which combined analysis of global changes with a participatory process involving national stakeholders. The exercise was designed to assess the implications of global changes for research.
Identifying and responding to Grand challenges should involve stakeholders from both public and private sectors in transparent processes taking into account the global dimension.
and final) and the consultative events arranged with stakeholders. A number of points are developed then that are related to the process
Key stakeholder consultation. Having developed a first catalogue of drivers and trends, the second phase was designed to engage with key stakeholders in Ireland to explore their significance and potential implications for the national context.
The stakeholder phase had three specific aims: Table I Drivers and trends assessment framework 1 Overview description;
rationale and evidence 2 Potential impact (global and national; emerging indications; timescales 3 Potential disruptive factors trend breakers, accelerators, wild cards 4 Connectivity and contingencies links with other drivers and trends 5 Challenges that this presents
The overall structure of the project provided opportunities for broad involvement of all stakeholders into priority setting, developing a shared expert opinion concerning preferred medium-and long-term development alternatives,
and other stakeholders in anticipating and dealing with transformations. It does so by critically reflecting on the selected papers for this special issue as well as on the discussions that took place at the fourth Seville International Conference on Future-oriented technology analysis.
and stakeholders in comprehending transformations and in tackling the so-called grand challenges. 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
and other stakeholders in anticipating and dealing with transformations. The first part of this introductory paper considers the potential roles of fta in enabling a better understanding of complex situations and fundamental transformations,
and stakeholders in comprehending transformations and in tackling the so-called grand challenges. Technological forecasting & Social Change 80 (2013) 379 385 Corresponding author at:
Furthermore, 5 and 13 underline the ongoing need for the greater involvement of stakeholders who can introduce necessary capabilities
create a common language and understanding between stakeholders thus supporting a systematic negotiation process, and legitimate a chosen course of action through engagement and dialogue.
and moving from forecasting activities and expert-driven identification processes towards the inclusion of expertise from a broader range of disciplines, a wider range of stakeholders and sometimes also the knowledge of lay people.
Comparing these two countries, the main difference lies in the existence of an umbrella organisation in the USA that pools heterogeneous stakeholders
and does not involve heterogeneous stakeholders nor make use of the knowledge gained in various FTA.
i) capture of indications for extrasysttemi change at a micro level instead of extrapolating seemingly dominant macro-trends, ii) mobilisation of tacit knowledge as well as support a creative spirit and an easy exchange of ideas among diverse stakeholders through
which the outcome requires the active interaction of different types of stakeholders. It is acknowledged that, within the FTA COMMUNITY
Cunningham and van der Lei 28 use such an approach for models providing support to decision-making on the selection of new technologies and discuss the issue of providing equilibrium between different groups of experts and stakeholders.
In the NEEDS project (www. needs-project. org), the acceptability of future energy technology options was submitted to a multi-criteria assessment involving a panel of stakeholders, the results
or for the quantitative analysis of qualitative data (such as statistical analysis of stakeholder opinions or networking behaviour. Such exercises push experts in quantitative and qualitative techniques closer to each other,
new technologies such as web 2. 0 can be used by FTA to streamline operations by increasing interactive participation of stakeholders, speeding-up the provision of information and feedbacks and integrating data of different sorts (pictures
or a foresight practitioner identifying the right stakeholders to invite to a workshop). Second, when FTA and especially foresight is addressing the intrinsically uncertain challenge of devising possible futures,
subjectivity, meant as expert/stakeholder opinion, is effectively a source of creativity and as such should be exploited fully.
Unavoidably, policy-makers and stakeholders will assign a higher plausibility to scenarios that somehow resonate with their own visions.
On the other hand, policy-makers and stakeholders will contribute to shaping the future through their decisions and their actions.
A good management of stakeholders'participation, is therefore critical to improve trust within the community.
In particular, stakeholders'participation should reflect the overall need of a finely tailored balance between quantitative and qualitative dimensions
and Jörß 67 we believe that participation of stakeholders and practitioners from different methodological traditions is crucial at least at three major stages of FTA PROCESSES:
The initial identification of issues is one of the stages where the involvement of stakeholders is essential as it allows collecting the views of those who will play an active role in the decision-making process supported by FTA.
During this stage, it is recommended also to include the wider range of stakeholders that will be affected by the consequences of these decisions.
when the expertise and knowledge made available by stakeholders and experts in the specific sector (s) subject to FTA can contribute to significantly increasing the quality of FTA results.
when sharing FTA findings with stakeholders who are expected to follow up with action are essential for building ownership whilst providing decisionmakker with insights on the limits of the FTA results.
thus also decreasing the risk of stakeholders dominating the FTA PROCESS. 14 The importance of this in the context of this paper lies in keeping a balance in participation of stakeholders
Much can also be learnt from the experience that the field of foresight has developed in dialogue and communication in support of building trust amongst stakeholders.
For instance, the consultative dimension of SEA (Strategic Environmental Assessment) has proven essential to build consensus amongst stakeholders around the long-term effects of large infrastructure projects.
Techniques and approaches related to building stakeholder trust can also be applied to bridge qualitative and quantitative communities.
Ansell and Gash 76 conclude that collaboration between stakeholders tends to develop when it focuses on small wins that deepen trust, commitment, and shared understanding.
Different perspectives, differentworldviews or different mental models of various stakeholders are usually the norm in FTA projects
and decision-making and by facilitating dialogues between various stakeholders 4. The value of the scenario exercise depends on the ways in
-create and support a systemized negotiation process among key stakeholders (social actors. -be helpful in engaging decision-makers in specific issues,
and supporting fruitful debates among stakeholders. Although the use of scenarios has gained much adherence, its subjective and heuristic nature leaves many academics
whose distinctive feature is disagreement among experts and stakeholders about the long-term consequences of present-day innovations 11.
and using future scenarios provide evidence to decision-makers empowering the stakeholders involved? The three questions represent a specific perspective linking action and decision-makingwith issues of (i) emergence,
further progress calls for a greater involvement of stakeholders who can introduce the necessary capabilities
There is a need for stakeholders to exploit this knowledge in order to create new business opportunities. This stresses the importance of stakeholders as sources of innovation.
The required characteristics of the new mode of public involvement are challenging: long-term forward-looking intervention, inter-ministerial, demand-side instruments combined and coordinated with supply-side instruments, based on foresight,
and linkages with social systems of innovation and social innovation stakeholders should be strengthened so that innovation experiments include the inherent social dimension within the research community 15.3.2.
and establishing a common vision among the innovation stakeholders as a boundary framework before moving into technology roadmapping 70.4.2.2.
and the scientific communities'involvement in policy discourse. 4. 3. Empowering stakeholders Developing and using future scenarios to inspire innovation do
they also involve the interaction of the stakeholders, their ideas, values and capacities for social change.
i e. empowering stakeholders, our analysis of the case studies from Appendix 1 revealed two groups of scenario practice:
expert versus stakeholder driven. In several exercises, expert judgment was the main input for scenario development.
Involvement of stakeholders was looked not intentionally for. In reality, this might lead to limitations. Firstly, the expert (i e. scientific) mind-set fosters expectations of regularity, simplicity and certainty in the phenomena and in our interventions 74.
Our analysis suggests that scenarios developed with broader stakeholder/expert participation will provide richer future images that go beyond the probable that is determined by the past and present 73,75.
we believe there is often no clear cut difference between experts and stakeholders: experts sometimes have a stake in the problem
and stakeholders equally have their expertise. It is a key challenge to benefit from this rich and complex audience.
Stakeholder involvement, for instance, may be facilitated by conceptualizing the future as open and dilemmatic, and recognizing ambivalence as legitimate 76.
and using scenarios should be viewed as a systemized negotiation process among key stakeholders (social actors),
and using future scenarios provide evidence to decision-makers empowering the stakeholders involved?.By questioning representation from a policy perspective and deconstructing future scenario practice,
and who was involved not (empowering stakeholders). An overview of our findings is presented in Table 2 that describes for each group of practice (sub-sections 4. 1 4. 3) the most common images of the future, an example of a characteristic technique and the dominant mode of futures thinking.
(what) Framing boundaries Shaped by possibility Extreme to inform the middle Eventuality Backcasting from targets Shaped by probability S&t Roadmaps Predictive Backcasting from principles Shaped by preference The natural step Visionary Empowering stakeholders (who) Expert
and discovery Expert panels Technocratic Stakeholder driven Shaped by interaction Future workshops Evolutionary 4 The groups are intended not to be) a typology.
and using scenarios should be viewed as a systemized negotiation process among key stakeholders (social actors),
and linkages with social innovators and other social innovation stakeholders should be strengthened so that social innovation experiments inform the research community.
and stakeholders towards achieving a common understanding on non-sustainable trends, offering scenarios and integrated solutions to support policy-makers.
and to promote cooperation between and among agencies, departments of the federal government, academia, and stakeholders.
and other stakeholders. The second set of national activities the paper analyzes is from Germany,
At the turn of the century, nanotechnology was discussed mainly with regard to content (future applications), not with regard to the future decision-making processes and the participation of stakeholders,
anticipatory activities included a wide range of stakeholders from politics, academia, industry and NGOS, as well as independent parties cf. 23.
At this stage, the FTA ACTIVITIES did not involve a broad range of stakeholders. Rather, it was driven a process by technology experts.
and stakeholders to generate broader knowledge than in 1999. These experts and stakeholders came from industry
from NGOS, from the physical and biological sciences, engineering, medicine, social sciences, economics, and philosophy. The report included insights from US experts in the field, examinations of lessons learned,
and mobilize an increasing variety of stakeholders in the future. The report emphasized the concept of anticipatory governance of nanotechnology
and real-time technology assessment 3. The report refers to the previous involvement of a broad variety of stakeholders
The need to increase multi-stakeholder and public participation in nanotechnology governance is stated as one of the main lessons learned after ten years 3. In 2011, the key architect of the National Nanotechnology Initiative
Coordination among agencies and enhanced engagement by many stakeholders are seen as crucial measures to realize the NNI goals 45.
and to integrate a growing number of stakeholders. The term technology foresight has not been used with regard to future-oriented activities in nanotechnology,
built up a network and opened the network gradually to new stakeholders and disciplines. 3. 2. Germany FTA for addressing the future of existing areas of strength In Germany,
In 2006, the Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety (BMU) established the Nanokommission a stakeholder commission on nanotechnologies as part of the federal government's high-tech strategy.
These unrelated processes cover dialogues at the federal and state levels as well as stakeholder dialogues and processes of public understanding of science and technology 50.
In contrast to the US, Germany lacks an organizational structure that brings together the expertise of the broad variety of ministries, agencies, stakeholders,
and in the case of the US a growing recognition to include a wider range of stakeholders
Not only the range of stakeholders involved was increasing in the last decade, but also the kinds of processes expanded from studies based on expert surveys to processes involving more stakeholders (such as NGOS and citizens).
On the one hand, the emergence and increase of participatory FTA ACTIVITIES is a positive reflection of increasing public attention to nanotechnology after the funding programs were established.
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
and ministries of the federal government and to pool the knowledge gained in stakeholders processes conducted beyond the BMBF.
and have influenced also greatly stakeholders and researchers outside the government. The vision-building process of 2010 served as an instrument to pool and coordinate FTA ACTIVITIES among government departments, agencies, and research communities.
if stakeholders hold opposing positions and claims, for example with regard to risk governance. In Germany, early FTA ACTIVITIES also provided justification for a policy under consideration (symbolic function)
and implementation is organized not by involving a broad variety of stakeholders and the policy system remains unchanged.
Comparing these two countries, the main difference lies in the existence of an umbrella organization in the US that pools heterogeneous stakeholders
or dialogues organized by the German Nanokomission were involving increasingly other stakeholders such as non-governmental organizations and citizens.
The updated nanotechnology vision in the US 3 is envisioning the involvement of a broader range of experts and stakeholders and addresses societal challenges through a sophisticated concept of future nanotechnology governance.
and does not include the requirements of heterogeneous stakeholders nor make use of the knowledge gained in various FTA.
an inter-organizational governance framework is crucial to uptake the knowledge as well as the requirements derived from various stakeholders.
Germany Workshop with stakeholders of future innovation camps in Berlin 6. Ubiquitous Innovation (including dark sides) Rolandas Strazdas Professor,
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,
The INFU visions gave rise to fundamental discussions among stakeholders regarding possible cultural transitions, new economic principles,
and the involvement of experts and stakeholders, helped avoiding premature convergence into established pathways and fostered the integration of diverse perspectives not only at the beginning but throughout the project.
and other stakeholders can systematically be involved in exploring future opportunities and risks. Marinho and Cagnin propose the inclusion of elements of FTA PROCESSES in strategic management with the explicit aim of‘‘improving Performance Measurement Systems''.
''Based on three case studies they suggest that FTA could help overcome some of the limitations of management approaches by setting up stakeholder dialogues
The Globalisation Strategy and the Research2015 process are two attempts to combine the strong Danish tradition for political compromises, negotiations and stakeholder inclusion with evidence-and expertise-based prospective elements.
such as not only government but also influential stakeholder groupings and experts. Societies with lower power distance might be more likely favour interaction (citizen consultation) based foresight methodologies
foresight processes might be seen to create a political battlefield where stakeholders with conflicting viewpoints seek to win the battle,
whereas stakeholders in societies that display less uncertainty avoidance are more likely to seek consensus. However,
The tolerance for deviant ideas also has implications for the selection of methods that include stakeholders in a foresight process.
Interaction refers to the extent of the inclusion and mutual challenging of views from experts and non-expert stakeholders.
(conferences, workshops, stakeholder inclusion. The Research2015 process included foresight methods such as horizon scanning, expert panels, user panels, dialogue meetings, conferences and workshops.
user panels and other forms of stakeholder inclusion, were oriented interaction. This orientation reflects a low power distance society's need for subordinate consultation.
which everybody (or at least the key stakeholders) agrees. This stakeholder inclusion might also reflect a belief in distribution of knowledge
and that interaction with stakeholders generates learning. Thus, indirectly a creativity dimension is included in the process.
The advantages of using negotiation in Danish settings are obvious. Due to the low degree of power distance in Denmark, major societal stakeholders expect to be involved in the development process of national research policy strategies.
This participative negotiation process, which involves seminars and workshops, provides an obvious opportunity to create a synergy effect due to the creative processes that are shaped by bringing together experiences and ideas from many different interest domains.
The dense networks among major societal stakeholders may be strengthened. The research policy strategies that were agreed upon can be enforced as more legitimate and plausible.
and negotiations among societal stakeholders mirror the‘mobilising joint actions'content of the European foresight Platform's definition of foresight,
Final proposal Dialogue with stakeholder organisations, ministries and research councils Reduction to 21 themes for strategic research Strategic research council (14) Independent research council (18) Contacts in ministries (15
and facilitates timely and efficient mobilisation of stakeholder communities. The fourth and last principle is‘glocal'impact orientation.
like any significant international undertaking, calls for clarity, unity, integrity and coherence 3 5. Further design requirements are introduced if the project aims to incorporate international research, innovation systems 6 and the diversity of stakeholders.
stakeholders'of an exercise 10. Cultural differences, language barriers, institutional practices, regulatory frameworks, capacities and capabilities of participants to contribute as well as more practical difficulties,
C. Cagnin, T. Ko nno la/Futures 59 (2014) 27 38 28 In the design phase is important to structure aspects such the interactions between people (e g. participants, stakeholders, policy and decision makers,
At the same time, the process must be designed to cope with shifting objectives and stakeholders'expectations during the implementation phase (i e. the so-called responsiveness of the process) 13.
Ko nno la et al. 15 claim that stakeholders'diversity1 is important to foster innovation capabilities through the creation of viable alternatives (scenarios) that escape the existing dominant designs
when they claim that an effective communication process with all stakeholders involved, including those in the initial phase of information collection,
project partners and other key stakeholders. In the international setting, those involved in the discussions may not be acquainted with foresight,
for instance, regarding the decision-making power of stakeholders due to the bottom-up aspects of the process. It is important
the design aimed to ensure the international relevance of the results by taking into consideration previous work both at European and International levels as well as seeking the participation of stakeholders from around the globe.
To link findings with stakeholders'expectations, especially those from industry, a first online survey was launched. It identified 261 experts around the globe
thus flexibly accommodate diverse stakeholder interests. 6 Open and collective stages are those based on processes of collective information gathering, sense making, decision making, dissemination or implementation of results.
and a common vision amongst the stakeholders taking part in the exercise. This generated momentum for shaping globally the intelligent manufacturing industry of the future 27.
ii) continuous recruitment of new members comprising both research and industry stakeholders for the Roadmapping Supporting Group, especially outside the existing IMS community,
in order to increase the network of stakeholders; and (iii) peer review articles and an edited book. 4. Revisiting the principles for global foresight The IMS2020 scenario
ways of ensuring engagement by a diversity of stakeholders; how to use communication channels; and which methods are suited best to particular situations.
The mapping results were brought together with partners'and stakeholders'experience, and shared in internal workshops
a range of channels were used to engage a diverse set of stakeholders around the world,
From the outset the initial design was geared towards taking into account the specificity of context and intentions when identifying guiding questions (i e. intended impacts and objectives), determining participants (i e. type and level of stakeholders'participation),
and the vision supported wider engagement Inclusion of diverse stakeholder interests supporting the definition of the relevant vision Inclusion of diverse perspectives
and engaging stakeholders Dissemination of results through the networks Training Tailored dissemination to targeted stakeholders Dissemination in different levels of innovation systems 9 However,
and has proved useful to kickoff discussions with diverse stakeholders with different or no understanding of foresight.
Although the diversity of stakeholders involved across the exercise and the communication procedures had been clarified to all from the outset, managing interactions,
The modular design of the exercise was conducive to accommodating diverse stakeholder expectations. The idea of embedding such modularity was adapted from another international exercise 29 where stakeholder participation was also based on the definition of explicit roles and responsibilities for the different phases of the process.
If this happens it may undermine the stakeholders'commitment to the process and the trustworthiness of the exercise at large 8. Hence,
and how stakeholders were selected, engaged and informed of progress and outcomes. To interact with wider audiences'two online surveys
and Table 2 Interacting with stakeholders. Stakeholders Selection process Type of network Methods for engaging
and informing Project partners Expertise Formal Face-to-face meetings, video/teleconference, Groove, email, groupwork Volunteering (for specific activities) Informal EU Commission Client Formal Face-to-face meetings, website,
and stakeholders the second planned workshop was devoted to develop a common vision. Here, although JRC-IPTS was facilitating and giving direction to the discussions,
but also from stakeholders around the globe. The second online survey and the wiki platform also enabled different parties to outline RI topics in
Also, the responsiveness to stakeholder needs and interests in the course of the exercise was crucial to keep the participants motivated
Finally, the extensive use of online tools in this project shows how it is practical to deliver on the promise of fast and extensive engagement of stakeholders, independent of geographical location.
time for the EU to meet global challenges, Publications Office of the European union, Luxembourg, 2010.2 L. Y. Tang, Q. Shen, Factors affecting effectiveness and efficiency of analysing stakeholders
For example, knowledge generated through the application of fta methods, FTA as a process of coproduuctio of stakeholder communities (i e. social capital),
which users and other stakeholders are involved systematically to detect future opportunities and risks. This could allow for a better integration of inclusive, long-term visions in decision-making and strategic thinking in the context of innovation.
the relevance of inclusive approaches and interaction between various stakeholders is emphasised strongly. It is argued that participatory methods are effective at stimulating the transfer of knowledge,
'In particular, there is a growing recognition of the user as‘innovator'and key stakeholder, especially in the early phases of scientific and technological research,
One approach that may be effective at enabling the desired inclusive knowledge creation is to use the future as a catalyst for precipitating the collective intelligence of users and stakeholders 10.
and stakeholders to voice and further develop their ideas, expectations, concerns. Through a better introduction of the future based on Foresight theory and practice and through an integration of methods and approaches from other fields, including user/market research
Such fora facilitate interaction between stakeholders that usually do not interact 6 and enable them not only to make their expectations more explicit
Zooming in on the interaction with current and anticipated users as a crucial yet very specific group of stakeholders
IF is focused more on New Product development processes, where stakeholders, and more specifically current and anticipated future users are consulted
hereby empowering users as key stakeholders and involving them continuously, beginning from the earliest phases and throughout the whole process.
It seeks to understand the complex interactions between products, services, users and other stakeholders in multiple, realistic contexts, building on Foresight theory and practice, traditional user research,
A large group of 46.000 Flemish DTV-users as key stakeholders were invited to fill in the survey by email.
which users and other key stakeholders were involved: 3. 2. 1. 1. Phase 1. In the first phase, literature and trend reports concerning current TV watching patterns,
Among the experts were people representing stakeholders from different perspectives (from a commercial broadcaster, regulatory institute, large multimedia retailing company, online social platform, university and big telecommunication player in Flanders.
These include the notion of stakeholder involvement in decision processes of mutual appreciation and a shared understanding of stakeholders'views as well as of joint experimentation and mutual learning.
and its diverse partners and stakeholders across the value chain to properly define joint or shared strategic objectives.
and experimentation to take place between stakeholders, nor the shaping of a shared vision to be developed. 3. 2. An example from the higher education sector 3. 2. 1. Rationale The second case focused on a higher education institution that was pursuing a management model focused on efficiency standards for sustainability and continuity in the long run.
The opening up of the organisation's strategic objectives into indicators, targets and initiatives or actions that reflect the true intentions of the institution enabled an overall reassessment of the institution's strategy (phase 1). Moreover, through a systematic consultation of key stakeholders
and monitor the needs and requirements of all its stakeholders. As a result the social projects were maintained during the holidays.
it was possible to see that the institution was not able to shape a process to build a shared understanding of stakeholders'views as well as of risks, opportunities, system capabilities and dynamic changes.
and support stakeholders to believe in the project being idealised. Hence, the proposed system should improve in terms of its notion of stakeholder involvement to enable the development of a common vision to be pursued across the system,
to promote a collective articulation of these visions and related expectations, and to develop an action plan to monitor the achievement of the agreed vision as well as enable adaptation over time. 3. 4. Limitations of the proposed system
For instance, the ways in which stakeholders are perceived and involved in decision processes such as the definition of strategic objectives is neglected often.
and stakeholders'views of what the future might entail or where they see themselves both individually and collectively.
i) stakeholder involvement,(ii) mutual experimentation and learning (instead of organisational learning based on individual/tacit knowledge), 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.
which stakeholders are perceived. Also the ways that they are involved in decision processes. In turn, these would lead to further mutual experimentation and learning.
and stakeholders'views of what the future might entail. Also, it considers where all actors see themselves both individually and collectively within these alternative futures.
and their stakeholders in the value chain confront, both individually and together, foresight can help actors to anticipate
and its stakeholders'ability to develop a joint vision and define where each one would like to position itself within a range of likely futures
(thus supporting phase 1). It does so by enabling a shared understanding of stakeholders'views as well as of risks, opportunities, system capabilities and dynamic changes (thus supporting phase 2). This builds upon knowledge
The application of the proposed system in practice shows that the notion of stakeholder involvement, mutual experimentation and learning,
if all stakeholders are to be catered for 1, 33,58 60,67 Performance Prism 33 Independent variables (nonfinancial ones) are identified incorrectly as primary drivers of future stakeholder satisfaction 58 Quality Function Deployment (QFD) 58 There is no criteria
-based assessment of the external environment 60 SWOT analysis 26 There is a lack of any system to define measures linked to consistent targets 58,59 Quality Function Deployment (QFD) 58 SWOT analysis
Overtext Web Module V3.0 Alpha
Copyright Semantic-Knowledge, 1994-2011