and by widening the perspectives and knowledge base of researchers, policy-makers and business decision-makers. -be useful in creating a common language and understanding between the various interest groups.
For instance, developments in science and technology have a strong potential to influence social change. There are, however, many reasons why the practical use of scientific knowledge
The recent economic crisis reminds us of the importance of mobilizing science, technology and innovation not solely for generating economic benefits,
Section 3 describes how we conceptualize inspiring issues and paradigms from different scientific disciplines such as business and innovation research, futures studies, sociology and policy analysis.
This paper reports on the reflexive inquiry that originates from several workshops with scientists and practitioners where the case studies have been articulated
The concept of roadmapping has its roots in science and technology planning 55. A science or technology roadmap is like a highway roadmap that describes how one might proceed from a starting point to a final destination expressed as a vision.
Like a highway roadmap shows the intersections between roads a science or technology roadmap also shows the intersections between scientific steps or technologies 56.
A roadmap can take various forms, but generally comprises a time-based chart together with a number of layers,
(what) Framing boundaries Shaped by possibility Extreme to inform the middle Eventuality Backcasting from targets Shaped by probability S&t Roadmaps Predictive Backcasting from principles Shaped by preference The natural step Visionary Empowering stakeholders (who) Expert
. F. Coates, Future innovations in science and technology, in: L. V. Shavinina (Ed.),The International Handbook on Innovation, Pergamon, London, 2003.32 C. Leadbeater, We-Think:
the social construction of ignorance in science and environmental policy discourses, Econ. Soc. 41 (2012) 107 125.50 L. Borjesön, M. Hojer, K.-H. Dreborg, T. Ekvall, G. Finnveden, Scenario types and techniques:
The Fast Start to Technology Roadmapping, Planning Your Route to Success, Centre for Technology management, Ifm University of Cambridge, 2001.56 T. J. Gordon, S&t roadmapping, in:
Rev. 32 (2007) 1 20.74 S. Funtowicz, J. Ravetz, Science for the post-normal age, Futures 25 (1993) 735 755.75 A. Jetter, W
June 7th 2007.78 A. Stirling, A general framework for analysing diversity in science, technology and society, J. R. Soc.
His professional challenge is connecting science and policy. On a broad range of regional and EU projects, involving foresight and integrated assessment,
Ted Fuller is a business academic and currently Director of research for the Faculty of business and Law at the University of Lincoln (UK).
and define research and innovation agendas of established science industry networks. The aim of the paper is to show what problems/challenges with regard to the innovation system have been addressed and
Governance Emerging technologies Key enabling technologies Nanotechnology Public engagement Foresight Technology assessment Responsible research and innovation 1. Introduction As science and technology become more central to economic development,
different types of future-oriented technology analysis (FTA) are used to determine national science and technology priorities, to develop governance frameworks
since the U s. National science and Technology Council published its first vision for nanotechnology research and development and Germany established its public funding program.
but rather also in processes such as technology forecasting, technology assessment and participatory future-oriented studies, involving scientists, policymakers, media,
Many studies in the field of science and technology studies (STS) have shown that nanotechnology is as much a political as a cultural phenomenon 11 14.
and technology assessment studies included actors and knowledge mainly from science and industry 1, 19 22.
especially in science, technology and innovation policy-making, 28 the above mentioned activities can all be considered as FTA.
national-level technology foresight studies are seen not as a prominent activity in the science and technology landscape of the United states. The U s. stands virtually alone in specifically avoiding centralized S&t planning
even though advanced forward-looking activities are used 32. In contrast to the US, the German government has launched several technology foresight processes in the last decade 33,34.
the US science policy community established an organizational structure around nanotechnologies and developed a vision for nanotechnology R&d.
This started in 1998 when the National science and Technology Council (NSTC), the principal executive body responsible for coordinating science and technology policy,
The studies brought together science and technology assessment of different fields of what would then be called nanoscale science and technology.
Visits to leading research laboratories in Japan and Europe and workshops held in the United states, Europe,
and Russia were used to gather additional information for worldwide studies in the field of nanostructure science and technologies 37.
Over 150 participants and contributors from government, science, and industry were involved in developing the vision.
and no experts represented the social sciences, humanities, innovation studies, environmental studies or science and technology studies. At this stage, the FTA ACTIVITIES did not involve a broad range of stakeholders.
most scientists do not give credit to Drexler's contribution to nanotechnology and instead focus on Feynman as the genius behind the origins of the field 11 (C. Selin, Expectations and the emergence of nanotechnology, science, technology & human values,(2007) 196 220).
Historical analysis indicates that the process of drawing the boundary so as to exclude Drexler's ideas was connected closely with controversies around the question,
and the National science Foundation (NSF). 446 P. Schaper-Rinkel/Technological forecasting & Social Change 80 (2013) 444 452 support nanotechnology education, research and development the fastest will thrive in the new millennium 1. These statements illustrate that the report
which can be characterized as a model of linear and science-driven innovation. In this model, technology results from research whereas society has to adapt to technology to make its applications successful.
the Nanoscale Science, Engineering and Technology (NSET) Subcommittee of the NSTC Committee on Technology (which succeeded the IWGN) called for the involvement of social scientists across the board 38
and presented a vision for progress in nanotechnology from 2010 to 2020 3. Besides redefining the R&d goals for nanoscale science and engineering integration,
Mihail C. Roco, Senior Advisor for Nanotechnology at the National science Foundation (NSF) recounted the history
and was dominated by a science-centric ecosystem. The second foundational phase (2011 2020) is planned to be focused on the integration of nanoscale science
and engineering and the mass use of nanotechnology. The related future governance will be oriented on a user-centric ecosystem
the activities under the umbrella of the National science and Technology Council Subcommittee were per se closely policy-related and, in the last decade,
Over more than a decade, the US science policy community established a continuously working core organization, built up a network and opened the network gradually to new stakeholders
conducting studies on specific nano-subfields and by bringing together relevant actors from science and industry through workshops and expert discussion 6. Technology intelligence, technology assessment,
They were established to bridge the gap between science and industry from the very beginning of R&d activities 48.
and science. 7 These early network activities did not involve other ministries or government agencies, as opposed to the US case.
value chain-oriented collaborative projects with partners from science and industry. They focus on the following areas:
These unrelated processes cover dialogues at the federal and state levels as well as stakeholder dialogues and processes of public understanding of science and technology 50.
In summary, for over a decade, the German variety of FTA ACTIVITIES was governed mainly by one ministry (BMBF) and focused largely on science industry relations.
and this institutional fragmentation can also be observed with regard to the governance of science, technology and innovation in the field of nanotechnology. 4. Comparing the US and Germany 4. 1. Timing and intervention Between the late 1980s and the late 1990s,
But only in the end of the 1990s were disconnected the formerly fields of nanoscale science and engineering brought together under the broader umbrella definition of nanotechnology.
science, and industry. Later processes included expertise from a broader range of disciplines and in the case of the US a growing recognition to include a wider range of stakeholders
The US Interagency Working group on Nanoscience, Engineering and Technology (IWGN) published a worldwide study on Nanostructure Science and Technology in 1999.
and have influenced also greatly stakeholders and researchers outside the government. The vision-building process of 2010 served as an instrument to pool and coordinate FTA ACTIVITIES among government departments, agencies, and research communities.
These early activities brought together the formerly unconnected fields of nanoscale science and engineering under a broad definition of nanotechnology and served as the foundation in developing long-term R&d visions and strategies.
such as public engagement activities organized by researchers in the US or dialogues organized by the German Nanokomission were involving increasingly other stakeholders such as non-governmental organizations and citizens.
References 1 NSTC, National science and Technology Council, Nanotechnology research directions: IWGN workshop report, Vision for Nanotechnology research and Development in The next Decade, 1999.2 BMBF, Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung, in:
Towards a Common Strategic Framework for EU. COM (2011) 48, Green Paper, European commission, Brussels, 2011.5 NSTC, National science and Technology Council, IWGN, E. A t.,The Interagency
Working group on Nanoscience, Nanostructure Science and Technology, in: A Worldwide Study, 1999.6 G. Bachmann, in:
Transf. 34 (2009) 320 342.9 M. C. Roco, Nanoscale science and engineering: unifying and transforming tools, AICHE J. 50 (2004) 890 897.10 M. Roco, Possibilities for global governance of converging technologies, J. Nanopart.
Sociology of the Sciences Yearbook, Springer, 2010.15 R. A w. Rhodes, Understanding governance: ten years on, Organ.
VDI, Düsseldorf, 1994.20 POST, Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology policy, in: Making it in Miniature Nanotechnology Report Summery, POST, Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology policy, London, 1996, p. 4. 451 P. Schaper-Rinkel/Technological forecasting & Social Change
80 (2013) 444 452 21 I. Malsch, Nanotechnology in Europe: Experts'Perceptions and Scientific Relations Between Sub-areas, Brussels Luxembourg, Institute for Prospective Technological Studies, 1997.22 National science and Technology Council, Nanotechnology, in:
Shaping the World Atom by Atom, 1999, p. 12 S, Washington. 23 L. M. Pytlikzillig, A j. Tomkins, Public engagement for informing science and technology policy:
what do we know, what do need we to know, and how will we get there?
International Handbook on Foresight and Science policy: Concepts and Practice, 2008, pp. 154 169.33 K. Cuhls, From forecasting to foresight processes new participative foresight activities in Germany, J. Forecast. 22 (2003) 93 111.34
science fiction as science, Configurations 10 (2002) 261 296.36 S. Kaplan, J. Radin, Bounding an emerging technology:
Sci. 41 (2011) 457 485.37 NSTC, National science and Technology Council, Nanostructure Science and Technology, R&d Status and Trends in Nanoparticles, Nanostructured Materials,
NSET Workshop Report, National science Foundation (NSF), 2001.39 E. Fisher, Lessons learned from the Ethical, Legal and Social Implications program (ELSI:
Handbook of Science and Technology studies, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass, 2008, pp. 979 1000.44 D. H. Guston, D. Sarewitz, Real-time technology assessment, Technol.
Soc. 24 (2002) 93 109.45 NSTC, National science and Technology Council, Committee on Technology, Subcommittee on Nanoscale Science Engineering and Technology, The National Nanotechnology Initiative:
Small Matter, Many Unknowns, 2004, p. 57s, Zürich. 56 B. Wynne, Public participation in science and technology:
towards an epistemological shift in the public understanding of science and technology, Public Underst. Sci. 19 (2010) 274 292.58 E. Altvater, B. Mahnkopf, The world market unbound, Rev.
Dr. Petra Schaper-Rinkel, political scientist, is a senior scientist and scientific project manager at the AIT Austrian Institute of technology in Vienna.
One prominent example is the case of priority setting for science, technology and innovation policy a highly relevant domain of foresight activities.
Sustainability researchers are emphasising that optimisation of current patterns of production and consumption is not sufficient to achieve the order of magnitude in reduction of ecological footprint required to preserve the earth's eco-sphere.
The majority of the participants were researchers, consultants, and inventors but a couple of people fromindustry and two policy-makers also took part.
but also due to the focussed and clear description and the perceived novelty of at least some of the visions (Figs. 5 and 6). The expert interviews were carried out by different researchers from the project consortium.
Innovation Leadership Forum, UK (Russia) Three seminars in the framework of international conferences with researchers and company representatives in Nürnberg, London and Exeter) 4. City-driven systemic
France Drafting of Citizens Agency in a visioning session in Brussels with actors in social innovation a Citizens Visions in Science and Technology FP7 SSH project. b Cradle to Cradle:
Philine Warnke is a researcher in the Foresight & Policy development Department of the Austrian Institute of technology (AIT) in Vienna.
Jennifer Cassingena Harper b a Manchester Institute of Innovation research, Manchester Business school, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK b Malta Council for Science and Technology, Kalkara, Malta
New tendencies include a heightened search for breakthrough science and a focus on grand societal challenges.
As it was observed long ago by researchers at Fraunhofer ISI, the research policy landscape evolves less by displacement of the old by the new
For science the need to demonstrate impact dominates the policy agenda in some countries and even the most responsive-mode oriented of European programmes,
For FTA ACTIVITY breakthrough science is less something to be anticipated 2 From the well-known quote by the former US Secretary of defense,
The tendency is also visible in the United states where the White house Office of Science and Technology policy has as its first goal to:
Ensure that Federal investments in science and technology are making the greatest possible contribution to economic prosperity, public health, environmental quality,
In the taxonomy of transformations emerging at the conference 14, the distinction made by a European Science Foundation working group between recognised
)( 2011) 229 231.7 A. Geim, Curiosity-driven science: philanthropy or economic necessity, in: Plenary Address to European commission Innovation Convention, 2011.8 L. Georghiou, J. Cassingena Harper and F. Scapolo op cit. 9 L. Georghiou, J. Cassingena Harper
Luke Georghiou is Professor of Science and Technology policy and Management in the Manchester Institute of Innovation research at Manchester Business school.
Jennifer Cassingena Harper is a consultant providing advice on research and innovation policy and strategy to the Malta Council for Science and Technology.
terminologies and expected outcomes could undermine the utility of such gatherings for both researchers and policy makers.
without systematizing the knowledge accumulated into the kinds of sense making frameworks that enable researchers and policy makers to share,
The seminal book Foresight in Science by Irvine and Martin analysed processes in France, West germany, the United states and Japan
Duprel and Keenan recently published a paper entitled‘Foresight for science and technology priority setting in a small country:
and more narrowly, on priority setting in science, technology and innovation policies. In the paper, we broadly adopt the European foresight Platform's definition of foresight as‘a systematic, participatory,
and priority setting in science, technology and innovation policies. 2. 1. Sociologists'and anthropologists'perception of culture Cultural differences and styles are very hard to quantify,
Denmark was not among the first countries to adopt foresight and similar systematic processes in policy making in science, technology and innovation policies or other policy areas.
science and technology have played traditionally a less important role in Denmark than in most of the comparable OECD countries.
and internationally recognised role in the political and wider public debate that concerns the potential and consequences of science and technology.
which also includes science and innovation policies. The combination of the widespread use of policy evaluations and the DBT's parliamentary technology assessment might have constituted a platform for policy making that would make the need for foresight less urgent.
the Danish research Council for Research policy recommended that the Ministry for Science consider utilising futures studies in affiliation with its strategy processes 28.
In this study, technology foresight was defined as‘‘dialogue activities and analyses of long-term developments in science, technology, economy and society with the aim of identifying technologies which may have economical and/or societal significance''29.
'1 Hence, technology foresight was seen to be part of the government's business policy and not, in particular, part of science policy,
L. B. Rasmussen/Futures 59 (2014) 5 17 11 the new Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation.
In addition the Minister of finance and the Minister for Science, Technology and Innovation participated. From April 2005 to April 2006, the Globalisation Council held 15 meetings.
The task of coining out the priorities that was identified in the catalogue was given to the Danish Agency for Science Technology and Innovation (DASTI.
R. Martin, Foresight in Science: Picking the Winners, Pinter Publishers, London, 1984.8 J. Crehan, J. Cassingena Harper, Foresight in smaller countries, in:
Handbook of Technology foresight, Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham, UK, 2007.9 F. Glod, C. Duprel, M. Keenan, Foresight for science and technology priority setting in a small country:
Et prioriteringsgrundlag for strategisk forskning, Danish Ministry for Science, Technology and Innovation, Copenhagen, 2008p.91. P. D. Andersen, L. B. Rasmussen/Futures 59 (2014) 5 17 17
the researcher trained the officials in the use of the scenario analysis method, while in the Overschie case, the researcher facilitated the scenario development
and application process and was one of the authors of the scenarios. One of the authors conducted both national level inquiries that were used as data sources for this article.
can provide a relevant starting point. 2. 4. A‘glocal'impact orientation Many researchers specialised in international management 20,21 have argued for‘glocalization'as the transformation of global and local interests into a new
Future-oriented technology analysis Strategic intelligence for an Innovative economy, Springer-verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2008.11 T. Ko nno la, K. Haegeman, Embedding foresight in transnational research programming, Science and Public policy 39
) 219 235.17 C. Cagnin, E. Amanatidou, M. Keenan, Orienting EU innovation systems towards grand challenges and the roles that FTA can play, Science and Public policy 39 (2012) 140
and sector (i e. the European forest sector) that aimed to create an international research agenda, based on the recognition of long-termchallenges of this sector and the identification of gaps and opportunities in wood material science and engineering.
This is especially the case for implementations around Emerging s&t fields. These depend on strategies requiring coordination of research activities from different research actors,
and management and organisation of science. These disciplines could provide frameworks to analyse some of the advantages and benefits of FTA APPROACHES.
globalisation and the accompanying mobility of students and scientists; the impacts of new technologies (e g. the impacts of the internet on teaching;
Former member of the Executive Committee of the European Science and Technology observatory (ESTO network) and of the Scientific Steering committee of The European Techno-Economic policy Support Network (ETEPS.
*Ozcan Saritas c, d, Dimitri Schuurman b, Laurence Claeys b, Lieven De Marez b a Department of Telematics, Norwegian University of Science and Technology
, O. S. Bragstads Plass 2a, 7491 Trondheim, Norway b iminds-MICT, Department of Communication Sciences, Ghent University, Korte Meer 7-9-11
Department of Telematics, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, O. S. Bragstads Plass 2a, 7491 Trondheim, Norway.
and finally the recognition of the close relationship between Science, Technology and Society due to the limits to the‘plasticity'of the society,
In most cases however, researchers need to fall back on secondary sources 28 which makes it more difficult to distinguish empirical observations from assumptions.
The cultural probing method allows researchers to gather subjective information from the users in an everyday context.
learning from science and technology studies, in: C. Cagnin, M. Keenan, R. Johnston, F. Scapolo, R. Barre'(Eds.
Lente, The Sociology of expectations in Science and Technology, Technology analysis & Strategic management 18 (2006) 285 298.18 P. den Hertog, R. Smits, The Co-evolution of Innovation theory, Innovation Practice
Challenges of user involvement in future technology analysis, Science and Public policy 37 (2010) 51 61.20 C. Lettl, User involvement competence for radical innovation, Journal of Engineering and Technology management
Proceedings of the 2010 43rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, IEEE Computer Society, 2010.23 E. Von Hippel, Lead users:
a source of novel product concepts, Management Science 32 (1986) 791 805.24 B. Katrien, S. Dimitri, M. Lieven De, Adoption versus use diffusion
despite the awareness that both researchers and executives have that organisational performance is linked directly to an alignment between Futures 59 (2014) 50 61 A r T I C L E I N F O
Future-oriented technology analysis Strategic intelligence for an Innovative economy, Springer, Heidelberg, 2008.40 C. Cagnin, E. Amanatidou, M. Keenan, Orienting EU innovation systems towards grand challenges and the roles that FTA can play, Science
lessons from initiating policy dialogues on emerging issues, Science and Public policy (2012)( forthcoming. 49 T. Ko nno la, A. Salo, C. Cagnin, V. Carabias, E. Vilkkumaa, Facing the future:
scanning, synthesizing and sense-making in horizon scanning, Science and Public policy (2012)( forthcoming. 50 C. Bezold, C. Bettles, C. Juech, E. Michelson, J. Peck, K. Wilkins, Foresight for Smart Globalization:
However, we ensured that at least one researcher acted solely as an observer in both cases.
and living labs Let researchers and engineers test and modify products in close collaboration with end-users in a real-life
a new perspective on learning and innovation, Administrative Science Quarterly 35 (1990) 128 152.27 S. A. Zahra, G. George, Absorptive capacity:
15 (1995) 241 257.37 R. Cowan, N. Jonard, J.-B. Zimmermann, Bilateral collaboration and the emergence of innovation networks, Management Science 53 (2007
Connecting Hard Sciences with Soft Values, Elsevier, Amsterdam/Oxford, 2007.49 Rijkswaterstaat, Waterinnovationen WINN, Ministerie van Verkeer en Waterstaat Waterinnovationen, The hague, 2011.50
Science and Public policy February 2010 0302-3427/10/010003-04 US$12. 00 Beech tree Publishing 2010 3 Science and Public policy, 37 (1 february 2010, pages
The contributors to this special section of Science and Public policy believe that forward-looking approaches need further tailoring
karelherrmanhaegeman@ec. europa. eu. Dr Jennifer Harper is at the Malta Council for Science and Technology, Villa Bighi, Kalkara CSP 12, Malta;
Introduction Science and Public policy February 2010 4 anticipate and shape future technological developmennts mainly, technology foresight, technology forecasting and technology assessment.
Dr Jennifer Cassingena Harper is the director of policy within the Malta Council for Science and Technology with responsibility for national research and innovation strategy and foresight.
and application of the ways that science and technology contribute to economic and social development, of the possibilities for managing research and technology more effectively,
Roadmapping Backcasting, technology/product roadmapping, science mapping multipath mapping (Robinson and Propp, 2006) Scenarios Scenario management, quantitatively based scenarios, different emphases and dark scenarios (Punie et al.
2006), science theatres, video (Steyaert et al. 2006; Decker and Ladikas, 2004) Valuing/decision-aiding/economic analyses Cost-benefit analysis, SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities,
trend impact analysis Introduction Science and Public policy February 2010 5 Six functions of FTA for policy-making are:
The papers selected for this special section of Science and Public policy explore how both public
**Introduction Science and Public policy February 2010 6 scans in the UK, The netherlands and Denmark, as developed in the ERA NET Forsociety Project.
Their analysis is based on the results of two surveys of selected international foresight practitiioner and leading foresight organisations, conduccte by Canada's Office of the National science Advisor and the Telfer School of management at the University of Ottawa,
Bridges between Science Society and Policy. Technology assessment: Methods and Impacts. Springer: Berlin, Heidelberg, New york. Eerola, A and I Miles 2008.
Science and Public policy February 2010 0302-3427/10/010007-12 US$12. 00 Beech tree Publishing 2010 7 Science and Public policy, 37 (1 february 2010, pages
Culture and Science neithhe those of the other partners involved in the project. This paper is reworked a version of a paper presented at the Third International Seville Seminar on Future-Oriented Technollog Analysis:
Joint horizon scanning Science and Public policy February 2010 8 Horizon scanning is the systematic examination of potential future) problems, threats,
and sciennc and technology (S&t) foresight and other FTA TOOLS by its wide scope and its function to envisage the complexity of future societal problems
Defence S&t Agency Singapore, 2009; Spring et al. 2007; Quiggin, 2007. Other examples were initiated by ministries or departments,
Departmental Victor van Rij is senior advisor foresight of the Knowledge Directtorat of the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science in The netherlands.
Denmark and the Netherlannds Before he became the senior advisor he assisted the national coordinator for science and technology foresight of The netherlands Royal Academy of Science.
and across disciplinary and departmental borders (cutting across different policy domains) Joint horizon scanning Science and Public policy February 2010 9 horizon scans can be narrower in scope (only looking for new technologies),
Horizon scanning on the national level, across all policy areas (including S&t opportunities) is a receen development
) The Government office of Science in the UK started its national horizon scanning in 2004.6 This activity covers a wide range of S&t forecasts (Delta Scan) and future developments across all policy domains (Sigma Scan.
7 In the same year, the Netherlands8 started a national horizon scanning activity that covered a wide range of (potential) futuur problems, threats and opportunities in all poliic domains (societal sectors) and in S&t.
focusing on the societal needs of the future and Emerging s&t. NISTEP (2005) in Japan executed a scanning-like activity during 2005,
and provides a broad scan of S&t developments and opportunities. The NISTEP exercise combines this broad-scope foresight with a thorough analysis of strengths and weaknesses of Japanese research and development (R&d
Well-known examples include the Internaationa Council for Science (2002) exercise that focused on societal issues and research agenda settiin and also its foresight analysis (International council for science, 2004.
Joint horizon scanning Science and Public policy February 2010 10 Joining up the data To compare the data of the different scans
S&t (including S&t policy; economy and finance (including its governance; environment (ecological; and politics and public services.
A Table 2. Subcategories Society S&t Economy and finance Environment (ecological) Politics, government, public services Social values S&t reflection Market Hydrosphere Legitimacy-democracy
Demographicsl S&t policy-governance Labour Geosphere and landscape Law and legislation Life styles families Psychology Finance tax Atmosphere Security Labour leisure Physics Outer space Health
system NBIC Educational system Nanotech and science Agri-food supply ICT mathematics Infrastructures Mathematics Armed forces ICT Geology Engineering Economics Chemistry Biology
and education S&t development Economical context/finance Economics Economy Physical environment Environment Nature Resources Political, administrative and legal Public services Politics State Global Joint horizon scanning Science and Public policy February 2010 11 first discussion with this network was held
in March 2007 and a second in October 2007. The possible use of the horizon scan data at the European commission (EC) level was discussed in interviews with representattive of different directorates within the EC.
but also for promising opportunities, some of which may originate in new or Emerging s&t findings and insights. All the scans are designed to generate themes and questions that cross policy domaain and research disciplines,
while the Delta Scan of the S&t developments was carried out by the Institute for the Future.
and develop resilient policies towards sustainability Joint horizon scanning Science and Public policy February 2010 12 discussions with representatives from different ministrries The primary data for The netherlands scan were collected by the COS Horizon scanning team
After completion, clusters that cover a variety of policy domains and scientific disciplines were forwarded to some essay writers.
Review phase Delivery phase Research phase OST Horizon scanning Centre Figure 1. Schematic design of UK horizon scan Joint horizon scanning Science and Public policy February
2010 13 public, companies, researchers, universities and organisaations Preselection of prioritised themes took place within an expert group that delivered input for a workshop with a user panel
and to cover all policy domains and science disciplines. In all horiizo scans, organisations and individuals were alloowe to make contributions.
Morton Wied Joint horizon scanning Science and Public policy February 2010 14 responsible, whatever its political constitution. Issuue were selected on the basis of indications in the literature of either positive and/or negative impact on these values.
and identify the implications of Emerging s&t and enable others to act on them. COS was the umbrella organisation of the so-called sector councils for R&d that were established by Dutch law during the 1980s to provide strategic knowledge questions for departmental policies in a number of policy domains (environment, agriculture, health,
and has been provisionally realloccate to the newly formed Knowledge Directorate of the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science.
which is acknowledged in the research 2015 document (Daniis Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation, 2008) that sets the stage for research prioritisation in Denmark for the coming four years in a clear relationnshi to the challenges facing
The report contained recommendations for Joint horizon scanning Science and Public policy February 2010 15 specific foresight activities which still have to be executed.
The netherlands scan contained significantly fewer issuue in the societal domain and the Danish in the S&t domain than the others.
scans Society 18.5 22.4 7. 5 15.6 S&t 16.4 8. 8 15.1 13.7 Economy/finance 21.2 21 6 18.9 20.5 Environment
which contains about 100 S&t issues, the comparison shows that the Dutch scan somehow seems to fall short on issues from the society domain Joint horizon scanning Science
and Public policy February 2010 16 weak signals and wild cards that may be used to assees the robustness of results that may come from other forward-looking tools as planning, scenarios and quantitative modelling.
The EC recently approved different blue sky projects that focus on these questions like the Citizen Visions on Science,
15 the Searching Emerging science and Technology project (SESTI) 16 and the I-KNOW projeec that both focus more on new methodologies to identify
Finally, the handling of science issues in the scans requires a careful approach. This should balance the need for scientific scrutiny
The successful approach to this taken by the UK's Delta Scan was to seek the views of 250 leading scientists
and members of the S&t community through an online Delphi-like survey facilitated by a wiki.
and evoking important questiion around the future than in providing clear-cut Joint horizon scanning Science and Public policy February 2010 17 answers (Medina Vasquez, 2006).
the Danish Agency for Science Technology and Innovatiio (DASTI), the UK Horizon scanning Centre, the Commisssi van Overleg Sectorraden voor Onderzoek en Ontwikkeling (COS), the Malta Council
for Science and Technollog (MCST) and PREST (University of Manchester, UK). ) 3. The comparison is given based on the documentation,
Finnsight 2015, the outlooo for science technology and society. Summary available from<http://www. aka. fi/Tiedostot/Tiedostot/Julkaisut/Finnsight 2015 en. pdf>,last accessed 1 june 2009.
Evaluation, Impact and Learning, Anchor paper Theme 2. Paper presented at Second joint horizon scanning Science and Public policy February 2010 18 International Seville Seminar on Future-oriented technology analysis:
Danish Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation 2008. RESEARCH2015 A Basis for Prioritisation of strategic Reseaarch Available from<http://en. fi. dk/publications/publications-2008/research2015-a-basis-for-prioritisation-ofstrattegicres/research2015-net. pdf
Defense Science and Technology agency Singapore 2009. Horizonsscan available at<http://www. dsta. gov. sg/index. php/943-DSTA-Horizons-2009>,last accessed 1 june 2009.
Methodology of Boundary work at the interface of science policy and society, basis for a manual, RMNO, ISBN 90.72377.62.1.
European commission, Directorate-General for Reseaarch Socioeconomic Sciences and Humanities. Available at<http://ec. europa. eu/research/social-sciences/pdf/reportthheworld-in-2025 en. pdf>
International council for science 2002. Identification of Key emerging Issues in Science and Society: an International Perspecctiv on National foresight Studies.
Paris: International council for science. Available at<http://www. icsu. org/Gestion/img/ICSU DOC DOWNLOAD/22 dd file spru07 02-Report. pdf>,last accessed 1 june 2009.
International council for science 2004. Foresight analysis. Available at<http://www. icsu. org/Gestion/img/ICSU DOC DOWNLOAD/371 dd file foresight analysis. pdf>,last accessse 1 june 2009.
In't Veld, R, H Maassen van den Brink, P Morin, V van Rij, H van der Veen and B Verlaan, 2007.
Horizon scan Report 2007, Towards a Future Oriented Policy and Knowledge Agenda. COS. Available from<http://www. horizonscan. nl/uploads/File/COS BINNENWERK%20engels 06 (1). pdf,
>last accessed 1 june 2009. Loveridge D 2002. The STEEPV acronym and process: a clarificattion ideas in progress, paper 29, Manchester, UK:
Science Valued! NWO Strategy 2007 2010. Available from<http://www. nwo. nl/files. nsf/pages/NWOA 6PXJ9W ENG/$file/wetens chap gewaarderd lowres eng. pdf>,last accessed 1 june 2009.
A Comprehensive analysis of Science and Technollog Benchmarking and Foresight, NISTEP report 99. Tokyyo NISTEP. Available from:<
Global Securiit Scan for Canadian Science Capabilities (2015 2020)- Report of Proceedings, Defence R&d Canada, Centre for Securrit Science.
Technology foresight directorate of the office of the national science advisor. Available from<http://www. techforesight. ca/Publications/Whatbroadsecuritychallenges Maycanadaface. pdf>,last accessed 1 june 2009. van Rij, V 2008.
Overtext Web Module V3.0 Alpha
Copyright Semantic-Knowledge, 1994-2011