Co-evolutionary scenarios: An application to prospecting futures of the responsible development of nanotechnology Douglas K. R. Robinson STEPS, University of Twente, Enschede, The netherlands a r t i c l e i n
This involved the inclusion of pre-engagement analysis of potential co-evolutions in the form of scenarios into interactive workshop activities, with the aim of enabling multi-stakeholder anticipation of the complexities of co-evolution. 2009
Co-evolutionary scenarios Selection environment Nanotechnology Responsible development Anticipatory coordination 1. Introduction The path to innovation is journey-like, certainly so for radical innovation.
This article focuses on the preparation and content of what we term co-evolutionary scenarios those
and incorporates what we call endogenous futures into scenarios which take actors'initiatives and interactions into account.
because this form of scenario confronts participants in multi-stakeholder workshops with choices and dilemmas, allowing for more informed strategy articulation through deepening
Scenarios have often been used to create a synthesis of future-oriented aspects prior to an interactive workshop,
and there are many roles that scenarios can play i e. offering possible alternative futures to assess and evaluate,
and deep case research 4 into scenario narratives which place emphasis on the how paths to the future may unfold
whilst reducing (but not removing) the emphasis on the where the paths will lead to. 1. 2. The why and how of co-evolutionary scenarios In recent years,
and context-rich scenarios encompasses a trade-off between recognizing the complexity of actual dynamics of innovation
Such scenarios should highlight both the multilevel/multi-actor dynamics and the unfolding innovation journeys of technology development have not been developed to date.
Such scenarios require insight into co-evolutionary dynamics, of actor activities (including anticipation in the form of agendas and strategies) and of enabling and constraining factors
for the scenarios we must also recall there may be many potential pathways to innovation 6 and each of the journeys down the pathways could involve forks, setbacks, convergence etc.
Co-evolutionary scenarios were developed as a theory-informed approach to capture the complexities of innovation journeys
The co-evolutionary scenarios should reflect this, and the discussions and interactions in the workshop will,
aid the construction of complexity scenarios, and aid in locating and targeting Constructive TA activities.
deadends etc. 1226 D. K. R. Robinson/Technological forecasting & Social Change 76 (2009) 1222-1239 For structuring the co-evolutionary scenario narratives,
and evolving arenas and thus a way of framing our scenarios. The next step is to introduce evolution overtime,
This is the task of scenario builder. Coupling endogenous futures with characteristics of innovation journeys (from historical case studies) within the framework of the IC+framework helps us structure the complexities
and control our speculation in order to make effective and high quality scenarios. The following section will bring us away from conceptual explorations to the real-world of FTA
and creating scenarios for a CTA exercise. 3. Evolving selection environments, and their internalisation 3. 1. A project is initiated In Autumn 2007 (as still the case 2 years on) there was an increasing emphasis on societal impact and embedment of nanotechnology applications.
and current situation and developed three co-evolutionary scenarios showing plausible playings out of technology innovations
which informed the scenarios. For a detailed account of the developments of the nano risk debate
In the case of the Frontiers Noe for nanotechnology, the programme involved research and preparation of these scenarios an input to 1-day multi-stakeholder workshops
The interaction of the participants with the scenarios and each other are important aspects of the Constructive TA.
and one must acknowledge these bring them out in the scenarios and create opportunities to become more reflexive of how the different participant groups make assessments.
Constructive TA develops endogenous futures into scenarios which not only take actors'initiatives and interactions into account but also the surrounding or ensuing dynamics and shifts in agendas that slowly become irreversible.
Scenarios are used not anymore to extrapolate particular developments into the future but rather, to enhance the reflexivity of actors regarding strategic decisions
Working with such scenarios in strategy articulation workshops is a means of testing the scenarios while probing and modulating participants'worldviews. 1230 D. K. R. Robinson/Technological forecasting
This shows the status of the IC+game board at the time of the workshop and was the starting point for the development of realistically complex scenarios.
Conceptual development of this multilevel perspective has been explored elsewhere 2. Box 2 Scenario 1 summary. The nano umbrella term becomes more specific (in funding mechanisms) now defined in terms of potential sectors that will be impacted by R&d lines.
& Social Change 76 (2009) 1222-1239 These elements provide building blocks to create three scenarios each of them a plausible story about how they might play out (including twists and turns).
In the next section I show one of the scenarios, which focuses on evolving governance mixes.
The other two scenarios focused on engagement and actor strategies, and on hype and mobilizing resources (promise requirement dynamics).
4. Summary of the scenarios Taking Fig. 2 as the game board, identification of some of the endogenous futures11, three co-evolutionary scenarios where created
The scenarios hang together with many elements being interchangeable. They do their job by emphasising tensions occurring in the Innovation chain+frame
Contrary to many traditional scenario building techniques, these co-evolutionary scenarios do not present mutually exclusive futures. In this way they are similar to the functions of expectations the scenarios can be read
and discussed as anticipations (1st order learning), but they also have a performative function in that they can lead to 2nd order learning on how to build more context-fitting scenarios.
Below I summarise the three scenarios developed for and in the workshop in the form of key threads and storylines.
For reasons of space only one example (scenario 3) is given in full in Section 5. The example helps to illustrate elements such as paths and endogenous futures. 4. 1. The three scenarios At the time of the workshop
in general most public engagement activities initiated by R&d actors focused more on enlightening the general public on the potentials of nanotech R&d-engagement as a lubricant against public friction.
Box 3 Scenario 2 summary. Drug delivery becomes a key driver in nanotechnology. Rapid developments in nano means the consequent burgeoning number of delivery methods leads to increasingly bewildering regulatory protocols.
The scenario in Box 2 revolves around these three meanings and links them up with overall strategies in motivations for engagement around nanotechnology. 12 The scenario focused on the engagement aspects of RRI, the roles of various actor groups, the strategies and how the interactions played out.
The scenario in Box 3 looks at a specific cluster of innovations in nanoparticle based drug delivery.
Tensions in this scenario include the issues of timeliness of engagement when to incorporate actors? Early stage technologies are fragile
and too early selection may inhibit novel solutions. The same for regulation-nanocodes enable in this scenario
but the lack of regulation and eventual loss of the support of public organisations means limited access to the novel therapy.
Box 4 Scenario 3 summary. By mid 2008 the patchwork of codes of conduct, best practices and measures of responsible innovation remains misaligned,
The scenario in Box 4 will be shown in more detail in Section 5. 4. 2. The effect of these scenarios in the workshop The three scenarios together covered the various positions and expectations of those actors active in the debate around RRI.
with praise about the plausibility of such scenarios. Analysing the scenarios in depth in the workshop was not part of the exercise,
but the participants were asked which elements they found the most striking or important. These provided the basis for the discussions in the workshop
the ethics of engagement (not incorporated in the scenarios but stemming from the discussions) where including NGOS
the co-evolutions described in all three scenarios where picked up and discussed. What was important in such a multi-stakeholder setting,
was the inclusion of all active actors in the scenarios. This meant that for certain actor strategies,
they could refer to scenario elements and discuss around these, allowing an easier route to some of the key issues.
I will give a full scenario (Scenario 3) with annotations showing the key elements in the narrative.
and how it fits into the emerging menu of socio-technical scenarios. 5. An annotated scenario Below is shown a full scenario.
but reveals the various elements of the scenarios as they appear. The annotations are given within the scenario text, after the relevant section of the narrative, in square brackets and in italic.
At the beginning of an annotation, an indication of the type of dynamic involved in the scenario text is given
emphasized by underlining the comment. By mid 2008 the regulation void continues and soft law is taken as an interim solution to allow nano to go ahead Observed misalignment:
these other fields are added to compare to the medical device innovation journeys later in the scenario..
(but create constraints later on in the scenario). Focused investments included nanofiltration (for effluent treatment), nanocoatings (for pigment and texture) and nanodiagnostics (for monitoring quality) and nanocharacterisation (for deeper understanding of paper materials.
However in this scenario it is not immediately taken up. Here it is recognized as a good report
Highlighting that this is not a dark scenario, but a situation which enables some options and constrains others..
6. Evaluation and discussion These co-evolutionary scenarios can prepare the ground for discussion of complex potential radical technologies via the combination of endogenous futures, the IC+framework and deep case research into actors
While in the annotated scenario, the Finnish worker case, and some of the actions and reactions given are contingent,
In that scenario I could include anticipations from the world of nano, fears of being locked out of the debate through lack of transparency,
the scenario introduces actors and their activities, responses and shifts that have a certain plausibility given
Participants in the workshop recognized the dynamics given in the scenario narratives. Elements were picked up,
This scenario worked well in terms of showing interactions and outcomes shaped by earlier patterns (endogenous futures), and in terms of encompassing variation and contingencies.
The scenarios also worked well in terms of stimulating productive discussion in the workshop. This can be seen as a stakeholder endorsement of the approach (which is an important indicator how well workshops like these are working.
these types of scenarios do stimulate discussions, and provide both a place for exploring different actors'positions
through exploration of endogenous futures and their playings out in scenarios, helps in creating more reflexive strategies.
This aids the scenario creator, in my case I could place amidst the three scenarios some major stances and strategies of various actors,
and based on expectations analysis and the concept of emerging irreversibilities, show how actors interactions and reactions would co-evolve with the broader IC+landscape. 6. 1. A new member to the socio-technical scenario family
Co-evolutionary scenarios can be created and are productive as an input in Constructive TA type workshops.
and the risk of bowing to the concentric bias of enactors who need scenarios to guide them to identify
and thus helps with the creation of scenarios. These scenarios embrace complexity by referring to the emerging natures of both the innovation chains and their environment.
Both are complex and there is co-shaping. So the scenarios provide a grip on complexity through actors pro-actively shaping chains and governance,
and through lock ins and selection. In workshop situations they act as a way to provide controlled speculation into easier to handle forms,
evaluate the scenarios and interact within multi-stakeholder workshops. 1237 D. K. R. Robinson/Technological forecasting & Social Change 76 (2009) 1222-1239 The scenarios use endogenous futures,
not as a way of extrapolating trajectories but to foreground what may happen as activities play out,
The co-evolutionary scenario approach is a contribution to the growing field of socio-technical scenarios 3. Other members of the family include regime transition scenarios14,
multilevel scenarios for evolving industrial sectors16, 17, and actor-centric scenarios revealing the visions carried by various actors 34.
Co-evolutionary scenarios make a modest, but important, contribution to this family by combining concentric and multilevel approaches through emphasizing co-evolution.
As is already clear from the evaluation of the workshop such scenarios support strategic anticipation.
If that informs interactions, it will lead to anticipatory governance. Acknowledgements This project was conducted within the framework of the Frontiers network of excellence and the Nanoned programme (www. nanoned. nl.
Mapping and Scenarios for Emerging technologies. Presented at the Annual Meeting of the Society for Social Study of Science (4s) in Montreal, Quebec, 2007.3 A. Rip, H. te Kulve, Constructive technology assessment and sociotechnical scenarios, in:
the confrontation of script-based scenarios, Phd thesis, Ecole des Mines, Paris. 1996.24 S. Glynn, Constructing a selection environment:
Foresight and similar future-oriented technology analysis methodds such as trend extrapolation, scenarios, Delphi analysis, focus groups, cross-impact analyses and roadmapping, can be found in traditional business-school
Scenario learning and potential sustainable development processes in spatial contexts: towards risk society or ecological modernization of scenarios.
Futures research Quarterly 17, no. 2: 33 55. Karlsen, J. E, . and H. Karlsen. 2007. Expert groups as production units for shared knowledge in energy foresight.
four scenarios were developed, which served as a backdrop for later elaborating elements of an RTI policy strategy for the city of Vienna.
The essence of these four scenarios is captured in their titles (Weber et al. 2007: Innovative niches:
'and the scenarios that had been developed in that context. The results of the programme were simply just about to become available
or scenario seeds, which could be developed further if one wishes to do so. 17 Although the future ideas were presented as being created entirely by the young,
Her main interests are negotiations of economic and social value in future orientation, reflexivity and stakeholder participation as well as collective scenario writing,
4. In scenario planning a set of alternative scenarios are created to achieve an understanding of the range of possible future developments, more or less regardless of
For more insight into scenarios and visions work, see Van Notten (2005) and Gertler and Wolfe (2004.
For an in depth discussion of different types of scenarios, see Van Notten et al. 2003). ) 5. On visioning in municipal planning,
Decision making in the public sector. In Scenarios in public policy, ed. G. Ringland, 124 31. Chichester: Johnwiley.
Scenarios in public policy. Chichester: Johnwiley. Sanz-Menéndez, L, . and C. Cabello. 2000. Expectations and learning as principles for shaping the future.
An updated scenario typology. Futures 35, no. 5: 423 43. Van't Klooster, S, . and M. Van Asselt. 2006.
Practising the scenario-axes technique. Futures 38:15 30. Voß, J-P, . and R. Kemp. 2006.
Imagine a scenario in which our organization is an American company initiating operations in Australia.
The sidebar vignette offers a realistic scenario of how this could unfold. The driver is bwhen do need you to have what information?
and deconstruct the scenario workshop process in detail to illustrate the organisational learning and spirals involved.
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.
Examples are the EU FP6 Nanologue project14 where different products for different socio-technical scenarios were envisaged or the strategy articulation workshops in the framework of the Dutch Nanoned initiative (e g. 49 51.
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
Policy 36 (6)( 2007) 813 831.49 A. Rip, H. te Kulve, Constructive technology assessment and Socio-Technical Scenarios, 2008.50 A. Rip, Folk theories of nanotechnologists, Science
In the open innovation systems firms are concerned less with stand-alone type foresight and more about how corporate strategy interfaces with the emerging research and innovation policy scenario.
those seeking to engage key stakeholders through shortduraatio activities such as scenario workshops, and on the other hand ongoing activities such as horizon scanning activity which provides the basis for informing the first type of approach.
A review for the 2006 FTA conference noted an increasing use of scenarios for the sector in the face of a number of pressures
In the university sector the scenarios of change have attracted public attention but so far the system remains largely unreformed.
In both fields, in particular the development of alternative scenarios help addressing uncertainties and diverse interconnections between many drivers.
In the security, sustainability and information society fields, stakeholders have the possibility to develop scenarios on
Project Outcomes Future perspectives Management Stakeholder engagement Nordic ICT Foresighta 17 Informative Evaluations of key ICT applications, Nordic scenario set in context of ICT development, scenario
Diverse Alternative scenarios. Also identification of ICT applications with development potentials in Nordic region; future-oriented elaboration of factors affecting the Nordic business and development environment in ICT.
Autonomous There was still a significant degree of freedom to adapt to the perceived needs during the process and the development of roadmaps and scenarios.
IRRIIS scenario workd 19 Informative Identification of emerging safety and security issues in an EU project to ensure the safety of critical infrastructures.
Autonomous Autonomous scenario work among the stakeholders. The experience of stakeholders‘‘overwrote''the methodological rigidity in some points.
Fixed Scenario workshops, on-line Delphi study, on-line forum, national seminars(‘‘FISTERA road show'')supported by desk research.
A number of scenario workshops were held, each involving in average 25 participants. Future Impact of ICTS on Environmental Sustainabilityh 22 Informative Explore how ICTS will influence future environmental sustainability (time horizon:
The scenarios developed during the project accommodated a diverse range of views and suggested a number of possibilities.
It consisted of data gathering and combination of qualitative scenarios and quantitative modelling. Exclusive The project was conducted mainly by the research partners.
Consensual The 8th Japanese technology foresight program consists of consensual Delphi survey, scenario, bibliometrics and needs analyses.
Delphi, Scenario, bibliometrics, and social and economic needs analysis. Autonomous There was still a significant degree of freedom to adapt to the perceived needs during the process and the development of scenarios and social and economic needs.
Extensive There was an extensive engagement of diversified stakeholders. About 2239 experts participated in Delphi survey. Also, many experts of social sciences participated in scenarios analysis
and needs analysis. Innovation 25 in Japan Informative The final report of‘‘innovation 25''has set out 5 scenarios for future Japan,
and find out the prior S&t topics to achieve the social goals. Instrumental‘‘Innovation 25''aims to make long-term strategy for Japan.
Consensual‘‘Innovation 25''has set 5 scenarios of Japan society in 2025 and it includes‘‘Long Health Society'',Safe and Secure Society'',Society with Multiple Career Path,
Autonomous There is freedom in discussion for social scenarios in each field, and the priority setting of science and technology based on technology foresight.
IRRIIS Scenario work was part of the European integrated project that provided improved understanding of the developments in the security field.
including diverse uncertainties in such scenarios. This challenge was dealt with in the brainstorming workshops, intensive e-mail communication, commenting and co-writing.
The consensual scenario work was()TD$FIG Fig. 1. Foresight projects positioned in view of the dimensions of outcomes (informative vs. instrumental) and future perspectives (consensual vs. diverse.
This allows addressing diverse perspectives and scenarios as well as common vision-building. However, positioning a project as informative
We explore this in the case of scenario workshops, below. Yet other methods are brought into play in the broader design,
''Once we go beyond extrapolating specific trends or devising imaginative scenarios based on historical analogy or generalisation from supposed vanguards, towards thinking about innovation systems more generally,
Methods such asworking within panels, workshops (scenario workshops in particular), are critical here, and in designing the FTA PROCESS it may be effective to appoint very senior members of key organisations to steering or advisory committees,
For example, a detailed account of a scenario represents a codification of posits, from which it is possible to reverse engineer at least some of the knowledge that informed the scenario work.
Good FTA practice will make it easy for later users of the work to assess the validity of its knowledge base
Specific methods Delphi surveys, brainstorming, scenario workshops, etc. may be used to elicit and share such information, although it may be less easy to capture in a structured way as would be the information from, for example, statistical data or trend extrapolations.
such as those incorporated into scenarios and roadmaps. Eerola suggests that these activities of capturing information
and extensive activities such as scenario workshops where a number of activities are organised into a sequence in
I. Miles/Futures 43 (2011) 265 278 272 management in a scenario workshop are discussed in the next section,
in order to illustrate the relevance of thekmapproach even in the context of individual/specific FTA METHODS. 6. Scenario workshops as knowledge processes Scenario workshops typically feature a sequence of activities.
This kind of scenario workshop usually extends over at least one day, and may involve several dozen participants.
Larger workshops employ‘‘break out groups''of say 6 12 people exploring different subscenarios or aspects of scenarios in detail.
Before the scenario workshop is implemented, there will typically be a design process, to: identify participants for the scenario workshop it is vital to include the right range of interests, knowledge and expertise,
and as far as possible key end-users of the results. determine what background research might need to be conducted. define the workshop procedures (what scenario methodology is to be deployed;
what areas of study within the domain of interest should be selected, what specific questions might be used in the workshop),
The scenario workshop is supported typically by background research, to provide workshop participants with a common information base (and sometimes some shared terminology),
/visions/scenarios/roadmaps/and/or action recommendations Reports on desktop surveys Background reports for focused workshops Reports on the results of SWOT/scenario/roadmap/action Integrative reports
I. Miles/Futures 43 (2011) 265 278 273 forecasts, even background scenarios (e g.‘‘‘‘starter scenarios''to be elaborated) prepared by an expert team or in earlier studies.
As well as background reading, provision of information from research and analysis is included often formally in the workshop,
etc. it is typical for a scenario workshop to begin with participants reviewing the background material, and then proceeding to draw on this (critically) in subsequent activities where this formally presented material is added to by information and opinions input by participants,
A common starting point in scenario workshops is to examine‘‘drivers and shapers''factors that could be critical to influencing the course of events,
Furthermore, throughout the scenario workshop, including this step of identifying and classifying drivers and shapers, there are liable to be moments of‘‘internalisation''as participants become more familiar with working with the background material and fitting it into their own conceptual frameworks and constellations of interests and also, perhaps,
''Major‘‘combination''moments come in the scenario construction sessions that constitute the heart of the workshop.
In conventional multiple scenario workshops, a set of alternative scenarios are developed. Often each one is constructed by each of a number of break out groups.
scenarios may be differentiated in terms of key uncertain drivers, broad archetypes about system performance, ‘‘what if''questions, etc.
The scenario framework can be a valuable tool for encouraging people from very different backgrounds to apply their knowledge in new ways.
and how they interact to produce the scenario. Other tasks include: identifying turning points and indicators of change, developing narratives of future histories and accounts of affairs at a future point in time in a way enabling comparison across break out groups, and so on.
In more aspirational‘‘success scenario''workshops or vision workshops it is more common for breakout groups to examine what a desirable future would look like in detail within specified subdomains,
It is common for a scenario workshop to conclude with some effort at defining key actions
Thus the scenario workshop is in many ways a microcosm of a larger FTA programme.
and prioritisation in the course of scenario work, for example. Perhaps we should be establishing a roadmap for this sort of‘‘enhanced reality''in FTA work. 10
In the UK, there had been major scenario work on strategies for developing a competitive edge in nanotechnology and literature/expert surveying of social issues associated with this field, in the early years of the present century.
This followed the much-publicised Ami (Ambient Intelligence) scenarios and roadmapping conducted for ISTAG (the Information society Technologies Advisory Group) of the EC 26.
‘‘dark scenarios''explicating key risks and vulnerabilities associated with the use of Ami technologies and services.
''12 The dark scenarios were developed, via workshop and expert group analysis, on the basis of posits about technology development (how realistic these are given current knowledge
Efforts to engage wider stakeholder communities in such deliberation as in the nanotechnology exercise remain rare (and even that exercise stopped short of deconstructing available scenarios
Scenarios of US and Global Society Reshaped by Science and Technology, Oakhill Press, Greensboro, 1997 (available at http://www. josephcoates. com/2025 pdf. html (accessed 29/07/2009)).
http://www. innovateuk. org/assets/pdf/taylor%20report. pdf (accessed 29/07/09). 26 ISTAG, Scenarios for Ambient Intelligence in 2010, in:
I. Maghiros, S. Delaitre, Dark scenarios as a constructive tool for future oriented technology analysis: safeguards in a world of ambient intelligence (SWAMI), Second International Seville Seminar on Future-oriented technology analysis, Seville, September 28 29,2006 (available at:
Overtext Web Module V3.0 Alpha
Copyright Semantic-Knowledge, 1994-2011