experiences from the innovation policy foresight and strategy process of the City of Vienna K. Matthias Weber a, Klaus Kubeczko a, Alexander Kaufmann a & Barbara Grunewald a a Austrian Institute of technology, Department Foresight
experiences from the innovation policy foresight and strategy process of the City of Vienna, Technology analysis & Strategic management, 21:8, 953-969, DOI:
experiences from the innovation policy foresight and strategy process of the City of Vienna K. Matthiasweber*,Klaus Kubeczko, Alexander Kaufmann and Barbara Grunewald Austrian Institute of technology, Department Foresight and Policy development, Vienna
and strategy process to revisit its urban research and innovation policy. This process undoubtedly had a major impact on policy;
objectives and results of the Viennese innovation policy foresight and strategy process and the different impact dimensions will be analysed
innovation policy; policy impact 1. Introduction In 2006, the City of Vienna initiated a far-reaching and open strategy process on the orientation of its future research, technology and innovation (RTI) policy.
The aim was to develop, in a participatory process, a comprehensive strategic framework as well as concrete proposals for*Corresponding author.
By then, Vienna is aiming to be among Europe's leading metropolitan areas in research, technology and innovation,
and its key characteristtics The concluding section will synthesise some of the most interesting insights that could be gained from the experience of the project. 2. Framework for the impact assessment of foresight processes1 2. 1. Changing insights into processes of innovation and policy making
the late 1970s saw the emergence of a new paradigm in research, technology and then also innovation policies,
which were characterised by a focus on shaping framework conditions that are conducive to innovation. This‘hands off'approach has evolved subsequently into
technology and innovation, which not only deals with framework conditions, but also with the institutional and structural settings of innovation systems (Dosi 1988;
Edquist 1997; Freeman 1991,2002; Fagerberg, Mowery, and Nelson 2005; Smith 2000. In line with these concepts, the 1990s were also characterised by a great reluctance of government policy to prioritise research themes and select technologies in a top down manner.
science, technology and innovation policies give the thematic portfolio of a country or region a greater weight again and pay more attention to long-term perspectives.
However, in viewof the complexity and the ever-changing character of the object of policy which strongly applies in the case of innovation policy it is recognised now widely that there is neither a clear-cut recipe for nor an overarching theory of policy making (OECD 2005.
which the experiences and impacts of the innovation policy foresight of the City of Vienna will be assessed,
the Austrian innovation system has gone through a phase of fast growth of R&d expenditures and internationalisation.
in order to keep pace with the international developments in science, technology and innovation, with new employment patterns and with the need to further upgrade research and innovation performance.
In 2006 it was decided therefore to initiate a process of strategic dialogue, bringing the growing number of diverse actors together in an open and self-critical debate.
technology and innovation options among players, creating debate Awareness of the systemic character of change processes Foresight skills are developed in a wider circle Dialogues in new combinations of experts and stakeholders and a shared understanding
and innovation thatwas blessed by the highest political levels. In fact, when the research programme was started at the end of 2004,
and analyses to underpin the development of an integrated, future-oriented urban research and innovation policy.
Central to the research programme was the combination of different perspectives on the situation of the urban innovation system.
In other words, while on the one hand these four themes mirrored major concerns of the city in relation to research and innovation, they also mirrored the main competencies and institutions by
and innovation area in the CENTROPE region, there were no participants invited from across the border.
With the regional research and innovation policy bodies being still in a process of emergence, several Viennese organisations were not able to tell with whom they would cooperate on joint actions.
and objectives for optimising the process of research and innovation with the help of RTI policy measures as available to the City of Vienna and embedded in the other policy levels (national and European) exerting an influence on the research and innovation scene
1) Making effective use of the potential for research, technology and innovation by creating adequate conditions for young people, irrespective of their origins,
Options for translating these goals into specific measures can be conceived along the lines of the main determinants of innovation ranging from push factors in the area of science (e g.
In addition, the development of a number of new avenues of research and innovation is being promoted.
4) Vienna as a hothouse for research and innovation facilitating new developments: Further improvement of working conditions for scientists and creative individuals is called for by providing local networks as breeding grounds for invention and creativity.
5) A European location for research and innovation Vienna as a hub for international networks:
In this context, Vienna's network-based location of research and innovation will be strengthened further. 4. 4. Implementation the schedule for 2008 and beyond Based on the objectives,
such as promoting innovation in the service sector, encouraging research cooperation and gender mainstreaming. The newbusiness promotion principles were introduced at the beginning of 2008 already.
In terms of its informing function, it certainly contributed to giving research and innovation more prominence and visibility in the context of urban policy.
technology and innovation among different players that are primarily dealing with other issues. While still being distributed very much among different municipal departments,
the support given by the city councillors ensured a coherent appearance of urban research and innovation policy to the outside.
The complexity of research and innovation became apparent to many participants and the benefits Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:10 03 december 2014 964 K. M. Weber et al. of
the innovation policy strategy has certainly become a point of reference for many new policy initiatives. Reference is made regularly to the strategy to lend legitimacy to new initiatives and document their compatibility.
The suggestion to foster innovation-oriented procurement in the city is an obvious example where established boundaries would need to be crossed
and innovation performing and facilitating actors outside the local government, but hardly any specific action has been started firmly yet that would build explicitly on the strategy.
as well as between local government and other research and innovation actors. 5. 3. Ultimate, long-term impacts Integrating suitable new actors in the community dealing with research and innovation is one of the key long-term impacts expected from foresight exercises.
Identifying‘new'actors is less the key point than integrating the known actors (e g. from neighbouring policy areas) into the debates about research and innovation.
it is rather unlikely that it will lead to the emergence of a more forward-looking culture in innovation and research organisations.
if this is seen as a first step only towards establishing a more strategic and open governance culture. 6. Conclusions The innovation policy foresight
A second reason must be seen in the early involvement of key actors in researchaan innovation-related organisations of the City of Vienna.
and innovation policy to the forefront of policy attention and that brought together representatives from most relevant policy areas.
For instance, the panel members were recruited mainly from the prevailing key organisations in research and innovation
and thus to the consideration of alternative futures had been addressed in the forward-looking part Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:10 03 december 2014 Trade-offs between policy impacts of future-oriented analysis 967 of the preceding research programme on the Viennese innovation system,
Third, the structural and organisational rigidities of urban research and innovation poliic that will need to be overcome for establishing novel types
in parallel with a shorter‘official'strategy document that outlines the common ground of urban research and innovation policy.
and strategy process had a quite significant impact on guiding the future research and innovation policy in Vienna, but the closeness to policy making implied that some of the exploratory and‘out-of-the-box'thinking that would usually be part of a foresight process was regarded not desirable
Notes on contributors Matthias Weber is Head of Research, Technology and Innovation (RTI) Policy Unit at Austrian Institute of technology (AIT) invienna.
Between 2006 and 2008 hewas leading a research programme on regional innovation patterns and policy in cooperation with the City of Vienna.
He studied economics and has been doing research and foresight projects in the area of research, technoloog and innovation policy, in particular related to regional and technological innovation systems such as transport and energy.
research performance and systemic innovation policy instruments. Barbara Grunewald has been Research Associate at Austrian Institute of technology (AIT) in the Department of Foresight & Policy development since 2005.
She studied Economics and Philosophy and is doing her Phd research on the role of diversity in innovation systems.
Reflections on the co-evolution of innovation theory, policy and practice: The emergence of the Swedish Agency for Innovation systems.
Paper presented at the 40th Anniversary Conference of SPRU,‘The Future of Science, Technology and Innovation policy:
Linking Research and Practice',Brighton, 11 13 september 2006. Cassingena Harper, J, . and L. Georghiou. 2005.
The targeted and unforeseen impacts on innovation policy: the eforesee Malta case study. International Journal of Foresight and Innovation policy 2, no. 1: 84 103.
Da Costa, O.,P. Warnke, F. Scapolo, and C. Cagnin. 2008. The impact of foresight on policy-making:
Wiener Strategie für Forschung, Technologie und Innovation. Executive version, City of Vienna, November 2007. City of Vienna. 2007b.
Wiener Strategie für Forschung, Technologie und Innovation. Long version, City of Vienna, November 2007. Dosi, G. 1988.
Systems of innovations: technologies, institutions and organizations. London: Pinter. Eriksson, E. A, . and M. Weber. 2008.
The Oxford handbook of innovation. Oxford: Oxford university Press. Forsociety. 2007. Self-evaluation tool for foresight project managers. http://www. eranet-forsociety. net (accessed 19 november 2007.
and sub-national innovation systems complementarity and economic growth. Research policy 31, no. 2: 191 211. Havas, A d. Schartinger,
Management of innovation systems: the role of distributed intelligence. Antwerpen: Maklu Uitgevers N. V. OECD. 2002. Dynamising national innovation systems.
Paris: OECD. OECD. 2005. Governance of innovation systems, Vol. 1: Synthesis report. Paris: OECD. PREST. 2006.
Evaluation of the United kingdom foresight programme. Final report. Manchester: University of Manchester. Rhomberg, W c. Steindl, and M. Weber. 2006.
Innovation as a systemic phenomenon: rethinking the role of policy. Enterprise&innovation Management Studies 1, no. 1: 73 102.
The rise of systemic instruments in innovation policy. International Journal of Foresight and Innovation policy 1, nos. 1/2: 4 32.
Truffer, B.,J.-P. Voss, and K. Konrad. 2008. Mapping expectations for system transformations. Lessons for sustainability foresight in German utility sectors.
The case of stakeholder image construction in a municipal vision project Stefanie Jenssen a a Centre for technology, innovation and culture (TIK), University of Oslo, Norway Published online:
The case of stakeholder image construction in a municipal vision project Stefanie Jenssen*Centre for technology, innovation and culture (TIK), University of Oslo, Norway The article addresses the theme of foresight and equality in the area of stakeholder participation
science and innovation. 7 Expectations embrace both the possiblle probable and the highly unlikely, and thus address the uncertainty of the future.
Innovation and Culture, University of Oslo, Norway and writing her Phd on values and uncertainty in foresight informing research policy priorities.
but also by economics, innovation studies, organisational studies, linguistics and semiotics, see Van Lente (1993), Brown, Rappert, andwebster (2000), Brown and Michael (2003), Borup et al.
knowledge flows and the coordination of innovation. http://www. iesam. csic. es/proyecto/formwp1. pdf (accessed September 2009).
International Journal of Foresight and Innovation policy 1: 126 48. Grunwald, A. 2004. Strategic knowledge for sustainable development:
International Journal of Foresight and Innovation policy 1: 150 67. Habermas, J. 1998. The inclusion of the other:
International Journal of Foresight and Innovation policy 3, no. 4: 403 19. Jenssen, S. Forthcoming. Municipal visions:
These can be exploited to help understand contextual factors affecting particular technological innovations. All told, this wealth of information enables potent technological intelligence analyses.
These involve an innovation that needs a power supply for remote settings. We have investigated already technologies
A l. Porter/Technological forecasting & Social Change 72 (2005) 1070 1081 1072 Innovation indicators are rooted empirical measures in models of how technological innovation proceeds.
and technology managers would naturally pursue empirical means to manage R&d and its transition into effective innovations.
J. Watts, A l. Porter, Innovation forecasting, Technological forecasting and Social Change 56 (1997) 25 47.4 N c. Newman, A l. Porter, J. Yang, Information professionals:
and the Finnish funding agency for technology and Innovation (Tekes) to carry out Finnsight 2015, a joint foresight exercise that would provide inputs to this strategy,
foster collaboration between these funding agencies and promote foresight and innovation activities at large. Towards these objectives Finnsight 2015 engaged 10 expert panels
research and innovation policy; innovation studies; group decision support 1. Introduction As an instrument of strategic policy intelligence (Smits and Kuhlmann 2004), foresight must often serve multiple objectives that are shaped by its policy context.
Typically, these objectives include attempts (1) to prepare priorities in the research and innovation (R&i) system,
(2) to reorient the R&i system, (3) to demonstrate the vitality of this system, (4) to bring new actors to R&i debates,
Ultimately, many of these objectives seek to strengthen the efficacy of innovation activities, for instance by improving the stakeholders'understanding of the R&i system or by fostering collaboration processes within innovation networks (cf.
Eriksson and Weber 2008; Hekkert et al. 2007; Salo, Könnölä, and Hjelt 2004.**Corresponding author. Email:
the national foresight exercise of the Academy of Finland and the Finnish funding agency for technology and Innovation (Tekes), which served to inform albeit indirectly the development of the national strategy and the attendant implementation of several Strategic Centres of Excellence in Science and Technology.
the Finnish Agency for Technology and Innovation (Tekes) has catalysed extensive consultation processes with researchers and industrialists in its strategy developmmen (Salo and Salmenkaita 2002;
and Technology policy Council of Finland (STPC) should develop by the end June 2006 a national strategy for establishing Strategic Centres of Excellence in Research and Innovation.
1) Learning and learning society (2) Services and service innovations (3) Well-being and health (4) Environment and energy (5) Infrastructures and security (6) Bio-expertise
Serviic and service innovations) had rather new and evocative titles. These panels were motivated by the growing importance of multifaceted phenomena which,
however, did not necessarily link to well-established fields of scientific inquiry or innovation activity.
it was imperative to achieve a proper balance in addressing the Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:11 03 december 2014 Axes of balance in foresight 991 intertwined components of research (of key concern to the Academy of Finland and innovation
for instance by way of innovations,(iv) through what measures the development of the focus area could be promoted best.
life control and social innovations 2. Services and service innovations Business competence in services Culture and adventure services Renewal of public services 3. Well-being and health Physical exercise and nutrition research Mental health
which contained numerous proposals towards the development of the Finnish research and innovation system (STPC 2006).
Furthermore, in 2007 the Ministry of Trade and Industry started a process towards the establisshin a National Innovation strategy,
with the aim of paving the way for measures that the broadening scope of innovation policies would call for.
of which addressed structural issues (e g. regional innovation policy; intellectual properrt rights; demand-orientation of innovation activities. The objectives of this process whose Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:11 03 december 2014 Axes of balance in foresight 997 results were published in June 2008
thus complemented those of Finnsight which purposely did not address structural questions. Building on the National Innovation strategy, the Governmeen has produced its Report on Innovation policy
which has been debated in the Parliament in late 2008.4. Axes of balance in Finnsight Although formal evaluation of Finnsight has been carried out,
Technology and Innovation was an important part. This opportune timing gave possibilities for instrumental use,
with the aim of promoting technological breakthroughs and innovations in all industrial sectors and services. See http://www. tekes. fi/en/community/Home/351/Home/473 for details. 4. The funding decisions of the Academy of Finland are taken by external scholars (usually university professors) who serve on its councils
and Innovation policy Council as of January 2009) is to assist the Government and its ministries by addressing, for instance,
major matters in relation to research and innovation policy by preparing related plans for the Government. 7. See http://www. tekes. fi/eng/strategic centres/8. For examples,
Foresight in Nordic innovation systems. Oslo: Nordic Innovation Centre. http://www. nordicinnovation. net/img/nordic foresight forum final report. pdf (accessed 20 september 2009.
Ansoff, I. 1975. Managing strategic surprise by response to weak signals. California Management Review 17, no. 2: 21 33.
Systems of innovation: technologies, institutions and organizations. London: Pinter. Eriksson, E. A. and K. M. Weber. 2008.
Functions of innovation systems: a new approach for analysing technological change. Technological forecasting and Social Change 74, no. 4: 413 32.
insights from the fostering of innovation ideas. Technological forecasting and Social Change 74, no. 5: 608 26.
International Journal of Foresight and Innovation policy 1, no. 1 2: 70 88. Smith, K. 2000.
Innovation as a systemic phenomenon: rethinking the role of policy. Enterprise&innovation Management Studies 1, no. 1: 73 102.
The rise of systemic instruments in innovation policy. International Journal of Foresight and Innovation policy 1, nos. 1 2: 4 32.
STPC. 2006. Science, technology, innovation. Helsinki: Ministry of Education. http://www. minedu. fi/export/sites/default/OPM/Tiede/tutkimus-ja innovaationeuvosto/TTN/julkaisut/liitteet/Review 2006. pdf?
lang=fi (accessed 7 october 2009. Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:11 03 december 2014 Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:11 03 december 2014
In fact Slaughter made it clear in his review of a previous decade of futures studies that‘‘As we look ahead it becomes increasingly clear that technical innovation on its own is not the main issue.''
and policymakers in the domain of research and innovation gravitates towards a concept that in its construction already includes the participation of both communities.
and more specifically for foresight, in terms of its inbuilt concern with research and innovation policy or strategy issues.
or use of these approaches to look at an entire research and innovation system. FTA APPROACHES are locked also in a spiral of co-evolution with research and innovation policy,
finding new applications in aligning actors around societal challenges (as described by Ko nno la et al.)
and in demand-side innovation policies while also influencing the development of those policies. Schoen et al. address recent developments in foresight theory
and rationalist technology-focused approaches towards recognition of broader concerns encompassing the entire innovation system including societal perspectives.
higher education and innovation. From a forward looking perspective, special emphasis should be given to the combination of quantitative
The conference will seek to understand further how far the institutionalisation (i e. embeddedness) of FTA supports both the achievement of measurable impacts and the strengthening of interaction s between research, higher education and innovation.
Economic, social and sustainability challenges have created a new and more demanding agenda for research and innovation policymakers and strategists.
Lemola, D. Loveridge, T. Luukkonen, W. Polt, A. Rip, L. Sanz-Menendez, R. Smits, Improving Distributed intelligence in Complex Innovation systems, final report of the Advanced
Frauenhofer Institute, Systems and Innovation research, Karlsruhe, 1999.7 L. Mermet, T. Fuller, R. van der Helm, Reexamining
Luke Georghiou*Manchester Institute of Innovation research MBS, University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester M13 9pl, UK Jennifer Cassingena Harper Malta Council for Science and Technology, Villa Bighi, Bighi, Kalkara
for Prospective Technological Studies (IPTS), Edificio Expo, C/Inca Garcilaso, 3, E-41092 Seville, Spain c Fraunhofer-Institute for Systems and Innovation research ISI
& Policy Studies (ST3PS), University of Twente, School of management and Governance, Institute of Innovation and Governance Studies (IGS), Capitool 15, P o box 217,7500 AE Enschede, The netherlands 1
. Introduction The paper presents an approach at improving the impact of foresight by systematically taking into account the characteristics of the targeted research and innovation (R&i) domains when designing a Foresight exercise.
Available online 19 november 2010 A b s T R A c T Thepaperpresentsanapproachatimprovingtheimpact offoresightbysystematicallytaking into account the characteristics of the targeted research and innovation (R&i) domains when designing a Foresight exercise.
In particular it is suggested that the capability of Foresight to function as a systemic innovation policy instrument for enhancing innovation
and learning capability could be improved substantially by tailoring the Foresight approach to the targeted innovation arena. 2010 Elsevier Ltd.
+31 053 489 3353/3350.5 PRIME=Policies for Research and Innovation in the Move towards the European research area, European Network of Excellence (2004 2009;
and innovation system and identifies the catalytic role of Foresight in this framework. The European system is sketched in terms of‘‘institutional arrangements''by depicting three (interrelated) arenas for the orientation, the programming and the performance of research.
and innovation system by fostering the operations of each of these arenas and the relations between them.
evidence-based policy and academic disciplines such as Innovation studies and Science and Technology studies 2. A number of classifications have been developed distinguishing types of Foresight with respect to approach, context and purpose 3
i e. directed at a certain innovation area. The need to tailor policy instruments to the characteristics of the targeted field is grounded well in insights from research on the dynamics of innovation and knowledge generation.
Innovation studies have pointed out how the dynamics of innovation systems are structured by the nature of the governing technological regimes that in turn co-evolve with socioeconomic and institutional framework conditions.
The co-evolution trajectories are determined partly by characteristics of National innovation systems such as regulation and cultural context 10.
At the same time sectoral and technology specific determinants (technological regimes) significantly structure companies'search processes and thereby shape the dynamics of knowledge production 11.
The sectoral systems of innovation approach which is focussing on the characteristics of knowledge production has been complemented by analysis of the properties of application domains
In all these approaches to characterising innovation regimes the knowledge base plays a crucial role.‘‘‘‘Central to the systems approach is the view that the key resource of a firm,
The characteristics of the knowledge base such as complexity, diversity and observability are used as key factors for generating innovation typologies 17,18. 6 Forlearn project and Forlearn online guide coordinated by DG JRC-IPTS;
/Futures 43 (2011) 232 242 233 All these results point to the fact that diverse innovation areas need diverse governance tools
For some time now it has been suggested that insights from innovation systems research on the systemic nature of knowledge production should be taken into account by R&i policy to better target its instruments and approaches 16.
Recently also political science approaches have been advocating the idea that innovation in the environment of the political system needs a corresponding increase in complexity of the political system or
in other words, the building of new institutions that are able to govern these innovations effectively 19.
and variables that need to be adapted to match these domains'specificities. 3. Institutional arrangements in European research and innovation system In Europe, the conduct,
the funding and the strategic orientation of research and innovation have become a multilevel and multi-actor arrangement (e g. 21,22).
Experiences from the vertical R&i coordination between local, regional and (international levels provide insights into the challenges of managing multilayered innovation systems 23.
and innovation policy from other policy areas such as social or employment policies where the Open Method of Coordination has been applied earlier on in Europe. 3. 1. Governance arenas in European research
and innovation system This section presents a concept for analysing the institutional arrangements characterising the R&i system in a given research field.
R&i systems, principal-agent and agency theories, strategic and distributed intelligence for innovation policy. It proposes a functional description of National innovation systems along three interacting arenas of governance:
-the arena of strategic orientation of research, borne by the political governmental authorities, deals with the elaborating of the vision of the future of the system,
and innovation, borne by PROS, universities and firms, which employ researchers, manage infrastructures; they produce,
and innovation areas develop across and beyond inherited national environments. This choice does not mean that the national and regional levels are not to be taken into consideration.
Foresight can be characterised as a systemic instrument 25 aiming at enhanced capabilities in innovation systems and their parts 26.
which enhances the connectivity of the innovation system and can improve its performance 34. However, the excessive strengthening of existing networks (see
i e. their tailoring using the arenas for governance Foresight objectives matrix. 4. Knowledge dynamics in European research and innovation system Policy-making in arenas of strategic orientation,
programming and performing is driven partly by the content and the dynamics of research activities and by the innovation patterns and interactions of different thematic fields or sectors(‘‘Knowledge dynamics''.
expecting one general type of Knowledge dynamics (reaching from science to innovation) and one unique set of appropriate supportive public policies.
The immediate conclusion for Foresight is need the for consensus building among stakeholders from industry and civil society for a further development of the European research and innovation system.
and innovation system thus helping to relax some of the current tensions. Two types of Foresight exercises are emerging from the analysis:
The generation of socio-technical scenarios in a stakeholder dialogue may well create a more reliable ground for transferring research results into successful nano-innovations.
To sum up the analysis revealed two types of Foresight useful for underpinning the European research and innovation system in the area of Nanosciences and Nanotechnologies:(
and technological innovation to inform the strategic orientation and programming arena and create trusted ground for nanoinnovvation at the orientation arena level. 6. Conclusions The paper set out from the notion of Foresight as a systemic innovation policy instrument supporting priority setting,
networking and vision building. The paper aimed to enhance the ability of Foresight to fulfil these functions through systematically taking into account (a) the specific characteristics of the research
and innovation area considered its fieldspeccifi Knowledge dynamics and (b) the institutional arrangement was described as interacting strategic orientation,
Howevermuch remains to be done to refine the framework to function as a sound base for tailoring research and innovation policy instruments.
This may be due to a lack of sensitivity towards the dynamics of the innovation and production realmcompared to the academic knowledge production.
and innovation field does not exclude the exploration of radical changes in these dynamics. To sum up
ERA is, in short, the integration/coordination of research and innovation policies between the EU and Member States 13 Mona:
using innovation studies to Design Foresight tools, in: N. Brown, B. Rappert, A. Webster (Eds. Contested Futures.
navigating the complex landscape of policy strategies, Technological forecasting and Social Change 75 (4)( 2008) 462 482.10 B.-A°.Lundvall (Ed.),National systems of Innovation:
Human Choice and Climate change, vol. 2, Batelle Press, WASHINGTON DC, 1998.16 K. Smith, Innovation as a systemic phenomenon:
rethinking the role of policy, Enterprise and Innovation Management Studies 1 (1)( 2000) 73 102.17 O. Marsili, The Anatomy and Evolution of Industries:
(ERA), European commission, Luxembourg, 2008.19 D. Braun, Special issue on‘‘The political coordination of knowledge and innovation policies'',Science and Public policy 35 (4)( 2008.
20 N. Brown, B. Rappert, A. Webster, Foresight as a Tool for the Management of Knowledge Flows and Innovation (FORMAKIN.
the case of the European union, Journal of European Public policy 3 (3)( 1996) 318 338.22 S. Kuhlmann, Future governance of innovation policy in Europe three scenarios, Research policy 30
the open method of co-ordination in innovation policy, Journal of European Public policy 11 (2)( 2004) 249 266.24 R. Barre',Essai d'interpre'tation de
La Recherche et l'innovation en France, Odile Jacob, Paris, 2007.25 R. Smits, S. Kuhlmann, The rise of systemic instruments in innovation policy, International
Journal of Foresight and Innovation policy 1 (1/2)( 2004) 4 32.26 A. Salo, T. Ko nno la, M. Hjelt, Responsiveness in Foresight management:
reflections from the Finnish food and drink industry, International Journal of Foresight and Innovation policy 1 (1 2)( 2009) 70 88.27 T. Ko nno la, V
insights from the fostering of innovation ideas, Technological forecasting and Social Change 74 (5)( 2007) 608 626.28 J. Irvine, B. R. Martin, Foresight in Science:
the UK experience, Journal of Forecasting 22 (2 3)( 2003) 129 160.34 B. R. Martin, R. Johnston, Technology foresight for Wiring up the National Innovation system.
) 817 830.37 M. L. Tushman, C a. O'reilly, Winning through Innovation: A Practical Guide to Leading Organizational Change and Renewal, Harvard Business school Press, Boston, 1997.38 T. Ko nno la, G. C. Unruh, J. Carrillo
Overtext Web Module V3.0 Alpha
Copyright Semantic-Knowledge, 1994-2011