Challenges in communicating the outcomes of a foresight study to advise decision-makers on policy and strategy Claudio Chauke Nehme1, 2,,
mind-set transformation. 1. Introduction Exercises to explore the future are considered to be importaan for strategic planning, decision-making support and for public policy formulation,
detect adverse conditions, guide policy, shape strategy, and explore new markets, products and services. It represents a merger of future methods with those of strategic management.
This paper discusses this decision-making environment and a relevant Brazilian Science and Public policy 39 (2012) pp. 245 257 doi:
demands may be associated with innovation, competitiveness, long-term government planning, subsidies to S&t public policies, and the future of complex themes, such as climate change, demography, biodiversity, bioethanol, energy efficiency etc.
all involving ST&I policy, and having participatory approaches, namely:.11 strategic foresight exercises to enhance the competitiveenes of the Brazilian industrial sector in the global economy:
which must be considered in the formulation of policies, planning and decision-making. Martin, cited by Cuhls
in order to support decision-making and the drawing up of policies and strategic plans. The focus provided by the differential use of the timeline in prospective studies arises from the fact that these elements are likely to occur in the medium-and long-term,
and the types of policies required to foster innovation in the future. Other than this study, foreign experts gave lectures
set up to provide strategic directiions according to institutional policies and framework..Management group (MG: assigned to manage process
navigating the complex landscape of policy strategies',Technological forecasting and Social Change, 75: 462 82. European commission, Joint research Centre, Institute for Prospective Technological Studies.
Habegger, B. 2010)‘ Strategic foresight in public policy: reviewiin the experiences of the UK, Singapore and The netherlands',Futures, 42:49 58.
*and Sylvia Schwaag Serger1 1lund University research Policy Institute, P o box 117, SE-221 00 Lund, Sweden, 2institute of Science, Technology and Society, School of Humanities
This paper analyzes priority-setting in China's recent research policy. We find that China's research policy is driven by a variety of different,
however, the primarily quantitative policy analysis in Liu et al. 2011)).)) We aim to remedy this by studying the processes
and interests shaping the priorities in China's R&d programs and policies. The choice of China may be motivated by its sheer importtanc in the world scientific system,
The question remains how that transformation is related to policy practice, that is, how deeply the quantitative transformation of resource inputs has affected the design of the policy process.
We argue that such a transformation of policy models is also underway, blending the traditional focus on large-scale missions with a pluralist funding of individual projects and scientific institutions,
without strings attached to policy-oriented programs. Pluralism and elitism thus exist side by side. In this sense, the outline of a Chinese research policy model is therefore indicative of a more general policy change in China.
The emergence of a new priority-setting model has been driven by growing internal criticism of what are described as cumbersome and opaque allocation models.
Science and Public policy 39 (2012) pp. 258 270 doi: 10.1093/scipol/scs006 Advance Access published on 17 february 2012 The Author 2012.
since been enmeshed with policies in other areas, reducing the professional autonomy of the scientific community in setting priorities (Ziman 1994).
and strateegi funds of various types constitute different policy layers, sometimes, but not always, under the coordinating umbrella of public research planning (Ruivo 1994).
in order to capture programs and policies which are aimed primarily at research quality (cf. Cantner and Pyke 2000.
and other attempts to classify technollog policy (Cantner and Pyke 2000; Foray 2000) have focused generally on economically advanced countries
2. China's S&t system and policy: An overview 2. 1 A short history While China has a long history of scientific and technologgica discovery,
After the end of the Cultural Revolution, the direction of China's development policy, and with it its S&t policy, changed radically (Gu and Lundvall 2006;
when the China Communist party Central Committee (CCPCC) issued policy documents outlining three major systems reforms: of the economic system in 1984, of the S&t system in 1985,
In formulating policy, MOST has a number of research institutes at its disposal, such as the Chinese Academy of S&t for Development (CASTED) but also the Institute for Policy Management at the CAS and academics at selected universities, such as Tsinghua.
The Development Research center under the State Council (DRC), a think tank, also contributes to setting overall policy directions through its analyses.
The National Development Reform Commission (NDRC) and the Ministry of Finance influennc S&t policy-making through their responsibilities for overall economic policy and the budget, respectively.
but also the fundamental policy stance on opening up China for trade and investment, for example through accession to the World trade organization and the policy of attracting foreign technollog and investments.
and equipment to firms Soft Science Research program Provide reliable scientific advice to national and local policy-makers Source:
Classifying policy objectives In this section, we attempt to disentangle the abundance of plans, programs and projects by examining
The basic research policy in the MLP is expressed in four categories, and four priority areas, thus representing an ambition to square‘national needs'with‘science dynamics'.
which shape policy. This finding matches the conclusions drawn by Gu and Lundvall (2006) who argue that the investments in S&t have not been supported sufficiently by institutional development.
or challenges considered to require policy intervention. Several national S&t programs and initiatives have been created following public appeals
They usually take the opportunities provided by the conferences to provide policy suggestions to the government.
and thus from outside the governmment However, the appeals or demands for policy action did not take the government by surprise
and were not in conflict with the government's policy goals. 4. 2 Identifying priorities:
More than two thousand scientists, engineers, policy experts, corporate executives, officials from universities, ministries, and corporations participated in the strategic studies.
A senior policy researcher observed that the main actors involved in S&t policy-making were government ministries and scientists.
which had been encouraged strongly by Chinese official policy, on China's technological upgrading, with MOST expressing skepticism (Mei and Luo 2005).
Scientific experts play an important role in anchoorin important policies and in providing expertise on thematic choices
The overarching goals remain under strong central politiica control (notwithstanding factional debates among the policy elites.
In themselves, the MLPS represent an important articulattio of science and innovation policy with the broader fields of policy:
for instance‘harmonious society'and‘indigennou innovation',indicating the contributions and frameworks of STI governance with broader policy process.
The marginal role of industry, particularly privately owned enterprrises as a stakeholder is another weakness in the policy process.
>A key official and policy-maker of the MOST reported that more than 3, 000 people had registered at the website
Braun, D. 2008)‘ Organising the political coordination of knowledge and innovation policies',Science and Public policy, 35: 227 39.
The Public policies of the Home of Scientist, pp. 191 220. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell International.
The Impact of Economic Ideas on RTD Policies, 4s/EASST Conference 2000, held 27 30 september 2000, Vienna.
Greenhalgh, S. 2008) Just One Child, Science and Policy. Deng's China Berkeley: University of California Press.
Innovation systems and Policies in the USA, Europe and Asia, pp. 241 63. Karlsruhe: Fraunhofer Verlag.
'Science and Public policy, 21: 173 83. Saich, A j. 1989) China's Science policy in the 80s.
Schwaag Serger, S. and Breidne, M. 2007)‘ China's 15-year plan for scientific and technological development a critical assessment, Asia Policy, 4: 135 64.
Science and Public policy 39 (2012) pp. 271 281 doi: 10.1093/scipol/scs008 Advance Access published on 11 march 2012 The Author 2012.
journals. permissions@oup. com The government's research, technology development and innovation (RTDI) policies, which are special forms of national institutions
The Taiwanese government shaped the sector through its policies on pharmaceuticals and biotechnology. On the other hand, the agricultural sector,
The Taiwanese government supported the sector through agricultural policies, which were considered not part of the biotechnology policies.
In summary within the same national border of Taiwan differren configurations of the three innovation systems show different dynamics,
From Freeman's perspective (1987) research, technology development and innovation (RTDI) policies extensively shape the national system of innovation.
The OECD (1999) also claims that RTDI policies should match the development of the national system.
especiaall government policies, do influence the performance of a nation's technological innovation system. According to the literature an innovation system is composed of actors and networks
and is guided strongly by a‘set of'government policies. Nevertheless, as we will show in Section 3, Taiwan adopted traditional biotechnology before 1945 and adopted modern biotechnology as early as the 1980s.
the Taiwanese government has implemented not a‘set of policies'towards biotechnology, but has adopted different sets of policies towards pharmaceuttica biotechnology and agricultural biotechnology.
The evolution of biotechnology and the two sectors before 2000 in fact deeply influences the development after 2000.
The Taiwanese government announced its first biotechnology policy, the‘Eight Key Industries'in 1982. After 1982, Taiwan started to have a biotechnology policy.
We discuss the evolution of the pharmaceutical biotechnology innovation system in Section 3. 1 and the evolution of the agricultural biotechnology innovation system in Section 3. 2. 3. 1 The evolution of the Taiwanese pharmaceutical biotechnology innovation system
) Multinational pharmaceutical giants who were attraacte by the government's policies of foreign direct investtmen (FDI)
Nevertheless, since the 1990s, because of the rising cost of manufacturing in Taiwan and the policies of free trade in pharmaceuticals, pharmaceutical MNCS gradually sold their manufacturing facilities to local companies (DCB 2003:
But such surveys were merely to serve policy expectations rather than to lead to commercializatiio (Zheng 2001:
Pharmaceutical and biotechnology policies. The Taiwanese government did not strategically promote a‘set of consistent policies'to foster the development of pharmaceutical biotechnologgy Instead,
each policy directed towards pharmaceutical biotechnology had its own historical background and changed with the evolution of pharmaceuticals and biotechnnology The Eight Key Industries policy,
which was the first biotechnology policy announced in 1982, should be regarded as an important milestone in the change of policies.
Before 1982, the main purpose of policies was to encourage and to control the manufacturing activities of the pharmaceutical sector.
Thus regulation and FDI policies were very important. After 1982 as policies graduaall turned to encouraging innovation in the pharmaceuticca sector,
R&d policies became more and more significant. However, as a milestone, the Eight Key Industries itself was only a general policy announcement.
Besides recognizing biotechnology as one of the eight key industries in which the government should invest more resourrces there was no other concrete policy promoted under the framework of the Eight Key Industries.
Furthermore, according to the Eight Key Industries policy, the development of biotechnology was almost equal to the development of the pharmaceutical sector
whose knowledge base was chemical engineering rather than biotechnology (MOEA 2010). Policies of regulation, FDI and R&d were directed towards the pharmaceutical biotechnology innovation system.
The Law of Pharmaceutical Affairs was passed in 1970 and remained the most important regulation controlling the manufacture of medicines until 2000.
The Good Manufacturing Practice regulations were launched in 1982 to force the local SMES to upgrade their manufacturing capabilities.
In 1950, the government launched the‘Statute for Encouraging Foreign Direct Investment'(abolished in 1990)
before the late 1990s, the government did not have specific policies to encourage the development of modern pharmaceutical biotechnology.
It only had policies to foster pharmaceutical chemical engineering. Only in the late 1990s did the government start to support the development of modern pharmaceutical biotechnnolog through supporting the innovation of new herbaceous medicines. 3. 2 Evolution of the Taiwanese agricultural biotechnology innovation system 3. 2
Agricultural policies. The Taiwanese government supported the development of agriculttura biotechnology through its agricultural policies.
The purpose of these policies changed dramatically in the 1980s. Before the 1980s, the agricultural products were export-oriented.
The main purpose of the agricultural policies at the time was to direct the agricultural sector to maximize the production of agricultural products, especiaall the primary productions of rice and sugar cane,
in order to earn large amount of foreign currencies. The majority of foreign exchanges were used to support the development of manufacturing industries, particularly the information and communication technologies (ICT.
did the policy objectives of the agricultuura policies turned to upgrading the farmers'living standards (Chang 1982:
when the first biotechnology policy, the Eight Key Industries, was announced in 1982, agricultural biotechnology was recognized not as a part of the development of biotechnologgy Indeed,
The two main agricultural policies promoting agricultuura biotechnology innovation system were agricultural R&d and regulation policies.
) Treating agricultural R&d policies as a type of welfare policy, modern agricultural biotechnologies innovated by universities and public research organizatiion were commercialized not
8 Another important agricultural policy promoted by the government was agricultural regulation. Before the 1980s, there was no policy regulating the innovation of seeds.
With the developmmen of GMOS in the 1980s,‘Genetic Modified Safety Rules'were implemented in the labs. Yet, besides field trials,
In sum, besides its agricultural policies, the Taiwanese government did not have particular policies to support the development of agricultural biotechnology.
due to the governmment'policies, these biotechnologies were commercialized seldom. 4. Discussion and conclusion The Taiwanese pharmaceutical biotechnology innovation system and agricultural biotechnology innovation system reveal different dynamics.
The two NSTISS were shaped by different sets of policies. The policies directed towards the pharmaceutical biotechnology system were regulations, FDI and R&d.
Before the 1980s, while pharmaceutical manufacturing was the main activity of the system, the main policies were regulation and FDI,
which aimed to control the manufacturing facilities and the quality of the medicines. After the 1980s,
the first biotechnoloog policy, targeted the development of the pharmaceutical sector, rather than biotechnology. Whilst the public organizations such as the DCB transferred technologies to pharmaceutical companies,
On the other hand the agricultural biotechnology system was supported only by agricultural policies. Before the 1980s while agricultural products were exported,
the government promoted agricultural R&d and regulation policies, merely to increase the welfare of farmers
Even though the system certainly adopted biotechnnolog for innovation, the commercialization of agriculttura biotechnology was encouraged not by policies.
In summary, the development of the NSTIS is shaped deeply by national institutions such as national RTDI policies.
Our final issue is the implications of RTDI policies. With the new concept of an innovation system
the NSTIS, the RTDI policies which can appropriately foster the development of an innovation system, can be reanalyzed.
Thus, appropriate RTDI policies which foster the development of NSTISS should cluster the network of actors, support the underlying logic of knowledge accumulaatio and exploitation in a particular technological field,
Indeed, new RTDI policies should be customized to deliberately match the different dynamics of different NSTISS
the new RTDI policies should take account of the different historical backgrounds of different policies. In the case of biotechnollogy a government should have different sets of policies for the development of pharmaceutical biotechnology and agricultural biotechnology.
Since each NSTIS is unique, National, sectoral and technological innovation systems: Taiwan. 279 RTDI policies copied from foreign countries
or copied from another NSTIS will find it very difficult to appropriattel support the development of a specific NSTIS.
‘how'could a government make appropriate RTDI policies to foster the development of NSTISS? The question should be analyzed further in future research.
Boschert, K. and Gill, B. 2005)‘ Germany's agri-biotechnology policy: Precaution for choice and alternatives',Science and Public policy, 32: 285 92.
Brink, J.,Mckelvey, M. and Smith, K. 2004)‘ Conceptualizing and measuring modern biotechnology'.'In: Laage-Hellman, J.,Rickne, A. and Mckelvey, M. eds.
Globalization, Change and Policy in Asia and Europe. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. Freeman, C. 1987) Technology policy and Economic Performance:
Taiwan's Biotechnology Policy and Promotion Status. Biotechnology & Pharmaceutical industries Program Office<http://www. bpipo. org. tw/en/policy. html>accessed 14 december 2010.
firms, demand, government policy and research'.'In: Laage-Hellman, J.,Rickne, A. and Mckelvey, M. eds.
Political consensus despite divergeen concepts of precaution',Science and Public policy, 32: 277 84. Wong, J. 2005)‘ Remaking the developmental state in Taiwan:
which are recognised hardly in the EU's existing innovattio policy instruments, in order to effectively reorient the EU's innovation systems towards grand challenges.
The main novelty lies in the increasing attention given to such issues in formulating new missions for STI policy.
This new orientation is perhaps nowhere more in evidence than at the EU level, where grand societal Science and Public policy 39 (2012) pp. 140 152 doi:
journals. permissions@oup. com challenges are presently a major focus of research and innovaatio policies. The aim is to rejuvenate the European research area (ERA), an overt political project,
which, since its adoption a decade ago, has yet to meet the expectatiion of European policy-makers.
and articulation of grand challenges at the EU level will mobilise Member States to better synchronise their STI policy instruments,
Longer-term time horizons to be introduced more expliciitl into shorter-term policy agendas and business planning practices.
If grand challenges are to be operationalised as rationales for STI policy interventions, the need to transcend these boundaries should be appreciated widely,
This is followed by a discusssio (Section 4) of the systemic reorientation of innovattio systems towards grand challenges and the demands put on policy and governance.
and innovation collaborration the degree to which recent developments cover the identified needs in the reorientation and governing of innovation systems and STI policies,
as well as the contributtion FTA could make to orienting policy agendas towards grand challenges. Section 7 draws some conclusions. 2. Innovation:
and this has implications for policy (Fagerberg et al. 2004). Factors vary, for instance, on R&d intensity (i e. high-tech,
This means there is no possibility of a one-size-fits-all policy mix to improve the performance of innovattio systems.
It is here that innovation system failures that demand policy attention tend to be identified, focused around actors'capabilities, the scale and nature of system interactions,
Generally speaking, institutions provide important levers for policy to shape actors'behaviours and interactions. This makes them an essential starting point in efforts to set in motion virtuous cycles of transformative change directed at grand challenges.
various visions and expectations, regulations and policies, and the activities of lead users. As such, guidance can be considered to be an interactive and cumulative process of exchanging ideas between technology producers, users and many other actors..
particularly for radical innovatiions The innovation system therefore needs to create spaces, for example, through procurement policies, standards or regulations that nurture demand for innovations..
or stakeholder theory, in which business organisations increasingly promote innovation in their social and environmental policies (Smith 2000).
there is a need for additional policies that are related to networks, community building, visions, experiments and learning.
Such socio-technical approaches refrain from simple policy recipes. Instead, they highlight co-evolution, multi-dimensionality, compleexit and multi-actor processes, conditions that,
At the same time, appropriate constellations of policy interventions will vary, depending on specific challenges, opportunities and problems encountered in sectors, technologies and social networks (Stirling et al. 2009).
Clearly, the eorientation of innovation systems places particular demands on STI policy and the governance of innovation systems.
These are oriented future processes that offer policy -and decision-makers the potential to look across (disruptive) transformations
They can also assist in managing the uncertainty associated with innovation activities and with the future more broadly by providing spaces for policy,
From a policy arena perspective, this coordination potentiia can enhance communication and understanding 144. C. Cagnin et al. between policy‘silos'and thereby support the emergence of an effective policy mix for innovation.
Finally, the act of participating in FTA PROCESSES can itself be transformative by encouraging the adoption of new perspectives
and investment priorities for public policies Evaluate existing strategies against potential futures, and devise future-proof strategies Develop reference material for policy-makers
and other actors to use, broadening the knowledge base around which decisions are made, thereby resulting in better informed public policies
or organisational strategies Provide anticipatory strategic intelligence to innovation system actors, including overall citizens, thus leading to policy processes amenable to current
and future issues Detect and analyse weak signals to‘foresee'likely future changes and to gain insights into complex interactions
business, societal, policy and political opportunities Increase awareness of possible risks, and hence the basis for more effective contingency planning,
C. Cagnin et al. 6. Implications for European collaborative programmes This section examines some of the recent STI policy initiatiive of the EU that seek to better orient policy agendas towards grand challenges
Addressing grand challenges is at the core of EU policies for research and innovation as illustrated by the latest EU strategic policy documents.
and has formulated ambitious policy objectives for climate change, energy security, demographic ageing and resource efficiency. At the same time the Europe 2020 Strategy notes that a partnership approach should extend to EU committees, to national parliaments and national, local and regional authorities,
However, it is agreed generally that existing policy implementation tools for STI cooperation fall short of adequately supporting broad-based collaborative action at the scale
as well as cross-departmental policy coordination and coherence. The new instruments also acknowledge the importance of long-term time horizons to be introduced more expliciitl into shorter-term policy agendas
and business planning practices. FTA has played already some role in the old instruments, e g. in setting the strategic research agendas in ERA NETS and the European Technology platforms,
Especially in relation to knowledge productiion the role of FTA is seen to be important for encouraging the multi-disciplinarity needed both in terms of research focus as well as in the identification of policy implications given the interdependencies of grand challenges
and the wide range of policy areas that are involved. Nevertheless, FTA could also play other potential roles in the new instruments dealing with grand challenges through better exploitation of its structuring and capacity-building roles
as a source of‘strategic intelligence'for policy and other actors, is itself a knowledge-creating activity.
One rectifying step would be to better consider the structural and functional aspects of innovattio systems with a view to identifying bottlenecks and appropriate points for effective policy intervention.
or launched new initiativves such as the Lund Declaration11 that shall be the basis for designing the EU's future policies for research and innovation.
and policy-makers representing all discipliine and from different parts of the world. Such bottom-up process was important
2010)‘ The impact of European policy on the development of the ERA in the areas relevant to environmennt'Draft Final Report.
Jacobsson, S. and Bergek, A. 2006)‘ A framework for guiding policy-makers intervening in emerging innovation systems in‘catching-up'countries',European Journal of Development Research, 18: 687 707.
Rittel, H. and Weber, M. 1973)‘ Dilemmas in a general theory of planning',Policy Sciences, 4: 155 69.
*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
Increased mobility, the instantaneoou impact of events through social media and the socioculttura interconnections linking Europe to the rest of Science and Public policy 39 (2012) pp. 153 165 doi:
The dynamic internatiiona environment requires policy-makers to be prepared better for the‘unexpected 'and to be in a position to instigate timely responses.
which are sufficiently agile to transform their policies and practices in response to challennges There is a need to enhance anticipatory,
Geels and Schot 2007) or rapidly (policy shocks)( e g. Skoufias 2003. The categories of grand challenges identified by theeuropean Research area (ERA) Rationales Expert Group (European commission 2008) provide one typology of transformations.
Different types of grand challenges call for different transformation models and policy strategies. The distinction between disrupptiv and recognised grand challenges referred to in the European Science Foundation report (European Science Foundation 2010) highlights the fact that areas of disruptiiv grand challenges can be exogenous
we speak of transitiion or policy shocks. The axes (see Fig. 1) highlight the divide between the primarily reactive approach to disruptive events
In the context of this intricate web of disruptive, natural and planned transformations FTA has a critical role to play in defining effective policy responses.
improovin the quality and robustness of anticipatory intelligeenc and preparedness for disruptive events through systematic approaches and shared insights and perceptioons creating an effective dialogue between key players in the different policy domains;
expertise and other resources required for effective policy responses. 2. 2 FTA systems and modes of governance FTA systems form an active part of the institutional context
force government to take up new measures in other modes of governance for instance policy measures to incentivise research
and the need for faster delivery of FTA results to policy and decisionmakking The rediscovery of parliamentary technology assesssmen (TA) is also a sign of renewed interest in institutionalised forms of TA (cf.
However, in principle institutionalised FTA has the advantage of being embedded firmly further in policy and decision-making:
and potential disruptions that are not yet at the top of the current policy agendas. 2. 3. 3 FTA networks.
In providing support on policy options and consequences in the face of disruptions, they have the potential to mobilise a distributed capacity in a flexible manner.
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 its embedding in other policies to tackle grand societal challenges, is a change in both governance and organisational models.
A much higher degree of policy coordination seems to be needed to address societal challennge as well as a much more continuous and‘embedded'approach to FTA.
This indicates that FTA has potential to support‘policy mix'(demand -and supply-side) approaches and the comprehensive analysis of possible measures in view of their combined effects on differren governance modes.
because routines in strategic policy processes do not always match with the characteristics of required methods.
Anticipate gradual changes and support deliberate policies for transitions.‘‘Wiring up the innovation system'.'Stimulating national and regional economic development through innovation.
Evidence-based, joined-up R&i policy. Consensus-building and effectiiv engagement of civil society. Programmes and projects.
Enhancing policy coordination through FTA. Joint visioning and programming. Policy coordination, in addition to research coordination. Contextualisation/embedding by approaches that are tailored to particular contexts:
global, national, regional, local or sectoral. Networking and institutionalisaatio to enhance fast responses Coping with a fast-changing world. 159 forward-looking
technology and innovation (STI) policies and achieving impact on national innovation systems (NIS). They argue that external FTA services are useful
or suggestiin future fields in a specific phase of re-orientation of policy, whereas institutionalised forms of FTA are more suitable under unstable political conditions and in situatiion with a high level of fluctuation.
The institutionalisation of FTA seems to generate intense discussion on the benefits and drawbacks of stronger integration in the policy processes.
in order to improve support for policy options and their implications. We can conclude that a substantial benefit can be derived from such networks, in particular for smaller countries or countries with a less developed foresight and anticipatory intelligeenc culture in general.
and also horizontal and pervasiiv anticipatory culture‘Innovation policy roadmapping as a systemic instrument for policy design'Ahlqvist et al.
2012) Focuses on gradual multilevel complex deliberate transformatiions which can be identified with a roadmapping exercise Identification of suitable policy instruments and/or strategies for various governance modes External service (projects and programmes),
and policy roadmapping activities‘Linking territorial foresight and urban planning'Ferna'ndez Gu ell et al. 2012) Addresses spatial dimension in gradual transformation, combining both reactive and deliberate approaches in scenario work that integrate spatial dimensions of urban planning Elements of different modes of governance addressed.
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.
can raise awareness among policy-makers and other stakehollder and help to validate foresight processes and the results that they generate.
and the contextualisation of R&i policy mix are emerging priorities. Local, regional and national FTA networks, cutting across different policy areas, can support an appropriate level of policy coordination to anticipate
and tackle structural deficiencies in the R&i ecology..Addressing grand challenges requires public appreciattio of the important role played by R&i in meeting social, environmental and other needs.
and require structured interactions with a broad range of related policy domains (European research area Board 2009;
Worldwide and regional (European) networks of the FTA units in international organisations, national and at least for some grand challenges regional (subnational) governments, business and nongovernmental organisations are providing an organisaationa solution to share policy perspectives
and develop joint policy and research agenda. The subsequent observations deal with the question of how these requirements
particularly as concerns the recognition of interconnections among the signals or the derivation of their policy implications (Dervin 1998).
'whose exploration paves the way for policy coordination and the attainment of systemic policy objectives. 3. 2. 3 Observation 3:
In many policy areas, both public and private sector, a strategic perspective on decisionmakkin is necessary
it is a rather new development in the public sector, for instance in the field of RTI policy,
As a consequence, there is a growing need to embed this anticipatory capacity in policy and decision-making quickly,
in order to deliver advice quickly to policy-makers. Thus, emerging forms of FTA facility are tending towards more embedded,
and by design, with the latter either triggered by policy shocks or managed as a smooth transition.
co-evolving with policy action in four archetypal modes of governance: integration, coordination, competition and co-existence.
In general, the shift from short-term projects and programmes to institutionalised forms of FTA is due to the demanding policy environment
particularly when the policy focus extends beyond the challenges that societies face today, to anticipate future challenges
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
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
Lessons from initiating policy dialogues on emerging issues',Science and Public policy, 39: 208 21. Brummer, V.,Ko nno la, T. and Salo, A. 2008)‘ Foresight within Era nets:
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.
Georghiou, L. and Cassingena Harper, J. 2010)‘ Policy dialogue brief on innovation policy',Report from the ERAPRISM Project.<
grand challenges',Science and Public policy, 39: 166 77. Ko nno la, T. and Haegeman, K. 2012b)‘ Embedding foresight in transnational research programming',Science and Public policy, 39: 191 207.
Ko nno la T.,Carrillo Hermosilla, J.,Loikkanen, T. and van der Have, R. 2009) Governance of energy system transition:
Scanning, synthesizing and sense-making in horizon scanning',Science and Public policy, 39: 222 31. Loveridge, D. and Street, P. 2005)‘ Inclusive foresight',Foresight, 7: 31 47.
Nehme, C. C.,de Miranda Santos, M.,Fellows Filho, L. and Massari Coelho, G. 2012)‘ Challenges in communicating the outcomes of a foresight study to advise decision-makers on policy and strategy
',Science and Public policy, 39: 245 57. Nordmann, A. 2004)‘ Converging technologies Shaping the future of European societies',Report of an Expert Group to the European commission.
transition management in public policy',Foresight, 3: 15 31. Salo, A. and Kuusi, O. 2001)‘ Developments in parliamentary technology assessment in Finland',Science and Public policy, 28: 453 64.
SEC. 2010)‘ Commission Staff Working Document A rationale for action, accompanying the Europe 2020 Flagship Initiative Innovation Union',COM (2010) 546, pp. 9 and 89,
Coping strategies and policy implications',World Development, 31: 1087 102. Taleb, N. N. 2007) The Black swan:
identifying common strategic choices and questions for knowledge',Science and Public policy, 37:7 18. Warnke, P. 2011)‘ Implementing systemic RTI priorities Recent experience from Germany,
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.
Overtext Web Module V3.0 Alpha
Copyright Semantic-Knowledge, 1994-2011