Coping with a fast-changing world: Towards new systems of future-oriented technology analysis K. Matthias Weber1,,*Jennifer Cassingena Harper2, Totti Ko nno la 3 and Vicente Carabias Barcelo'4 1ait Austrian Institute of technology, Department of Foresight & Policy development, Donau-City
organisational and technological innovations at the three levels of FTA systems, to make FTA fit for the challenges of the future.
and demand-side measures to create innovation-friendly markets. Social and environmental challenges deal with the causes and consequences of issues such as climate change, food and energy security and the ageing society,
is an important driver of innovation and competitiveness, often requiring structural and systemic change and, in turn, necessitating the capacity to design
First, the traditional and best established forms of FTA focus on the anticipation of rather gradual change that may require adjustments of how innovation systems are wired up'and what thematic,
but the focus of attention has remained on research and innovation (R&i) policies, with greater attention being paid to the perspectives of societal stakeholders.
and networkking Papers with a strong emphasis on the innovation system, tend to also address other dimensions and their interplay with the coordination mode.
what happens in the innovation system before and after FTA is conducted. Rijkens-Klomp and van der Duin (2012) have illustrated that
or innovation systems compatible with the underpinning culture, institutional conditions and availabbl capacities and resources. Such observations lead to diverse forms of organisational setups for FTA.
‘Wiring up the innovation system'.'Stimulating national and regional economic development through innovation. Guiding and/or complementiin competition and integratiio oriented governance.
Designing research policy and strategy with broad aim of selecting priorities for research investments and cooperation of R&i actors.
Networking to address open innovation Emerging rationales for FTA. Improving the robustness and dynamics of the R&i ecology to address (global) disruptions and engineer breakthroughs.
Mission-oriented to tackle societal challenges by engineeriin radical socio-technical innovations. Emerging disruptions. Enhancing policy coordination through FTA.
technology and innovation (STI) policies and achieving impact on national innovation systems (NIS). They argue that external FTA services are useful
In particular Warnke (2011) recommends the use of strategic dialogues to foster the embedding of suggested‘future fields'into the national research, technology and innovation (RTI) landscaape Ahlqvist et al.
They suggest changing this anticipatory thinking by transforming the foresight process into a horizontal organisational function that permeaate all levels of the parallel innovation process.
and uncertainty Systemic view on innovation capabilities of society in which RTOS are pertinent nodes. Emphasis on coordination mode and its interactions with other governance modes Institutionalisation of FTA needs to be combined with network structures to attain:
and also horizontal and pervasiiv anticipatory culture‘Innovation policy roadmapping as a systemic instrument for policy design'Ahlqvist et al.
which engages stakeholders in innovation and policy roadmapping activities‘Linking territorial foresight and urban planning'Ferna'ndez Gu ell et al.
and embedding innovation priorities into innovation landscape and in particular policy strategies Various governance modes are addressed in examination of instituutiona change for uptake of foresight results in design of systemic innovation policy Discusses how the findings of foresight project are embedded in institutional structures and policy design 160.
K. M. Weber et al.‘‘intelligent piggybacking'approach is much more suitable for smaller catching-up economies than the traditional‘grand narratives'approach typically employed in larger advanced economies to define future developments at the cutting edge of a given field of technology.
Embedded and networked FTA facilities are particularly suitable to fulfil the following functions for innovation policy4 in such a dynamic context:.
However, the coordination mode of governance that seems to be on rise in Europe see for instance the debates on European Innovation Partnerships
FARHORIZON Innovation policy Workshop (Weber and Georghiou 2010) and ERAPRISM Policy Dialogue Brief on Innovation policy (Georghiou and Harper 2010),<http://farhorizon. portals. mbs. ac. uk
6. Europe 2020 Flagship Initiative Innovation Union,<http://ec. europa. eu/research/innovation-union/pdf/innovation-union-communication en. pdf>accessed 15 december
2011 (SEC 2010) References Ahlqvist, T.,Valovirta, V. and Loikkanen, T. 2012)‘ Innovation policy roadmapping as a systemic instrument for forward-looking policy design',Science and Public policy, 39
Cagnin, C.,Amanatidou, E. and Keenan, M. 2012)‘ Orienting European Innovation systems towards grand challenges and the roles that FTA can play',Science and Public policy, 39: 140 52.
'Report of the Independent Expert Group on R&d and Innovation appointed following the Hampton Court Summit
Georghiou, L. and Cassingena Harper, J. 2010)‘ Policy dialogue brief on innovation policy',Report from the ERAPRISM Project.<
2010)‘ Commission Staff Working Document A rationale for action, accompanying the Europe 2020 Flagship Initiative Innovation Union',COM (2010) 546, pp. 9 and 89,
<http://ec. europa. eu/research/innovation-union/pdf/rationale en. pdf#view=fit&pagemode=none>accessed 15 dec 2011.
Tiits, M. and Kalvet, T. 2011)‘ Foresight as an innovation policy tool in smaller catching-up economies:
Weber, M. and Georghiou, L. 2010)‘ Dynamising innovation policy: Giving innovation a central role in European policy',Farhorizon project report.<
<http://farhorizon. portals. mbs. ac. uk/Portals/73/docs/Farhorizon%20dynamising%20inno vation%20policy. pdf>accessed 15 dec 2011.
Weber, M.,Havas, A. and Schartinger, D. 2011)‘ Exploring the potential impact of FLA on national innovation systems,
and Honorary Research fellow, Manchester Institute of Innovation research, University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9pl, UK 2international Council for Science, 5 rue Auguste Vacquerie
Manchester Institute of Innovation research, University of Manchester. Keenan, M. and Miles, I. 2008)‘ Scoping and planning foresigght'In:
Innovation policy roadmapping as a systemic instrument for forward-looking policy design Toni Ahlqvist1,,*Ville Valovirta2 and Torsti Loikkanen2 1vtt Technical research Centre of Finland, Ita inen Pitka katu 4, Turku, P o box 106,20521 Turku, Finland 2vtt Technical research
toni. ahlqvist@vtt. fi The systemic characteristics of science, technology and innovation policies have been discussed much recently.
This paper presents innovation policy roadmapping (IPRM) as a methodologgica framework for linking R&d results to systemic policy contexts and to forward-looking policy design.
innovation policy; roadmapping; systemicity; forward-looking policy design; foresight; socio-technical transformation. 1. Introduction Since the 1960s, the results of R&d practices have increasinngl been approached as knowledge inputs in the construuctio of science and technology policies.
and along with the emergence of an emphasis on innovation policy in the 1990s, many new features,
like the perspectives of users, societal regulation and markets, have become core parts of science, technology and, now, innovation policies.
Because of these developments, in the 2000s it has become more common to talk about systemicity in the context of science, technology and innovation (STI) policies.
innovation is a systemic activity that:..involves a variety of actions within the system, of which the innovating organization
Therefore, not just innovation activities, but also the policy-making process could benefit from the use of‘systemic instruments'(Smits and Kuhlmann 2004:
foresight and forward-looking policy design The concept of a system has different emphases in different branches of the innovation literature.
First, the innovation system literature highlights those organizations that particiipat in the emergence, diffusion and embedding innovatiions such as universities, public and private R&d organizations, companies and various intermediate organizattions and the collective learning processes between these organizations (Smits et al. 2010).
Secondly, the literature on systemic innovations and transition managemeen emphasizes the dynamic relations of sociotechnoologica landscapes, socio-technical regimes and niche-level innovations in the context of emerging technologies (Geels and Schot 2007.
In this view, system failures are approached as outcomes of‘rigidities and mistakes of innovation agents'and‘a lack of linkages and fragmentatiio between innovation actors'(Georghiou and Keenan 2006:
like exploring future opportunities in order to set priorities for investment in science and innovation activities, reorienttin the science and innovation system, demonstrating the vitality of the science and innovation system, bringing new actors into the strategic debate,
and broadening the range of actors engaged in science and innovation policy. Weber et al. 2009: 955) argue that policy processes have gone through a conceptual shift in
which a linear model of policy-making has been replaced with a more learningbaase cyclical model. This observation means that policy-making is systemic in a double sense:
Innovation policy roadmapping. 179. Symbolic function, i e. that policy is based on informatiio that is shared and collaboratively interpreted.
Niche innovations build up internal momentum, through learning processes, price/performance improveements and support from powerful groups..
Destabilization of the regime creates windows of opportunity for niche innovations (Geels 2002,2005; Geels and Schot 2007;
In innovation policies a common vision is required, because, for example, commercialization of innovations is usually dependent on investments
and development activities realized by multiple actors. A joint vision can direct these interlinked activities towards joint goals
Particularly when developmeent commercialization and diffusion of innovation takes place in a context with a high degree of systemic characteristics
This is common, for example, in environmental innovation. Social and economic costs created by emissiion and pollution are not always easy to allocate to those who generate them.
such as public funding for R&d and innovation, support for technical standardizatiion intellectual property rights regulation and the provisiio of public technical infrastructure, can be applied.
The fifth way is to identify specific innovation targets, either singular technologies or logical temporal sequences, in the roadmap structure.
or the Innovation policy roadmapping. 181 system could also refer to a convergence of sectors, for example in the case of functional foods.
The key idea of a transformation roadmap is to connect the development of technologies and innovations to a wider societal sphere.
The fragmented structure of the industry, its value chains and business models create barriers to the adoption of new innovations.
Innovation in the constructiio sector therefore needs to be framed within the larger context of new business processes, contractual arrangemennts organizational culture,
The cyclical nature of the industry with its expectations of short-term profit discourages innovation, as both demand and profits are subject to strong variation (Squicciarini and Asikainen 2010).
Innovation policy roadmapping. 183 4. 2 Outline of the transformation roadmap In this case, the roadmap knowledge was crystallized in a transformation roadmap (Fig. 3). The working vision for the green and intelligent buildings roadmap,
Support for standardization is becoming accepted as a legitimate goal for government innovation policy as part of demand-oriented innovation support.
Standardization is a critical prerequisite for innovation because it influences technology development and contributte to innovation through shaping the way in
which new technologies are developed. A further policy proposal would be to catalyse government procurement of green buildings,
At the level of products and solutions, the support for collaborative R&d and facilitation of commercialization of research results were assessed as the main innovation policy practices.
Financial support for collaborative Industrial r&d will provide the basis for an innovation-driven construction industry, but should be offset by demandorieente innovation policy measures such as smart regulatiio and public procurement. 4. 2. 3 Sectoral development.
In this roadmap, sectoral development is divided into the themes of market and solutiions The present markets are fragmented and emphasiiz suboptimization by price.
Innovation policy roadmapping. 185 5. Case study 2: Roadmap of environmentally sustainable ICT, Finland 5. 1 Background The second case study is a roadmap of an emerging systemic field:
and technology roadmaps This example of environmentally sustainable ICT demonstrrate an innovation policy roadmap that is constructed of a systemic transformation roadmap and a technology roadmap
Innovation policy roadmapping. 187 role. The utilization of smart metering and sensor technologies could result in more elaborate energy consumpptio information,
It can also provide a more nuanced perspective of the temporal sequencing of the evolution of technology and innovation,
We conclude this paper by emphasising two related contribuution that the roadmapping approach can bring to innovation policy and forward-looking policy design.
First, innovation policy roadmapping contributes to enhancing the systemic benefits of foresight. Our conclusiion support the views of Georghiou
In addition, diffusion of innovations often depends on changes in infrastructure, information systems, organizational practices and social institutions.
R. 2010)‘ Value creation in innovation ecosystems: How the structure of technological interdependennc affects firm performance in new technology generations',Strategic management Journal, 31: 306 33.
Innovation policy roadmapping. 189 Eerola, A. and Loikkanen, T. 2009) Governance and Research of Nordic Energy system Transition-Summary Report of the Gorenest Project, VTT Research Notes 2505.
Linking technology resources into business planning',International Journal of Technology management, 26:12 9. Gann, D. and Salter, A. 2000)‘ Innovation in project-based, service-enhanced firms:
2004)‘ From sectoral systems of innovation to socio-technical systems. Insights about dynamics and change from sociology and institutional theory',Research policy, 33: 897 920..(
Transition management encounters environnmenta and innovation policy histories in Finland',Policy Sciences, 42: 409 27. Heracleous, L. and Jacobs, C. D. 2008)‘ Crafting strategy:
Smits, R. and Kuhlmann, S. 2004)‘ The rise of systemic instrumeent in innovation policy',International Journal of Foresight and Innovation policy, 1: 4 32.
Smits, R.,Kuhlmann, S. and Shapira, P.,eds,(2010) The Theory and Practice of Innovation policy:
Squicciarini, M. and Asikainen, A. 2010)‘ Sectoral innovation performance in the construction sector'.'Final report, task 1. Europe Innova, Innovation Watch.
World Business Council for Sustainable development. 2009) Energy efficiency in Buildings. Transforming the Market. Geneva: World Business Council for Sustainable development.
experiences from the innovation policy foresight and strategy process of the City of Vienna',Technology analysis and Strategic management, 21: 953 69.
Another driver for more collaboration is the increasing pressure in Europe1 and other parts of the world2 for research and innovation to both support competitiveness3 and offer solutions to global and local societal challenges.
and which now experiences increasing pressure to contribuut to innovation strategies and to engage more with business and the wider society.
If effective research and innovation are seen as part of the solution to these tensions, they also require alignment along these dimensions.
and all are part of the same research and innovation system. Co-ordination of research and innovation activities therefore needs to take into account possible links between different levels of transnational co-operation.
For instance, some programmes may require joint infrastruuctur investments, innovation clusters may benefit from links with coordinated programmes.
Positioning programme co-operation and co-ordination within this wider perspective shows the importance of aligning collaboraatio between different levels of S&t co-operation.
and followed by the identification of research/innovation topics and societal challenges. Programme design and initial funding commitments are made,
At the level of innovation clusters the recently established first knowledge and innovation communities (KICS) of the European Institute for Innovation and Technology (EIT) also face issues of governance, prioritisaatio and evaluation.
A recent evaluation14 of the EIT proposes to put in place‘robust procedures developed through a mutual learning process with the existing KICS'.
'The further development of transnational research and innovation collaboration is likely to benefit from conceptuua demarcation of different dimensions of the challenges.
authorities and autonomous Mobility and exchange of scientists Programme cooperation and coordination Institutional cooperation Project cooperation Exchange of S&t information Innovation/knowledge clusters 2 3
At present, research and innovation policies are challenged by global market conditions where Member States, regions or even industrial or local clusters compete for critical resourrces such as knowledge, human resources,
Indeed, today the research system is an integral part of the prevailing multilayered innovation system. Ko nno la et al.
regional and (international levels providing significant insights into the challennge of managing multilayered research and innovation systems.
Such challenges have been related to the systemic nature of innovation (Smits and Kuhlmann 2004), performmanc of innovation systems (Lundvall 1992;
The articulation of thematic priorities for transnational research and innovation co-operation, e g. from EU level, raises issues related to their coherence with the priorities and needs of lower levels of governance, particularly in terms of
In effect, the adoption of innovation as a crosscutting policy objectivvewhich is prominent even in sectorally oriented policies holds promise for the closer integration of innovattio and other policies.
Co-ordination-oriented research and innovation policy differs from other policy areas because it has to account for an especially cumbersome context and sector-specific differences.
In last two decades systemic challenges in research and innovation have lead to the development of systemic Embedding foresight in transnational research programming. 195 instruments for better preparedness, co-ordination and integrratio of research and innovation systems
innovation and other policy areas (such as competition, regional, financial, employment and education policies) Another organisation deals with international activities Problems with aligning financial resources and budget
and the mobilisation and networking of innovation communities across borders. The responsibles for the shaping of research agendas realised that a systematti participatory bottom up foresight process could streamline the engagement of Research and Technology development communities from eight countries.
support mobilising and networking of innovation communities across borders EMIDA ERA-NET21 29 partners (and three observers) of 19 EU Member States and Associated Countries 2008 11 Develop a durable focused network22 of national research funders in Member and Associated States of EU in order to share information,
business opportunities and needs for new co-operation structures Support identification of breakthrroug innovations on functions of cities in future (2020 50) Embedding foresight in transnational research programming. 197 3
scenarrio for long-term urban developments, an improved understanding of future trends and research needs, first concepts and recommendations for policy measures, a strengthening of the European research and innovation communities,
and innovation system using a multitude of instruments, research activities, infrastructuure and institutions. The composition of the research consortium may also help to support horizontal co-ordination,
and mobilising the innovation communities can be crucial for understanding (and enhancing) the capacities and capabilities of different countries to participate in joint programmes.
and implementation plans'depends on the envisaged role that is ascribed to a specific foresight activity in an evolving innovation environment.
and innovation systems Figure 3. Process and result flexibility in modular foresight design for transnational research programming. 202.
building on diverse statistical and policy support databases and the plethora of documentation from different levels of research and innovation systems.
a programme set up in connection with the Europe 2020 strategy (European commission 2010b) and European Innovation Partnerships (European commission 2010c).
or when the research and innovation systems and capacities of the countries involved are highly diverse. 5. Conclusions Recent efforts in transnational research programming indicate that the mobilising effect of embedded foresight activities can lead to novel networking and cross-feeding of research and innovation
public administration and civil society in different levels of research innovation systems set a major managerial challenge how to prepare,
horizon scanning and generation of innovation ideas among a wide and diverse set of stakeholders) can alleviate the risk of co-optation,
especially in cases where a culture of participation and of transnational research and innovation policy co-ordination is lacking.
Notes 1. See Europe 2020 (European commission 2010b) and the Europe 2020 Flagship Initiative Innovation Union (European commission 2010c.
A Strategy for American Innovation: Securing Our Economic growth and Prosperity.<<http://www. whitehouse. gov/innovation strategy>accessed 15 march 2012.3.
For an analysis of the link between innovation strategies and economic performance, see Dahlman (2008. 4. The four steps used by ERA NET (European research area-NET) are:.
systematic exchange of information and good practices on existing programmes and activities. identification and analysis of common strategic issues. planning and development of joint activities between national and regional programmes. implementation
'9. This platform aims at supporting the process for develoopin national/regional innovation strategies for smart specialisation that support the development of well-performing national or regional research and innovaatio systems,
Method of Coordination, COST, KICS, European Innovation Partnerships. Thematic instruments are the Standing committee on Agricultural Research (SCAR) in the field of agriculture,
Chioncel, M. and Cuntz, A. 2012)‘ Research and innovation challenges and policy responses in Member States'.
Dahlman, C. 2008)‘ Innovation strategies of three of the BRICS: Brazil, India and China: What can we learn from three different approaches?'
Edquist, C.,ed.,(1997) Systems Innovation: Technologies, Institutions and Organisations. London: Pinter. EMIDA. 2009)‘ Description of Work, Grant Agreement for Co-ordination and Support Actions (Coordinating) EMIDA, Annex 1, approved 31 january 2008 and updated 28 october 2009 (FP7 Theme
2010c)‘ Europe 2020 Flagship Initiative Innovation Union',COM (2010) 546 final. Commission..(2011)‘ National open access and preservation policies in Europe',Directorate-General for Research and Innovation, Directorate B European research area, Unit B. 6 Ethics and gender.
Brussels: European commission..(2012)‘ Forlearn Online foresight Guide',<http://www. foresight-platform. eu/community/foresightguide/>accessed 15 march 2012.
2011) External Evaluation of the European Institute of Innovation and Technology (May 2011), Framework Contract on evaluation and related services (EAC 03/06), Final report on evaluation.<
The open method of co-ordination in innovation policy',Journal of European Public policy, 11: 249 66.
Lundvall, B.-A°.,ed.,(1992) National systems of Innovation: Towards a Theory of innovation and Interactive learning. London: Pinter.
European Institute for Innovation and Technology. Niehoff, J. and Andersdotter, C. 2007)‘ Report on the Workshop for ERA NETS on industrial technologies',<http://netwatch. jrc. ec. europa. eu/static/download/Report%20workshop
Optimat Ltd and VDI/VDE-Innovation+Technik Gmbh for DG Research Directorate M2. 2005)‘ Examining the design of national research programmes'.
Reid, A.,Miedzinski, M.,Bruno, N. and le Gars, G. 2007)‘ Synergies between the EU 7th Research Framework programme, the Competitiveness and Innovation Framework programme and the Structural Funds',Policy
Reflections from the Finnish food and drink industry',International Journal of Foresight and Innovation policy, 1: 70 88.
Smits, R. and Kuhlmann, S. 2004)‘ The rise of systemic instrumeent in innovation policy',International Journal of Foresight and Innovation policy, 1: 4 32.
Institute of Innovation research, MBS, Harold Hankins Building, University of Manchester, Manchester, M13 9pl, UK 2tno, Wassenaarseweg 56,2333 AL Leiden, The netherlands 3eu DG
thus providing a more evidence-based approach to research and innovation policy (Georghiou 2007). The main focus of this activity has been to address new and emerging technological areas that may have an impact on social, economic,
innovation, emerging, issues, impact, change, future, emerging, promising, threatening, solutioons discoveries, problems, crisis, tensions, growth, breakthroughs, breakdowns,
The key conceep for innovation journalism',Innovation Journalism, 2/11<www. innovationjournalism. org>accessed 13 march 2012.
as a means of preparing for the development of the Europe 2020 strategy and related policy initiatives such as the EC Communication on the Innovation Union.
demography, migration and health. economy, trade and financial flows. environment, energy, climate change and agriculture. research, innovation and (e)- education.
The final report (Boden et al. 2010) has been referenced in the Communication on the Innovation Union (SEC 2010),
and has served as an input to the recent EC Communication on the Innovation Union. Overall, it appears the methodological approach in this exercise which had well-defined phases for the systematic‘bottom-up'scanning of issues
Blackburn, S.,Cudd, P. and Hawley, M. 2010)‘ A horizon scanning system for identifying new telehealth innovations',Global Telemedicine and ehealth Updates:
Foresight for research and innovation policy and strategy',Futures, 43: 243 51. Glenn, J. C.,Gordon, T. J. and Florescu, E. 2010) State of the Future, The Millenium Project.
Experiences on an innovation platform in European agenda setting'in Proceedings of the FTA 2011 Conference, Seville,<http://foresight. jrc. ec. europa. eu/fta 2011/>accessed 26 september 2011.
The limitations of environmental management systems for innovation',Journal of Business strategy and the Environment, 16: 525 37.
Insights from the fostering of innovation ideas',Technological forecasting and Social Change, 74: 608 26.230. T. Ko nno la et al.
Martin, B. and Johnston, R. 1999)‘ Technology foresight for wiring up the national innovation system: Experiences in Britain, Australia and New zealand',Technological forecasting and Social Change, 60:37 54.
Commission Staff Working Document A Rationale for Action, Accompanying the Europe 2020 Flagship Initiative Innovation Union COM (2010) pages 9 and 89,
<http://ec. europa. eu/research/innovation-union/pdf/rationale en. pdf#view=fit&pagemode=none>,accessed 16 september 2011.
*Alexander Bunkowski2 and Lothar Behlau2 1fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation research, Breslauer Straße 48,76139 Karlsruhe,
Fraunhofer's mission is to conduct innovation-oriented research for the benefit of private and public enterprises as well as society in general.
journals. permissions@oup. com which is to conduct innovation-oriented research for the benefit of private and public enterprises,
EU 2011 or the different definitions given during the presentations at the Innovation Convention, held 5 6 december 2011 in Brussels). Some institutions and companies have lists of megatrends and regard them as global challenges.
it is useful to consider the specifics of the‘Fraunhofer innovation system 'and the role of strategic R&d planning at the corporate level within this system.
'At the end of the 2005 and 2008 FTA PROCESSES, 12 innovation topics, that became 12 Fraunhofer future topics were defined.
Therefore, every research organisation and every actor in the innovation system has to position itself or himself in 236.
The team selecting the grand challenges consisted of members from the headquarters in Munich and from the Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation research in Karlsruhe.
Innovation. Wachstum. Hightech-Strategie 2020 fu r Deutschland'.'Bonn/Berlin: Bundesministerium fu r Bildung und Forschung,<http://www. hightech-strategie. de/de/81. php>accessed 20 july 2011.
Office for Official Publications of the EU. Cuhls, K.,Blind, K. and Grupp, H. 2002) Innovations for our Future.
Technology, Innovation and Policy, Series of the Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation research, No. 13.
The Framework programme for Research and Innovation, COM (2011) 808 final. Brussels: European commission. Glenn, J. C.,Gordon, T. J. and Florescu, E. 2009)‘ 2009 State of the Future;
Future radar 2030 (Zukunftsradar 2030)',International Journal of Foresight and Innovation policy, forthcoming special issue. Lund Declaration.
< Back - Next >
Overtext Web Module V3.0 Alpha
Copyright Semantic-Knowledge, 1994-2011