projects (discussed, for example, in the literatures on complex product systems,
or celebrations of transhumanism but also to more‘‘mundane''exploration of future opportunities and risks associated with large-scale projects
or adapt to, future circumstances, providing and working with relevant knowledge to build capabilities for better action.
and shared visions of what futures to seek or avoid. Having key actors, or influential members from key organisations, engaged in the FTA PROCESS means that they can develop a much deeper understanding of the process itself,
and action within it that can contribute to the construction of the future. Involvement inthe FTAPROCESS thus increases the understanding of itsoutcomes and their relevance in various situations,
I. Miles/Futures 43 (2011) 265 278 270 Whatever mixture of the three goals is being pursued,
as Jaspers et al. 16 discuss in the case of Germany's Future programme. FTA ACTIVITIES necessarily involve, in a very central position, engaging knowledgeable agents,
I. Miles/Futures 43 (2011) 265 278 271 understanding themselves and their worlds, or whatever.
I. Miles/Futures 43 (2011) 265 278 272 management in a scenario workshop are discussed in the next section,
I. Miles/Futures 43 (2011) 265 278 273 forecasts, even background scenarios (e g.‘‘‘‘starter scenarios''to be elaborated) prepared by an expert team or in earlier studies.
or more detailed posits about the future. Yet already some‘‘combination''of information is likely to have been performed outside of the workshop, in the course of the preparation of the background material.
and lead to distinctive futures. Often, something like the STEEPV approach in which people are asked to identify factors and issues under the headings social, technological, economic, environmental, political,
identifying turning points and indicators of change, developing narratives of future histories and accounts of affairs at a future point in time in a way enabling comparison across break out groups, and so on.
I. Miles/Futures 43 (2011) 265 278 274 making. This is most likely to be accomplished by those who have participated in
Technology Roadmapping and other ways of visualising future prospects are supported by improved tools, and Delphi and other methods for eliciting expert opinion are frequently put online.
I. Miles/Futures 43 (2011) 265 278 275 One of the biggestkmchallenges that confront FTA,
I. Miles/Futures 43 (2011) 265 278 276 safeguards and privacy-enhancing mechanisms...thereby encouraging people to accept
for example. 14 But such large-scale critical exercises and re-envisioning of the futures posited in major studies remains uncommon,
Strategic intelligence for an Innovative economy, Springer, Berlin, 2008.2 W. Bell, J. K. Olick, An epistemology for the futures field:
problems and possibilities of prediction, Futures 21 (2)( 1999) 115 135.3 A l. Porter, et al. Technology Futures analysis Methods Working group, Technology futures analysis:
Springer, Berlin, 2008.6 I. Miles, From Futures to Foresight, in: L. Georghiou, J. Cassingena Harper, M. Keenan,
the case of‘Future',Seville, First International EU US Seville Seminar on Future-oriented technology analysis, 2004 (available at http://forera. jrc. ec. europa. eu/fta/papers
I. Miles/Futures 43 (2011) 265 278 277 23 I. Miles, J. Cassingena Harper, L. Georghiou, M. Keenan, R. Popper, New Frontiers:
A Story of the Near and Far Future, Methuen, London, 1930.29 O. Stapledon, Star Maker, Methuen, London, 1937.30 O. Stapledon, Sirius:
. Cole, C. Freeman, M. Jahoda, K. L. R. Pavitt, Thinking about the Future, Chatto & Windus, London, 1973,
How Open is the Future? VUB Brussels University Press, Brussels, 2005. A. Eerola, I. Miles/Futures 43 (2011) 265 278 278
FTA and equity: New approaches to governance Cristiano Cagnin a,,*Denis Loveridge b, Ozcan Saritas b adg Joint research Centre Institute for Prospective Technological Studies, Calle Inca Garcilaso 3, 41092 Seville, Spain
Futures 43 (2011) 279 291 A r T I C L E I N F O Article history:
Contents lists available at Sciencedirect Futures journal homepage: www. elsevier. com/locate/futures 0016-3287/$ see front matter 2010 Elsevier Ltd.
All rights reserved. doi: 10.1016/j. futures. 2010.11.006 A short overview of the development of the present situation regarding governance sets the scene for the more detailed analysis of the relationship between governance
and each of three pillars mentioned above. The later discussion intends to enable the FTA COMMUNITY to reflect on how FTA ACTIVITIES can support the move towards more democratic societies and the potential impacts of FTA in governance.
and glocalisation and to the need to anticipate the future needs to manage risk and regulation.
exposing the hidden social consequences and concerns for the future of advances, real and imagined, of S&t though in very different ways.
/Futures 43 (2011) 279 291 280 both been disbanded under changing political regimes. Most recently, foresight studies have stormed onto the scene to become a global phenomenon.
a series of diagrams are used later to illustrate some of the issues that will need to be incorporated into any future mantra of governance and the evolution of S&t.
in ways that are responsive to the present and future needs of society. Sheng 9 claims that there are eight major characteristics to good governance:
/Futures 43 (2011) 279 291 281 As a counter-argument, Olsen 11 suggests that the process of governance may not always produce a precise and stable policy outcome.
and convergence since itempowers citizens actively to shape their future and encourages an integrated approach to development
and the possibilities of future generations to attend their own necessities. Sustainable development can be characterised as long term social learning oriented by public policies,
/Futures 43 (2011) 279 291 282 To achieve this goal, a base of knowledge and abilities that are technically feasible
allowing their renovation (in the case of renewable natural resources), in proportion to the needs of future generations.
/Futures 43 (2011) 279 291 283 CSR proponents have used four arguments to make their case 29:
/Futures 43 (2011) 279 291 284 CSR strategies may work under certain conditions 24, but they are highly vulnerable to market failures.
which have become the ethical roadmap for the future. At the same time socially responsible investment (SRI) has become mainstream
/Futures 43 (2011) 279 291 285 Corporate governance is then about strategic CSR, which integrates value chain social impacts and investments in competitive context;
/Futures 43 (2011) 279 291 286 beyond addressing global inequalities and cultural and religious divides.
as long-term investment in a firm's future competitiveness. The money already invested in CSR
/Futures 43 (2011) 279 291 287 business and society if consistently invested in social initiatives
/Futures 43 (2011) 279 291 288 community's readiness to address global issues and to building governance at a global level.
FTA can fulfil its role of supporting actors in society in shaping a common future based on a shared vision among all concerned.
/Futures 43 (2011) 279 291 289 References 1 D. Large, Participation and representation, A Review of Sustainability Here and now, in part of The Great Debate:
The Art and Science of Anticipating the Future, Routledge, New york, 2009.15 H. G. Daellenbach, Systems thinking & Decision making:
Exploring New Ways to Explore the Future, COST A22 Conference (CD: P042-T4), Athens, July 9 11 (Keynote paper), 2007.19 EC, Growing Regions, Growing Europe:
Our Common Future, 1987.22 M. Bursztyn, et al. C&t para o desenvolvimento sustenta'vel: formulac¸a o e implementac¸a o de poli'ticas pu'blicas compati'veis com os princi'pios do desenvolvimento sustenta'vel definidos
/Futures 43 (2011) 279 291 290 35 M. E. Porter, M. R. Kramer, The competitive advantage of corporate philanthropy, Harvard Business Review (2002.
/Futures 43 (2011) 279 291 291
The Big Picture trends, drivers, wild cards, discontinuities and weak signals Ozcan Saritas a,,*Jack E. Smith b a Manchester Institute of Innovation research, University of Manchester, Oxford Road, M13 9pl Manchester, UK b Federal Foresight & Innovation strategy, Defence
an opportunity to contribute to a value-adding Futures 43 (2011) 292 312 A r T I C L E I N F O Article history:
Futures experts (attendees of the FTA 2008 Conference) were invited to state their opinions on these questions by considering the trends, drivers, wilds cards,
discontinuities and weak signals likely to shape the future through the Big Picture Survey. The survey was launched 6 months prior to the Conference.
Global Futures Forum Vancouver April 2008, Europe@2025 European commission. Contents lists available at Sciencedirect Futures journal homepage:
www. elsevier. com/locate/futures 0016-3287/$ see front matter 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:
10.1016/j. futures. 2010.11.007 Foresight knowledge base regarding the directions and catalysts that are prompting our global future and its various contingencies and uncertainties.
The originators of this survey used the responses to lead a plenary discussion at the 2008 FTA Conference,
and to encourage reader to think about similar other Future-oriented examples from their own perspectives.
so it is deemed even more important to work toward a more commonly accepted set of definitions for purposes of future work in this area. 2. 1. Trends The starting point for scanning definitions is usually to identify the key trends which are presently evident in the broad sense of being both discernible
O. Saritas, J. E. Smith/Futures 43 (2011) 292 312 293 Potential trends Possible new trends grow from innovations, projects,
O. Saritas, J. E. Smith/Futures 43 (2011) 292 312 294 As one can see there are subtle differences from trends.
Drivers have real leverage on one's future flexibility and outcomes i e. if a driver goes one way
They are both presently accessible and future relevant. The concept of uncertainty enters again into the Foresight process
Arguably the best known work in wild cards comes from Petersen 7 author of‘‘Out of the blue How to Anticipate Big Future Surprises''.
Thinking about the Future. O. Saritas, J. E. Smith/Futures 43 (2011) 292 312 295 Building on Petersen's work, Barber 9 developed an additional wild cards
tool called a‘‘Reference Impact Grid''(RIG) which helps strategists and risk managers define vulnerabilities within a given system
O. Saritas, J. E. Smith/Futures 43 (2011) 292 312 296 Recent reports about accelerated arctic ice shelf melting and greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere
Sometimes it is referred as future oriented information, sometimes more like emerging issues. Hiltunen 16 has tried to clarify the confusion about the weak signal definitions
by combining signal, issue and interpretation in the concept of the‘‘future sign, ''which more holistically describes how these signals relate to change.
The tool is developed by the Finnish company Fountain Park. 5 Another tool for using weak signals in organizations is called the Futures Windows 5, in
and increase futures thinking and innovating in the organization. In general weak signals are messages and signs usually associated with early developments in technologies, societal innovations, conflicts, origins of conflicts, etc. that while not easily verifiable from a present day perspective.
or future trends, drivers or discontinuities. Weak signal examples In the 1980s the first mention was made of global warming and climate change;
/O. Saritas, J. E. Smith/Futures 43 (2011) 292 312 297 3. Big Picture Survey 3. 1. Motivation and approach Up until the Future-oriented technology analysis
The Scientific Committee of the FTA 2008 Conference heard that some attendees felt that an opportunity had been missed to discuss future Foresight determinants
2. Building on a survey of FTA Conference attendees-experts about critical trends, drivers, shocks-wildcards, discontinuities and weak signals, new insights can be gained about the state of Foresight and future uncertainties,
J. E. Smith/Futures 43 (2011) 292 312 298 e g. do those with more years of experience tend to use greater differentiation in their scoring?
O. Saritas, J. E. Smith/Futures 43 (2011) 292 312 299 The diagram illustrates that:
O. Saritas, J. E. Smith/Futures 43 (2011) 292 312 300 Table 2 Examples of trends.
O. Saritas, J. E. Smith/Futures 43 (2011) 292 312 301 years experienced groups. We believe that this strong contribution from the more experienced contributors supports the basic assumption behind the survey that such a gathering of experts would constitute a uniquely defined relevant cohort worthy of sampling
Clear belief that health-medicine, climate and the environment will be central to our futures and offer possibilities for improvements, sometimes through dramatic changes;
O. Saritas, J. E. Smith/Futures 43 (2011) 292 312 302 Fig. 7 shows the frequency distribution of drivers of change and the most widely cited ones.
O. Saritas, J. E. Smith/Futures 43 (2011) 292 312 303 Impact assessment. There was a general consensus among all respondents around the globe that around 65%of the drivers will have high impact
J. E. Smith/Futures 43 (2011) 292 312 304 affiliations expect high likelihood of occurrence.
O. Saritas, J. E. Smith/Futures 43 (2011) 292 312 305 include those identified in Table 4 that would have unknown implications because of they were to appear,
O. Saritas, J. E. Smith/Futures 43 (2011) 292 312 306 3. 2. 5. Discontinuities The orientations of discontinuities are represented with the following radar diagram
O. Saritas, J. E. Smith/Futures 43 (2011) 292 312 307 3. 2. 5. 1. Joint assessment of Foresight experience and discontinuities.
and deniers create discontinuity Global security issues rise, e g. nuclear crisis O. Saritas, J. E. Smith/Futures 43 (2011) 292 312 308 2016
O. Saritas, J. E. Smith/Futures 43 (2011) 292 312 309 Good response with 171 weak signals;
The respondents with a Foresight experience longer than 1 year expect most the majority of the weak signals to emerge in the medium term future (2016 2025),
J. E. Smith/Futures 43 (2011) 292 312 310 4. Conclusions and implications on policy and strategy The following implications from the outputs of the Big Picture Survey
and insights that can be used to guide future Foresight work and additional FTA surveys of this type or building upon this base.
6 J. Smith, Presentation at the Centre for Innovation studies, Thecis Breakfast Edmonton Alberta, January 13th, 2009.7 J. Petersen, Out of the blue How to Anticipate Big Future Surprises, Madison Books, 2000.8
K. Steinmueller, Thinking about The Future-Strategic Anticipation and RAHS by Risk assessment and Horizon scanning (RAHS), National Security Coordination Secretariat, Singapore, 2008.9 M. P. Barber,
Wildcards signals from a future near you, Journal of Future Studies 11 (2006) 1. 10 N. N. Taleb, The Black swan:
The Impact of the Highly Improbable, Random House Publishing, New york, 2007.11 P. van Notten, A m. Sleegersb, M. van Asselt, The future shocks:
O. Saritas, J. E. Smith/Futures 43 (2011) 292 312 311 13 K. Steinmueller, Wild cards for Europe, Z punkt, 2003.
O. Saritas, J. E. Smith/Futures 43 (2011) 292 312 312
Overtext Web Module V3.0 Alpha
Copyright Semantic-Knowledge, 1994-2011