| Different stakeholder (49) |  |
| Exclusive stakeholder (9) | |
| Relevant stakeholder (30) | |
| Stakeholder (733) | |
| Stakeholder engagement (31) | |
| Stakeholder group (23) | |
| Stakeholder image construction (9) | |
| Stakeholder participation (25) | |
| Stakeholder workshop (16) | |
| Wider stakeholder (5) | |
failing to use available techniques to encourage culture change in stakeholder organisations and creating a much greater digital divide by over-restriction of access to available information. 5. What's the use?
Evaluation also serves to highlight the role of FTA as learning processes for stakeholders and thereby encouraging widespread innovation in organisational responses to the challenges of the future. 6. Importing ideas As might be expected of a session dealing with new ideas on FTA there was a wide diversity of suggestions and issues presented.
and learning to improve the coherence and coordination between the actions of a wide range of actors and stakeholders.
achievements and deficits In the light of insights from research on innovation and technological change, much foresight thinking and practice have struck us as somewhat over-simplistic and in particular over-optimistic in its hopes, e g. with respect to the ability to mobilise innovation system stakeholders to act
Therefore, a consolidated integration of analytical and exploratory scientific methods (e g. system analysis and modelling) on the one hand and of participatory processes and interactions with experts and stakeholders on the other would help enhance the scientific credibility of foresight results. 7‘Environmental scanning'along the lines
and stakeholders Adaptive foresight is designed to help decision-makers develop strategies. You can do a research project usingmany of the ideas from AF,
potentially involving many stakeholders of which some represent other and equally legitimate aspects of the addressee than the direct client.
for instance in order to ensure coordination and cooperation between different actors and stakeholders. 22 An alternative, more theory-led,
This phase is conducted through back-office work, discussions with the client and perhaps interviews with a limited number of other experts and stakeholders.
drafting of exploratory framework scenarios25 The first forward-looking and interactive element of an AF project is typically a workshop with experts and stakeholders.
This is useful in order to clarify shared (or diverging) policy and/or societal goals, ambitions and underlying values of the actors and stakeholders involved.
, 1, 2), in the recognition that the engagement of stakeholders from several countries may help anticipate scientific, technological and societal developments, for example.
at best, help the stakeholders overcome possible barriers by supporting shared vision-building, networking and priority setting (see, e g.,
Here, tentative interests in prospective collaboration can be probed by inviting stakeholders from different countries to explore what research themes should be pursued through international joint RTD activities
ERA NETS and other European coordination tools are indicative of the transformation of the EU innovation policy from financially oriented measures to the facilitation and monitoring of stakeholder processes
14) where policy-makers interact with RTD stakeholders in learning processes and build new coalitions and institutions based on the use of distributed strategic intelligence 15.
and embedded foresight activities that help RTD stakeholders recognize how the benefits of international collaboration can outweigh the efforts needed to overcome regulatory, institutional, administrative and cultural barriers.
The engagement of RTD stakeholders from all the countries was a prerequisite for identifying research issues that reflected relevant scientific and technological developments, on one hand,
the consultation processes had to recognize multiple interfaces among the RTD stakeholders from eight different countries.
Scalability is needed to process contributions from stakeholders who are concerned with different facets of innovation systems at the local, sectoral, national and international level.
In Woodwisdom-Net, scalability meant that the consultation process had to deal with varying amounts of contributions from large number of stakeholders in different countries.
Furthermore, the process engaged an extensive set of RTD stakeholders from eight countries, most notably Researchers and Industrial leaders:
Specifically, the process consisted of consecutive phases with specified roles and responsibilities for stakeholders, whereby inputs were solicited
The main phases are summarized in Table 1. Over 400 stakeholders from all participating countries participated in the process.
this is yet another reason why stakeholder roles and responsibilities must be explicated carefully and communicated. Even funding organizations are faced with a learning challenges,
and often part of larger foresight exercises driven by stakeholders of science and technology policies. Moreover national SDOS, including some in the USA
on the regulationreleevan aspects and also to make use of the information about the stakeholders active for regulatory action in a potential new field.
Within potential technological fields relevant for future regulation, regulation-relevant contents and possible stakeholders have to be identified,
Nevertheless, complementary content and stakeholders analyses allow a further specification of possible fields of future regulation and the identification of stakeholders.
CENELEC and ETSI published by the European commission 38 to develop a standardisation work programme to support the internal market for the service sectors. 3. 2. 3. The future needs for standards in nanotechnology based on a survey among stakeholders
Blind and Gauch 39 conducted a survey among the stakeholders of nanotechnology research and standardisation in Germany.
Surveys can be used to ask stakeholders about future needs for standardisation and regulation activities. Finally, surveys have a high acceptance as a methodology
Furthermore, most foresight approaches actively involve stakeholders and their inputs. Foresight methodologies can also be used to assess ex ante the impacts of just released,
and technology foresights focusing both on active researchers and stakeholders responsible for shaping and performing R&d programmes.
and even the identification of stakeholders, especially companies, but also researchers, to be involved in the regulatory process.
However, the reliability and validity of the results depend crucially on the identification of the adequate sample of stakeholders.
which allow at least the identification of stakeholders in science and technology working both in research institutes
Stakeholders from the user and even the consumer side are much more difficult to select based on the presented indicator methodologies
and even stakeholders Influence of non-technology-related factors cannot be considered Surveys Quantitative Micro data of the respondent
the range of stakeholders and experts to be integrated in a Delphi exercise to perform a regulatory foresight becomes wider and more complex,
and a long-lasting process of convincing stakeholders about the need and effectiveness of such approaches are required.
and stakeholders, like regulatory bodies. A first approach was launched in Germany by a study to identify future themes for standardisation based on the negative experiences in the case of nanotechnology,
He also has an interest in multi-stakeholder forums. Currently he is at Utrecht University, Department of Innovation and Environmental Studies,
The role of stakeholders/actors, processes and objectives also have to be studied in order to identify the principles
Societal actors and the public at large are seen increasingly as stakeholders of major importance that should be involved in decision-making processes.
It has to engage all interested and potentially affected stakeholders in this endeavour. Foresight is one such method
It enables the alignment of all stakeholders'endeavours such that they can influence underlying trends. Foresight can have an impact on the ways in
while new combinations of experts and stakeholders were brought also together. Intermediate impacts included the development of visions of the future;
and the ownership of action plans by stakeholders and sponsors. In terms of ultimate impacts, the exercise influenced research agendas in the science base
On the other hand, other stakeholders suggested that the greater involvement of ministries would also have undermined legitimacy by turning the exercise into an outlet for government policy and opinion.
and initiate meaningful and lively dialogues among stakeholders. Their diverse accumulated knowledge and experience, as well as distinct viewpoints are indispensable for building policy-relevant visions.
10.1016/j. techfore. 2008.02.001 levels, the stakeholders of universities, as well as academics interested in prospective analysis of innovation systems. 2008 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
and‘relative weight'of stakeholders to be involved in a participatory prospective analysis on the future of universities:
and its potential benefits for various stakeholders. From a different angle, there are fundamental differences between foresight programmes, on the one hand,
and weights of involving stakeholders: national and regional policy-makers, businesses, societal groups, students, academic staff, etc.
let alone among different types of them. 568 A. Havas/Technological forecasting & Social Change 75 (2008) 558 582 4. Futures for universities Vision-building requires an intense dialogue among stakeholders for two reasons:(
Second, the content or some elements of the futures drafted here can be used as one of the inputs for dialogues among stakeholders in actual foresight processes.
regular communication among the stakeholders even when the process is completed; stronger co-operation; shared visions and consensus on the actions need to be taken;
They possess excellent‘navigation'skills to find their way in this complex world, often characterised by conflicting requirements of the various stakeholders.
For the stakeholders of universities their leaders, staff, students, businesses, the relevant community around them, be it local,
as are promoting strategic dialogues among the stakeholders, initiating pilot foresight (prospective) projects; etc. The national 579 A. Havas/Technological forecasting & Social Change 75 (2008) 558 582 governments, international organisations and associations of universities can provide methodological and financial support for these initiatives.
as well as distinct viewpoints and approaches of the major stakeholders involved in these strategic dialogues, enrich the prospective discussion
and hence their contribution to socioeconomic development, major stakeholders need to be involved when strategic decisions are to be made on universities.
and complementing these with information from future-oriented stakeholder surveys, the Technology barometer can be regarded as a new tool for managing strategic investments in R&d,
examines how vitally important the foresight objective of inclusiveness in the embracement of diverse stakeholders is for the credibility of an innovation process.
This involved the inclusion of pre-engagement analysis of potential co-evolutions in the form of scenarios into interactive workshop activities, with the aim of enabling multi-stakeholder anticipation of the complexities of co-evolution.
did not include stakeholders sufficiently, used inadequate assessment methods and failed to conclude the process by actually informing strategic action 37.2.3.
and stakeholder preferences for the assessment and making impacts of system choices transparent. To tackle this claim in an adequate way,
a wider group of stakeholders is involved 59 to diversify the knowledge sources 30. The relevant groups are identified in the situation analysis (e g. by using system constellation methods 60 to identify the roles, intentions, power and interactions among the most influential and affected 1153 E. Störmer et al./
The core team selects approximately a dozen stakeholder representatives according to their influence and affectedness 61.
The stakeholders are included in two workshops. At the end of the process, the results are transmitted to the decision makers who then decide about specific strategies. 3. 1. 2. Foresight generation Phase in the generation phase, the exploration of context uncertainties,
board minutes and stakeholder interviews, they identify the strength and weaknesses of the prevailing technical and organizational setup to address claims from customers, public, regulatory bodies and the affected environment 62.
because stakeholders agree on their low performance. Options in the far right corner show strong differences in assessments among stakeholder groups.
While we may imagine solutions that seem attractive to a majority of the stakeholders in a future regional setting,
we chose again the social desirability of each option, measured by the average of the stakeholders'ratings.
In other words, we may say that the (prospective) stakeholders assessed the options according to their (assumed) subjective interests
Points in the lower right corner represent options that are rated low by stakeholders but would rank higher
In the first workshop, the stakeholders elaborated four alternative scenarios describing context conditions in the year 2030+based on the set of influencing factors
In contrast, the industry's stakeholders favor besides low tariffs, additionally low levels of bureaucracy as well as voice and participation in the associations decision board. 4. 4. Exploring the trade-off landscape The virtual future stakeholder groups
In contrast, industry stakeholders did not favor this option, mainly because they would have to treat their wastewater onsite
and that consensus between the stakeholders is often lacking The onsite treatment option received highly diverse assessment scores.
A comparison of the stakeholders'assessment with the sustainability evaluation of the core team offers insight into the sustainability deficits that a politically negotiated solution would entail (see Fig. 5)
we can detect favorable aspects neglected by the stakeholders: In the downturn scenario, the core team assessed onsite treatment as the best solution due to savings in the sewerage network,
a characteristic that was taken not into account by the stakeholders. Such sustainability aspects could thus be included into the elaboration of detailed recommendations in the next step. 4. 5. Utilization implications for infrastructure development The performance characteristics of the different options
The inclusion of selected additional stakeholders in the workshops was appreciated for tapping into a broader knowledge base
E. Störmer, Focus on actors initial experiences with system constellations in theory-based evaluations, Z. Eval. 7 (1)( 2008) 35 73.61 J. Mayers, Stakeholder power
Creating shared understandings among the stakeholders about the possible future developments is also important in each field;
The recruitment phase builds the network of experts, stakeholders and others meaningful to the process.
In the exploration stage, main issues, trends and drivers as well as key stakeholders'frames are explored. Analysis stage means studying how the context and main issues,
when possible and relevant experts and stakeholders are collected. The generation phase or the prognosis phase of the FTA PROCESS resembles the hazard/risk identification phase in risk assessment
and open for all the interested stakeholders and many kinds of stakeholders are invited to participate in the process. o Exclusive stakeholder engagement
which means that stakeholder participation is limited and thus not open for all the stakeholders interested. 1171 R. Koivisto et al./
/Technological forecasting & Social Change 76 (2009) 1163 1176 Fig. 1. However, the normal monitoring and evaluation actions are conducted
and the publication of the last barometer is assessed to well fulfill transparency requirements of the stakeholders.
For this stakeholder analysis, key words were defined by the topic coordinators. According to the key words, literature from the Web of Science was counted on the one hand
as well as new networks and visions amongst stakeholders. Embedding participation in policy-making: facilitating the participation of civil society in the policy-making process,
or strategy 4, 5. Broad participation of societal stakeholders is not an essential requirement, but is becoming more and more a standard practice. 4 At the same time covering a broader range of important social,
Here is an opportunity for broader participation of societal stakeholders and open-minded discussions. Increasing the information base supports identifying
Moreover, opportunities for broad-scale participation of societal stakeholders are limited, as the choice among policy-alternatives is politicized a highly process in the end.
and stakeholders of a California water agency and measured participants'increasing understanding of the challenges posed by climate change
Difficulties in applying traditional scenario methods among the heterogeneous stakeholders public sector scenario exercises must engage are reported also elsewhere in the literature 17.
improve stakeholder interaction and ensure a proportionality of costs and benefits. The overall process is coordinated by the Secretariat General of the European commission,
Soft links are concerned with creating more informal spaces for discussion and exchange between policymakker and their key stakeholders, in an ongoing mode with few official outputs.
but wide spread of stakeholders who will help to shape the future of society through the practical scheme proposed.
is prompted by (a) recognition of the restriction to participation in current Foresight (b) the lessons learned from the corporate sector regarding the benefits of stakeholder inclusion
New groups of stakeholders Mechanisms to cope with the demands of social inclusion Whether inclusivity should be local,
its scope and its methods, including the‘selection'of the stakeholders to represent participants from:
This will inform the profiles of stakeholders/experts/lay people to be involved in Foresight, and will portray their relationships. 3. How Inclusive foresight might be achieved The steps that might be taken towards Inclusive foresight are:
The approach of CSH recognises that various stakeholders in society may see situations 14 in radically different ways because different stakeholder values and behavioural characteristics lead to different boundary judgements.
The‘radical'view accepts that these stakeholders may be in a conflicting or confrontational relationship with each other and may be unequal in terms of their power 15, status and other behavioural characteristics relevant to (i) above. 1215 D. Loveridge,
This involved the inclusion of pre-engagement analysis of potential co-evolutions in the form of scenarios into interactive workshop activities, with the aim of enabling multi-stakeholder anticipation of the complexities of co-evolution. 2009
Within this context, a key issue for many potential stakeholders, and most of those that were the subject of this FTA exercise was
and stakeholder strategies were explored. At the time of the workshop (December 2007) the situation in and around nanotechnology involved mostly the discussion of Environment, Health and Safety aspects (EHS/HES) and other nanotoxicity related discussions,
as well as the exploration of positions, stances and perspectives of the stakeholders, where probed and explored.
What was important in such a multi-stakeholder setting, was the inclusion of all active actors in the scenarios.
This can be seen as a stakeholder endorsement of the approach (which is an important indicator how well workshops like these are working.
The paper introduces the concept of'stakeholder image, 'which is associated with the inherent characteristics of specific social groups from socioeconnomic cognitive and political perspectives.
Amunicipal foresight activity in Lundal is described to illustrate how an image for young people was created to endow them to be represented as stakeholders in the process.
With its long-term perspective and its emphasis on connecting perspectives of different knowledge areas and different actors and stakeholders, foresight differs from corporate strategic planning,
five or maybe eight years ahead and involves only a very limited number of stakeholders.
The methods used in this approach to strategy formulation are, among others, stakeholder analyses, networks, negotiations, political games, alliances and power bases in expertise (i e. academic reputation.
Foresight processes are political processes where stakeholders or powers negotiate with each other; compromises (which produce results) can be made on goals as well as on means;
Stakeholders and decision-makers in charge of implementing the choices are the major players in these processes; foresight practitioners (process consultants or core groups) and formal processes play relatively minor roles.
Foresight methods preferred under this approach focus on key actors and their viewpoints, for example stakeholder analyses and Delphi studies.
A clearer inclusion of stakeholders and of the general public in the research council case would have improved the plan's legitimacy;
and a series of face-to-face interviews with stakeholders, including senior researchers within Luxembourg and abroad, as well as companies and public administrators.
Instead, a better STI policy strategy is to foster an innovation system that is sufficiently flexible to support such areas at their time of emergence. 5. 3. Deliberative processes Foresight exercises are characterised by deliberation between various stakeholders, often in workshhop and working groups.
'whereby stakeholders are playing a range of roles and representiin different interests at the same time. However contrary to previous findings (Crehan and Cassingena-Harper 2008), this did not make coordination easier in Luxembourg
and findings will have some effects on a wide array of stakeholders. In the case of FNR Foresight, these include the FNR itself, the MCHER, the research community and, to a lesser extent, the business community.
thus familiarising the wider public with the stakeholders as well as with the role of science in a modern society. 6. 3. Impacts on the research community As mentioned in the previous section,
owing to a lack of common vision among the various stakeholders on the position and contribution of S&t to Luxembourg's socioeconomic development. 7. 2. Setting the‘granularity'of priorities The priorities identified by the exercise were set at a level
this implies a need for participation of stakeholders. Further, the role of government is shifting from being a central steering entity to that of a moderator of collective decision-making processes.
3) Policy facilitating by building a common awareness of current dynamics and future developmment as well as new networks and visions among stakeholders,
technology and innovation options among players, creating debate Awareness of the systemic character of change processes Foresight skills are developed in a wider circle Dialogues in new combinations of experts and stakeholders and a shared understanding
between panel work and broad participation The participatory nature of the strategic process is demonstrated by involving more than hundred stakeholders from various areas in the panel work,
but also by the three public events that were organised at the beginning, at mid-term and at the end of the process in order to gather further input from a broad range of stakeholders.
the public forum at mid-term could draw on the active participation of experts, stakeholders and citizens in four thematic forums.
A combination of experts and stakeholders from the key organisations involved in the research and policy fields covered by the respective panels was sought.
It had to ensure the coordination with the vice-mayor's office, with the key stakeholders and between the four panels.
the RTI-strategy of the City of Vienna was presented to an equally large audience of several hundred participants, backed by the mayor, city councillors and key stakeholders.
experts and stakeholders together who had interacted hardly with each other before. Ashared understanding of the future challengeswas created,
they could not be defined individually by any of the stakeholders. A key role in this negotiation process was played obviously by the panel chairs (in accepting suggested initiatives on new draft panel documents) and by the vice-mayor's office (in accepting proposals on draft versions of the final
and argued for their authenticity as important social stakeholders. The term stakeholder image construction describes here a predefined process in
the project leadership resolved issues of stakeholder interests and futures literacy before they received their contributions.
Constructing a desired image of specific stakeholders predefines considerably their potential as participants and the scope of their contributions in visioning projects.
such as knowledge workers (including experts), stakeholders and users of public services. In its ideal form, Foresight today integrates long-term planning,*Email:
10.1080/09537320903262397 http://www. informaworld. com Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:10 03 december 2014 972 S. Jenssen multi-stakeholder dialogue
and strategic decisions. 3 In their seminal paper on‘Inclusive foresight'Loveridge and Street (2005) argue that the credibiilit of foresight is dependent on extending participation to social stakeholders, especially those not normally seeking participation themselves.
'Loveridge and Street (2005,47) describe stakeholders as‘individuals or groups which can be affected by and/or affect an organisation and its activities'.
The stakeholders in this particular case were participants in a communal effort, also called‘local stakeholders'.
To underline the importance of participation in the vision-building project, the project leadership drew upon a specific image of young people as stakeholders in municipal development.
How did this particular image of young people as stakeholders influence their involvement and the final results of their participation in the project?
The idea of an‘image'of stakeholders is used here not in a managerial sense, as in the image of an organisation or firm which continuously has to be updated
in order to communicate effectively with its stakeholders, the question here is which image an organisation might create of its stakeholders to legitimise its strategic choices.
This specific case of municipal visioning illustrates how an image of young people was created in order to endow them with stakeholder characteristics that fit the objectives of the vision project.
Relevance of case study What picture do we have of young people between 14 and 19 years of age?
This, however, emphasises questions such as to what extent stakeholders should be involved in the process, which ideas of the future should be labelled as‘desired
After that, planners began to talk about‘community visioning'as a new method of‘soliciting stakeholder input for the creation of collective plans'.
which the idea of assumed shared values collided with the ideal of community engagement. 9 The following discussion of how an image of schoolchildren as stakeholders
however, shows that the collection of young people's contributions was preceded by the construction of a specific image of them as stakeholders.
This paper argues that constructing a specific image of young people as stakeholders points towards a dilemma of inclusive foresight that cannot be rectified by specific management and process principles.
It arises when social stakeholders are made participants in a foresight process aiming at producing one desired vision of the future.
Defining young people as embodying the future made them important stakeholders in the further development of an already wealthy community.
One important aspect of creating an image of young people as primary stakeholders was their social and economic position within the community.
Thus a specific social-economic image of young people as stakeholders was indispensable for their participation.
Although as stakeholders their social definition as‘young people'was essential for their participations, when it came to their contributions their present social status was not
The stakeholders described in this case are also not sponsors of the exercise or‘organisations that might be expected to act in the light of the exercise's findings'(Keenan 2002,49).
The participation of young people as stakeholders in the vision project is an example of a wider legitimation movement that does not base stakeholder participation on authority but on authenticity (Brown and Michael 2002.
which they constructed an image of this group as authentic stakeholders regardless of their knowledge or possibilities to influence political decision making.
however, this image construction as authentic stakeholders was not enough to define their role as participants.
981 Table 1. From stakeholder to participant how the young people were defined as authentic stakeholders,
Areas Pre-definitions as stakeholders Preconditions for their contributions as participants Cognitive Young people are the future Imagine yourselves as grown-ups in 2020!
an additional stakeholder and participant construction by the project leaders was needed to ensure a desired outcome of the project.
The young people were asked to contribute with ideas matching their image as stakeholders already constructed.
longteer planning and decision-making. 19 If the young were authentic stakeholders, what perspectives and insights were they to contribute to the project?
The administrative and political leadership's construction of a specific stakeholder image and the preconditioning of the young people's contributions is a good example of exactly this performative way of exercising rhetoric and representative power in a municipal planning process.
Using expert and stakeholder panels in technology foresight principles and practice. Foresight Methodoloogie 45 59. UNIDO. http://www. tc. cz/dokums publikace/tf-course-textbook-unido 1085 11. pdf (accessed September 2009.
< Back - Next >
Overtext Web Module V3.0 Alpha
Copyright Semantic-Knowledge, 1994-2011