These include innovation system modelling, text mining of Science, Technology & Innovation(‘ST&I')information resources, trend analyses, actor analyses,
sharing progress on our efforts to devise algorithms to help extract key technology components, significant actors, and potential applications.*
TDS models can serve to identify the key institutional actors, spelling out enterprise requirements, and spotlighting leverage points to affect the prospects of successful commercialisation.
and profile that activity and the associated actors from these data (Steps C and D). Many analytical tools can serve to profile R&d,
and take it to market and (2) the key contextual factors (actors, trends, and events) affecting the success of that innovation process.
targeted at the USA we chose this national focus to focus on a set of key actors.
and those discussed in the business-oriented literature identifies possibly important actors in the DSSC arena.
2006) with relevance to strategic dialogues Model/framework Relevance to strategic dialogues Rational actor paradigm (RAP) The RAP assumes that all individuals maximize their personal benefit without communication with,
and can facilitate the interplay of actors in research as well as research policy. Through our work we have come to the conclusion that a carefully designed transfer of foresight results into research policy making would be beneficial in a wide range of situations, not just in Germany but also within the EU and internationally.
The Lund Declaration and other initiatives have provided high-level impetus for actors in the research and innovation system to take stock of the way in which they develop
and thusmobilise actors to take actions in order to realise the joint visions (or at least take steps in that direction).
or even impossible to solve by single actors. Grand challenges 381 C. Cagnin et al.//Technological forecasting & Social Change 80 (2013) 379 385 are by nature complex and largely impervious to top-down rational planning approaches.
ii) align actors around the challenge;(iii) discuss expected and unexpected consequences of challenges; and (iv) anticipate
and stresses the need of an organisational structure that includes a variety of actors and perspectives from the outset of an endeavour in order to properly foster nanotechnology by establishing governance structures able to coordinate interactions of relevant actors.
Schirrmeister and Warnke 14 contribute towards building foresight capacities for systemic and structural transformations by proposing an original methodological approach that combines four specific features:
and to promote co-operation between various actors. In Germany, FTA was used mainly to shape
In both countries, public policy activities to foster nanotechnology were accompanied by efforts to establish governance structures to coordinate interactions between actors of the innovation system.
implies the need for an organisational structure that includes a variety of actors and perspectives from the outset.
The implication for foresight methods is that network analysis can introduce a‘systemic'perspective emphasising relationships between actors,
and prepare various actors for it. In this context, combining methodological approaches creates opportunities to complement the weaknesses inherent to the use of one single approach with strengths of other approaches.
a multi-actor, multi-objective method, Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 76 (2009) 1037 1050.29 N. Agami, M. Saleh, H. El-Shishiny, A fuzzy logic based trend impact analysis method, Technol.
by an individual or group of actors, and‘policy-making'for the act or process of designing policies by those in charge of designing (public policy.
Another important challenge inmany FTA projects is supporting amulti-actor process. Different perspectives, differentworldviews or different mental models of various stakeholders are usually the norm in FTA projects
and may result in situations where the results of FTA projects are contested by one ormore of the actors involved in the process
if the diversity of views and/or actors is cared not properly for. Here, EMA can be of use,
the actor-options framework for modelling socio-technical systems, in: Policy analysis, Delft University of Technology, Delft, 2010.6 P. Eykhoff, System Identification:
which explicitly focuses on multiple actor groups within the electricity system, most importantly the end users and the generation companies.
It is possible to name two major supply options for all actor groups, i e. using electricity supplied via central generation,
-create and support a systemized negotiation process among key stakeholders (social actors. -be helpful in engaging decision-makers in specific issues,
and innovation instruments and actors to tackle the innovation emergency related to the grand challenges the European union is facing 16, p1.
By consequence, innovation systems are described as networks of actors and institutions that develop, diffuse and use innovations 38.
and using scenarios should be viewed as a systemized negotiation process among key stakeholders (social actors),
and negotiated by the key actors 79. However, it is also crucial to keep in mind the limitations of the scenario methodology 80.
and defining areas for innovation Weak on complexity of socio-technological systems Evolutionary Interaction Engage in sustainable pathways enabling transformations of innovation systems Allows a systemized negotiation process linking a variety of social actors
innovation Risk of not reaching out to key (technological) actors 440 P. De Smedt et al.//Technological forecasting & Social Change 80 (2013) 432 443 acknowledge the limits of our analysis:
and not only probable or desired futures among the actors that develop, diffuse, and use innovations. Learning of participants is not always an objective as such,
and using scenarios should be viewed as a systemized negotiation process among key stakeholders (social actors),
what main actors have been involved, from the first monitoring and forecasting studies on nanotechnology to the establishment of national nanotechnology programs
what main actors were involved in the future-oriented activities conducted prior to and after the establishment of national nanotechnology programs.
In both countries, the public policy activities to foster nanotechnology were accompanied by efforts to establish governance structures to coordinate interactions between actors of the innovation system.
covering non-state actors, and is characterized by continuing interactions among network members 15. Today, future governance is seen as crucial for the development of nanotechnology 16.2.2.
and technology assessment studies included actors and knowledge mainly from science and industry 1, 19 22.
as in the case of emerging technologies, the diverse and dynamic environment enables the actors within the pluralistic system to use FTA to build up governance networks
visiting conferences and other relevant actors internationally, organizing expert panels on different aspects of nanotechnology,
conducting studies on specific nano-subfields and by bringing together relevant actors from science and industry through workshops and expert discussion 6. Technology intelligence, technology assessment,
a network of important actors was already in place revolving around one federal ministry. Priorities were set focusing on the positions, needs,
the VDI-TZ built and stabilized actor networks representing industry and science. 7 These early network activities did not involve other ministries or government agencies,
Unlike in the US, there was no initiative in the beginning that brought together different actors under an independent umbrella organization.
Other actors, such as other ministries and their agencies (for instance the BMU and the Federal Environment Agency) stepped in only after the funding strategy was established already.
which expertise was limited by involving actors exclusively from government, science, and industry. Later processes included expertise from a broader range of disciplines
449 P. Schaper-Rinkel/Technological forecasting & Social Change 80 (2013) 444 452 In this later stage, heterogeneous stakeholders beyond the actors of the early established nano-policy networks
Unlike in the US, the governance network in Germany is centralized around one ministry (the BMBF) lacking a continuously working governance structure to bring together the variety of actors involved in nano-related innovation processes.
Both in the US and Germany, actors conducting early FTA did not claim to have a broad impact on public policy,
implies the need for an organizational structure that includes a variety of actors and perspectives from the outset.
and matching processwhere interaction is the critical element 9. Rothwell's fifth-generation innovation concept describes innovation as amulti-actor processwhich requires intensive interaction at intra-and inter-firm
For decades the dominant definition of innovation as new products and processes that are introduced to the market combined with the common understanding of companies as the main actors in this process was questioned hardly ever.
but all of them integrated other experts'and actors'opinions and knowledge. Several co-ordinators decided to reach out to a wider community of actors.
The smallest group comprised 5 and the largest one 42 participants. The INFU teamimposed only a very rough indication on the format for the vision's delivery.
France Workshop envisioning the open innovation city with actors from city councils and companies involved with city level innovation in Paris 5. Innocamp Society Dominik Wind Until we see new land (Innovation camp Start-up),
Berlin, Germany (US) Workshop in Berlin with stakeholders and key actors from cradle to cradle communityb in Berlin 8. Social experimentation Stéphane Vincent La 27e Région,
France Drafting of Citizens Agency in a visioning session in Brussels with actors in social innovation a Citizens Visions in Science and Technology FP7 SSH project. b Cradle to Cradle:
In subsequent phases of the INFU project, the findings were assessed by actors from various stakeholder groups with respect to impacts for society, economy and ecosystems 29.
However, it is to be noted that among the around 80 actors involved directly in the INFU futures dialogue
In particular the policy actors welcomed the fact that INFU underpinned the exploration of fundamental changes in the innovation landscape rather than isolated responses to individual trends. 3. 2. Lessons learnt methodology From a methodological point of view the aim of the INFU project was to contribute towards building
Themajority of these responses indicate that the project succeeded in opening up new perspectives for exploring the future of innovation with relevance for strategic conversations among various actor groups.
In our view the effort put into realising contributions of external actors beyond mereworkshop participationwas fully justified by the diversity of the outcomes.
The value of the contributions of actors from different perspectives was exploited much better than in conventional workshops where participants'contributions are documented by the foresight team.
and engagement of the actors dealing with the topic, but at the same time there is a high risk, namely that only positive visions that go along very well with the personal value systemare taken up and further developed.
Actors who considered a structural change as a positive transition werewilling to be involved in the further development of the visions.
what is called variously orchestration or alignment of actors around the challenge. Of the three the most difficult is likely to be identification of new challenges.
The key actors in this phase were the five negotiators from each of the five parties that were behind the Globalisation Strategy.
Furthermore, new and deviating ideas from actors who had conflicting interests were introduced during the process,
formal ones are more visible among those who collaborate and also to other actors outside.
Moreover, the first online questionnaire and interviews with key industry actors took into account those research topics already mapped
Community actors, institutions and multilevel governance in regional foresight exercises, Futures 36 (2004) 45 65.10 C. Cagnin, M. Keenan, R. Johnston, F. Scapolo, R
The fourth paper, by Robinson and Propp, addresses the important issue of alignment of actors for innovation policy to succeed.
At the same time, the city major, a key actor in the process, supported the initiative by developing employment opportunities for youngsters
and (iii) a common vision to be pursued across the system based upon the mutual positioning of value chain actors in relation to the future.
and in engaging different actors to confront views, learn from one another, and agree on a path to follow.
thus paramount to enable alignment of actors and select (joint) strategies to be pursued. This also allows different organisations to build on complementary resources rather than to duplicate efforts 40.
Also, it considers where all actors see themselves both individually and collectively within these alternative futures.
However, such common vision to be pursued across the system should be based upon the mutual positioning of value chain actors in relation to future needs 52.
Ultimately, interactions 45,53 56 between actors need to be reinforced to allow the coordination and mobilisation of necessary skills and resources towards a common target;
foresight can help actors to anticipate and manage emerging challenges. It does so by providing spaces where actors can come together to shape equally likely paths into the future through a collective articulation of visions
and expectations (thus supporting phase 1). Such articulation would be the basis for actors to jointly experiment
and develop creative options and solutions to challenges (thus supporting phase 1) as well as learn with one another
In this context, the inclusion of forecasting and technology assessment features would allow further experimentation (e g. modelling) in relation to the possible pathways actors can pursue both individually and collectively.
This is particularly true with a view of aligning value chain actors towards a shared vision enabled through FTA.
and its actors to become co-adaptive in time. However, a new piloting of the system would be critical to both validate
community actors, institutions and multilevel governance in regional foresight exercises, in: Paper Prepared for the STRATA ETAN Expert Group action on Mobilising the Regional foresight Potential for an Enlarged European union, 2002.44 C. Shelton, Quantum leaps, Butterworth-Heinemann, Boston, Massachusetts, 1997.45 C. Cagnin,
principles of the Cyclic Innovation Model are (1) that innovating is predominantly a cyclic interaction between different actors who exchange knowledge
The cyclic nature of the relationships between the different actors means that there is constant feedback
and feed-forward between the actors. In this analysis, level 1 of the CIM is applied since it comprises a direct link between futures research and innovation.
including methodologies combining scenario analysis, multi-issue actor analysis, roadmapping and target costing 39, business modeling and future studies.
, scenario analysis, multi-issue actor analysis, roadmapping Project 2. 3 Thematic innovation radar Identifies new technologies, trends and topics in a predefined thematic field Project 2. 4 Working group Provide a setting to explore future topics
which is designed to give a comprehensive picture of relevant future issues for an actor (or a set of actors),
and underlying values of the actor (s). No particular time frame (try to look forward as far as we can see or imagine),
The Delphi was meant to help reduce the uncertainntie associated with some of the impacts we came across in the analysis. Sector Analysis Realtime online Delphi Scenario development Policy analysis Issues analysis ICT key trends Trends in actor behaviour Transformation pressures in the CC
Sector analysis The first step in our process is the analysis of the sector in terms of the actors, business models, technollog trends, societal developments,
looking at the role of the various actors in the value chain (e g. publishers, retaai etc.),
and actors along the various value chains for reasons inherent in the varying degree of digitisation in each sub-sector and the market structures that have prevailed in each domain until recently.
Figure 3. Actors and key technological areas in the video game sub-sector Source Mateos-Garcia et al.
and for the actors in the sector. Consequently, our impact assessment focused on four categories of issues (technology, regulatory, market and user related), each encompassing a number of sub-issues.
By their very nature, the issues raised tend to be assessed in differing ways by the various actors in the creative content sector
e g. debates, inclusiveness, actor alignment etc. and foresiigh impact in terms of learning effects, and strateeg formulation for action by system actors.
Conceptually, this would be multifaceted a complex evaluation based on the broad impacts of an FTA PROCESS. Similarly, Amanatidou and Guy (2006) have pointed out the direct and indirect benefits of FTA:
technology and innovation priorities Creating a language and body of practice for thinking about the future A source of inspiration for policy system actors More comprehensive,
repositioning of old ones Establishment of communications structures between innovation actors Support the empowerment of (innovation and futures) systems actors Contribute towards the development of actor identities Foresight provides many opportunities for enhanced
so as to gain agility and strengthen preparedness Learning effects impacts Supports system actors to create their own futures Creates a shared vision amongst diverse actors Gain insights into complex interactions
and emerging drivers of change Builds trust and shared basis of experience between system actors Detect
and analyze weak signals that enable actors to‘foresee'changes ahead Facilitate better understanding of potentially disruptive change Provide anticipatory intelligence about the systems
and their changes to system actors Development of significant new ways of thinking about challenges and opportunities Promote collective learning through open exchanges of information
i e. self-reflection amongst actors;‘‘blockade running'to resolve barriers; and bridge building to move forward New decision-making structures, processes:
and practical implementation Involvement of political actors in the process Critical success factors for government-led foresight Science and Public policy February 2010 35 asked what they thought were the best contemporary foresight organizations,
but the clear message was that a successful foresight program had to connect in some meaningful manner to private sector actors.
which focuses on the daily use of technology and stresses the power of human actors and societal forces (Williams and Edge, 1996;
e g. the actor-network theory (Latour, 1993), which states that technology and people are part of sociotechhnica networks,
Impact of technology policy on innovation by firms Science and Public policy February 2010 65 consensus not only among political actors but also among organizations representing business interests.
in order to avoid ex ante selection bias would be to undertake an evaluation by awarding grants (subsidies) randooml within a pool of actors who are judged suitabbl for funding (Jaffe, 2002).
which actors should be engaged, what actions should or could be taken, what is the possibility and role of innovation,
and the mutual positioning of innovattio system actors in relation to the future. At the same time, FTA can support
and often disparaat actors that might not normally interact. These allow for knowledge to be created, exchanged and diffused.
Significant features are that it is targeted at the systemic level of multiple actors and organisations,
In addition, this methodological approach was based on the perception that decision-making emerges from a negotiaatio between multiple actors.
Wang 1993), selected sectors and actors (Jakobson 2007; Zhang et al. 2009) or assessment of the state of its STI capabilities (D'Costa and Parayil 2009;
Five S&t‘forces'or actors were identified: the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS), the public research institutes affiliated to the ministries,
These actors operated on the basis of a clear division of labor with little interaction between them.
in funding research and in establishing research institutions (for an overview of key institutions and actors see also Kroll et al.
A senior policy researcher observed that the main actors involved in S&t policy-making were government ministries and scientists.
Although industrial actors especiaall large firms, were asked sometimes to provide input, such suggestions were paid not enough attention. 8
as the reforms of governance continue to stress the need for articulation of actors'interests, building new constituencies among academics, academic institutions and industry to tap into their interests,
Several contradictions confront actors in the Chinese S&t system: the large number of programs and initiatives, leading to overlaps, the ambition to foster public debates and pluralist deliberation,
but also a risk of an overly strong reliance on a few elite actors. The marginal role of industry, particularly privately owned enterprrises as a stakeholder is another weakness in the policy process.
and agricultural biotechnology innovation systems we find that even within the same nation different NSTISS reveal different dynamics, in terms of actors and networks, the application of technology and knowledge and institutions.
The institutional actors, such as firms and industrial laboratories, universities and government laboratories, and their networks constitute the national innovation system (Nelson and Rosenberg 1993).
A group of actors in the system carry out market and non-market actions for the creation, production and sale of the products.
These actors interact through communiccation competition cooperation and commands, and the actors'networks are shaped by institutions,
such as national institutions. Indeed, actors and networks, knowledge and technology, and institutions are the three blocks of a sectoral innovation system.
National institutioons from the perspective of Malerba (2002), should match the sectoral innovation system within the national borders.
2002), within a particular knowledge field the actors, including the buyers and sellers, of a dynamic network interact in a specific economic or industrial arena
which is under specific institutional infrastrucctures The interactions of the actors in the network are both market and non-market.
According to the literature an innovation system is composed of actors and networks technology and knowledge, and institutions.
The actors within the system such as institutional actors, use the knowledge of a particular technological field to produce a set of particcula products.
The actors within the system carry out market and non-market interactions in order to generate, diffuse and utilize the knowledge of a particular technologgica field to create,
produce and sell a particular set of products. The interactions and networks between the actors are shaped by national institutions.
The national government plays an essential role in establishing national institutions. To sum up, an NSTIS, as the three innovation systems, is composed of actors and networks, technology and knowledge,
and institutions. The components of the system are shaped by national institutions. We choose the Taiwanese biotechnology
Firstly, the actors and networks of different NSTISS may differ from each other and evolve differently over time.
In brief, within the same nation different NSTISS may involve different groups of actors and the networks of the different groups of actors may not only be quite distinct,
but may also change differently over time. Secondly, different NSTISS may adopt the same knowleedg base to develop different products
As shown above different NSTISS may have different actors and networks, as well as different applicatiion of a particular technological field for different sets of products.
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,
Even their meanings tend to be highly contesste by different actors Furthermore, any attempts to address them must span a number of longstanding organisatiional epistemic and sectoral boundaries,
Section 3 describes the working of innovation systems around their structural elements focused on actors'capabilities, the scale and nature of system interactions,
At the same time, innovation is a systemic phenomenon by nature as it results from the continuing interaction between different actors and organisations (Freeman 1970.
with firms and other innovating actors operating in linked environments of institutions and other actors.
The advantages of thinking in terms of innovation systems is that they provide a more complete picture of the topography of innovation-relevant actors and the relations between them
There are distinct differences in actors and relations-shaping institutiion between countries and sectors, and in the way they perform.
focused around actors'capabilities, the scale and nature of system interactions, and the workings of institutions (Arnold 2004;
Actors: these include a wide range of types of organisattion including: firms (large and small, multinatiiona and domestic), universities, public research labs, government ministries and agencies,
in that they are generated by the activities of actors and their interacttion with one another. At the same time, they also structure these activities and 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.
it is important for innovation systems to be able to guide actors in selecting options for investment.
As such, guidance can be considered to be an interactive and cumulative process of exchanging ideas between technology producers, users and many other actors..
and wider variety of actors involved in innovation systems. Indeed, right at the outset, a more transformative innovattio sets a responsibility to catalyse
The institutions that pattern actors'behaviours and interactions are also more variable and likely to operate in less than predictable ways as they span traditional boundaries.
and focus of business actors in engaging with innovation, since certain grand challenges call for social responsibility
Instead, they highlight co-evolution, multi-dimensionality, compleexit and multi-actor processes, conditions that, it will be argued below,
and other actors to become more adaptive and capable of enacting systemic change. Thus, FTA can play a number of important roles (see Fig. 1) in orienting innovation systems
informing decisionmakkin processes, structuring and mobilising actor networks, and capacity-building among innovation system actors. Fig. 2 illustrates the inter-relatedness of these FTA roles with the innovation system functions outlined earlier in the paper (see Table 1). The inter-relations are summarised in the sub-sections that follow. 5. 1 Informing decision-making
The informing role of FTA most closely relates to the innovation system functions of facilitating experimentatiio and learning, knowledge development,
and mobilising actor networks The structuring role of FTA relates to the aim of identifyiin
and bringing together diverse actors and stakeholders and creating spaces for discourse and joint action.
and for engaging different actors to confront views, learn from one another, and agree on a path to follow that usually includes broader
New knowledge (including also non-technological knowledge) has to be developed on topics relevant to grand challenges among a distributed landscape of actors.
The need for cross-disciplinary/departmental/national/sectoral coordination implies new channels for knowledge diffussio among actors that have worked traditionally apart Guide direction of search
strong in the sense that they constitute mobilising convictions among a large group of actors. These should be embedded socially and guiding lights for businesses, policy makers and consumers.
Building these visions should be an inclusive, joint process, highlighting inter-dependencies and encouraging alignment of actors.
but also to new combinations of actors that are mobilised to fulfil the promises articulated in guiding visions,
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 the design and development of appropriate forms of resilience Mobilising and structuring actor networks Improve implementation by enabling transparency,
which actors can identify and thereby better coordinate their activities, be they individuals or organisations Disrupt‘lock in'thinking
and pursue a broad concept of innovation involving all actors and regions in the innovation cycle,
and priorities through knowledge development based on expert knowledge and by mobilising the resources availabbl in the actors already involved in the projects.
Additionally, the role of FTA in developing and mobilising resources becomes relevant in identifying the most relevant actors
the identification of suitable actors to engage can take place by mapping stakeholders based on certain criteria and paying attention to relevant gaps or stakeholders which,
and learning between diverse and often disparate actors to take place, which ultimately supports the achievement of the inclusiveness claimed to be needed in dealing with grand challenges.
as a source of‘strategic intelligence'for policy and other actors, is itself a knowledge-creating activity.
and mutual positioning of other innovation system actors vis-a vis the future. In addition to these, FTA PROCESSES can encourage multi-disciplinarity in research needed
and applying a forward looking approach to situation/challenge at hand Knowledge diffusion FTA involves bringing together often disparate actors that might not normally interact to imagine
and in setting strategic research agendas among different actors Capacity building role of FTA supports collective learning and knowledge creation Guide direction of search and selection FTA tends to lead to articulation
of visions and expectations that guide actors in their search and selection of future opportunities.
through articulation of market-shaping expectations and visions and conditions for coordination of market actors that these provide Structuring role of FTA allows consideration of future market applicability of different alternatives alongside with research excellence needed to foster their development Capacity
and in coordinating actors Develop and mobilise resources'FTA PROCESSES lead not only to new combinations of knowleedg
but also to new combinations of actors that are mobilised to fulfil the promises articulated in guiding visions.
Even where new actor networks have not emerged, the FTA PROCESS and its products can mobilise those involved to reassign resources Structuring role of FTA enables definition of governance structures
and bodies Capacity building role of FTA supports teams of diverse actors to engage and join forces for designing common desirable futures Orienting European innovation systems. 149 contributions these would make to various innovation system functions. 7. Conclusions This paper has outlined the contours of an emerging mission-led approach to innovation policy that is more global
and the difficulties this implies in mobilising actors and resources for enacting transformative change. A different type of innovation policy is required essentially that better acknowledges the co-evolutionary, multidimensional,
complex and multi-actor nature of the processes involved in enabling transformative change. In this context, this paper has introduced some of the contributions that FTA could make to orienting innovattio systems towards grand challenges.
and interactions between actors to emerge, which can lead to the establishmeen of new linkages (as well as the disruption of existing ones.
or diffused as usually, very few actors (usually termed experts) take part in the dialogue or creative process.
using the notion of an‘overall function'does not imply that all actors in a particular system exist for the purpose of serving that function
Actors do not necessarily share the same goal, and even if they do, they do not have to be working together consciously towards it
Community actors, institutions and multilevel governance in regional foresight exercises',Futures, 36:46 65. Hall, B. H. and Rosenberg, N. 2010) Handbook of the Economics of Innovation.
Overtext Web Module V3.0 Alpha
Copyright Semantic-Knowledge, 1994-2011