The use of Foresight around the globe an overview and more EFP Rafael Popper rafael.popper@manchester.ac.uk PREST - Manchester Institute of Innovation Research EFMN
Introductory remarks In both futures and foresight literatures there have been plenty of discussions about processes, generations, challenges, classifications and various styles of forward-looking practices and methods. (See De Jouvenel, 1967; Boucher, 1977; Coates, 1985; Jungk and Müllert, 1987; Cameron et al., 1996; Bell, 1997; Glenn and Gordon, 1999; Godet, 2000, 2001; Georghiou, 2001; Masini, 2001; Miles, 2002, 2008; Cuhls, 2003; Voros, 2003, 2005; Kaivo-oja et al., 2004; Bishop et al., 2007; Barré, 2008; Popper 2008; Johnston and Sripaipan, 2008; Keenan and Miles, 2008; and Georghiou et al., 2008). Even though these and many other contributions provide a huge knowledge base of definitions, frameworks and experiences using a wide range of real and occasionally hypothetical examples, up until now there has not been a systematic and organised effort comparing foresight styles in six world regions or exploring how are foresight methods selected using large number of case studies (886 cases).
Foresight for whom?
2009 2010 For us? (~5 to 20 years) or for the next generation? (~20 to 30 years) or for future generations? (30 years+)
What is foresight?
What is foresight? Broadly speaking Foresight is not about forecasting by experts Foresight is more about sharing a vision and/or a set of objectives (for our children s future?) promoting trandisciplinarity research engaging key stakeholders, including decision- and policy-makers Prospective & Futures Foresight drawing upon and creating knowledge networks extending the breadth and depth of the knowledge base for decision-making organising a long term thinking process Policy-making & Planning Participation & Networking
Foresight is not mere fashion
Evolution of Programmes/Exercises Year Country Exercise/Programme Method(s) Since 1971 Japan 1st to 4th STA surveys Delphi 1991 Japan 5th STA survey Delphi USA Critical Technologies Others 1992 New Zealand Public Good Science Fund Others Germany BMFT, T 21 Others 1993 South Korea Foresight Exercise Others Germany Delphi 93 Delphi 1994 UK 1st TF Programme Delphi + Others France Technology Delphi Delphi 1995 France 100 Key Technologies Others Japan Germany Mini-Delphi Delphi 1996 Austria Delphi Austria Delphi Japan 6th STA survey Delphi Australia Matching S&T to futures needs Others Spain ANEP Delphi + Others 1997 Hungary TF Programme (TEP) Delphi + Others Netherlands Technology Radar Others Finland SITRA Foresight Others South Africa Foresight Exercise Delphi + Others 1998 Germany Delphi 98 Delphi Ireland Technology Foresight Ireland Others New Zealand Foresight Exercise Others UK 2nd UK Foresight Programme Others Sweden 1st Swedish Foresight Others 1999 Spain OPTI Technology Foresight Delphi South Korea Korean Technology Delphi Delphi Thailand ICT Foresight Delphi + Others China TF of Priority Industries Delphi + Others Others include: scenarios, panels, roadmapping, critical technologies, etc. Year Country Exercise/Programme Method(s) Japan 7th STA Survey Delphi Brazil Prospectar Delphi 2000 Brazil TFP Brazil (UNIDO/MDIC) Delphi + Others France 2nd 100 Key Technologies Others Portugal ET2000 Others Venezuela TFP Venezuela 1st cycle Delphi + Others 2001 Chile TFP Chile Delphi Germany FUTUR Others Czech Republic TF Exercise Others Turkey Vision 2023 Delphi + Others Colombia TFP Colombia 1st cycle Delphi + Others 2002 UK 3rd UK Foresight Programme Others Cyprus, Estonia, Malta eforesee Others Denmark National TF Denmark Others USA NIH Roadmap USA Others China TF Towards 2020 Delphi + Others 2003 Greece Technology Foresight Greece Others Norway Research Council 2020 studies Others Sweden 2nd Swedish TF Others Japan 8th Japanese Programme Delphi + Others South Korea Korea 2030 Delphi + Others Ukraine Ukranian TF Programme Delphi + Others 2004 France FuturRIS Others France AGORA Others Venezuela TFP Venezuela 2nd cycle Others Russia Key Technologies Others Colombia TFP Colombia 2nd cycle Delphi + Others Brazil Brazil 3 Moments Delphi + Others 2005 Romania Romanian S&T Foresight Delphi + Others Finland Finnsight Others Luxembourg FNR Foresight Others USA 21st Century Challenges GAO Others 2006 Finland SITRA Foresight Others Poland Poland 2020 TF Programme Delphi + Others Others include: scenarios, panels, roadmapping, critical technologies, etc.
foresight around the globe
EFMN 2010 EFP Foresight around the globe So far, EFMN Mapping has produced a vast amount of information on foresight unprecedented in the world The mapping has been useful to understand foresight practices in Europe and other regions of the world 100 cases 437 cases > 800 L0 & L1 767 cases > 1400 L0 & L1 846 cases > 1600 L0 & L1 > 1000 cases > 2000 L0&L1 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
mapping foresight 800 600 400 200 0 International Europe Latin America North America Asia Oceania Levels 0&1 Levels 2&3
mapping sponsors 2010 mapping government agencies and departments (or simply government ) are the main sponsors of foresight in all regions, although we can see a few differences. For example, government sponsorship is present in nearly all European and Latin American cases mapped, but is to some extent less dominant in North America, Asia and Oceania.
mapping mapping target audiences Broadly speaking, there is no great variation, government agencies and departments are the main target groups, regardless of the region. The most remarkable results are the relatively large numbers of research and business community targets far more than there are sponsors. This basically indicates that public administrations often sponsor studies targeted at these other groups. But also governments are among target groups more often than they are among sponsors, suggesting that other sponsors could be using foresight exercises to shape public policy agendas.
mapping mapping time horizons Most exercises are looking 10 to 20 years ahead into the future. With the majority of mapped exercises being initiated in the late 1990s or early 2000s, our analyses are focusing on early 21st Century foresight practices. The figure also shows that Europe, North America, Asia and Oceania have a more strategic attitude towards the far future (e.g. 30, 50, 100 years ahead).
mapping mapping territorial scale For all world regions, the national level is by far the most important. As policy-making is still predominantly carried out at this level, this result should come as little surprise. The remaining foresight initiatives are more or less equally distributed over the other territorial scales, although there are some significant differences between regions. Sub-national exercises are found most frequently in Europe possibly reflecting long-term trends of regionalisation in many European countries closely followed by Latin America.
mapping methods 2010 mapping The results indicate that some methods are very widely used across the world; such is the case for: expert panels, literature review, scenarios trend extrapolation.
mapping outputs 2010 mapping The results shows the popularity of some common codified outputs.
mapping socio-economic sectors 2010 mapping
Now, how is foresight actually practiced?
Each phase should be carefully planned Pre-Foresight Recruitment Generation Action Renewal Rationales Sponsor(s) Objectives Orientation Resources - Core team * - Time - Money - Infrastructure - Cultural - Political Approaches Time horizon Methodology Workplan - Activities - Tasks - Deliverables Scope - Context - Coverage Project team * - skills Partners Sub-contractors Steering Group Experts - Thematic - Sectoral - Regional - National - International Champions - Thematic - International Panels Methodologist Facilitators Rapporteurs Existing knowledge is amalgamated, analysed and synthesised Tacit knowledge is codified New knowledge is generated (e.g. elucidation of emerging issues, creation of new visions and images of the future, etc.) KNOWLEDGE Advising - Strategies - Policy Options - Recommendations - Transforming - Networking - Policy-making - Decision-making - Step 3: generating (new) knowledge through the exploration, analysis and anticipation of possible futures Step 2: mobilising and engaging key stakeholders Learning - Process - Products Evaluation - Impacts - Efficiency - Appropriateness Dissemination - Shared Visions - Foresight Culture - Step 5: evaluating Step 4: shaping the future through strategic planning Step 1: scanning and understanding major S&T developments, trends and issues Source: Popper (2008)
And, how do we analyse foresight processes?
How are foresight methods selected? First argument methods are chosen based on their intrinsic attributes their nature Qualitative Quantitative Semi-quantitative their capabilities, i.e. the ability to gather or process information based on: Evidence Expertise Interaction Creativity Second argument methods are chosen based on fundamental elements and conditions influencing the foresight process; in other words, foresight process needs matter. See Popper (2008), How are foresight methods selected?, Foresight, Volume 10, 2008, issue 6
Two questions related to the intrinsic attributes of methods: 1. 1 How is selection influenced by the nature of methods? 2. 2 How is selection influenced by the capabilities of methods? Nine questions related to the elements of foresight processes: 3. 3 How is selection influenced by the Geo-R&D context? 4. 4 How is selection influenced by the Domain coverage? 5. 5 How is selection influenced by the Territorial scale? 6. 6 How is selection influenced by the Time horizon? 7. 7 How is selection influenced by the Sponsorship? 8. 8 How is selection influenced by the Target groups? 9. 9 How is selection influenced by the Participation scale? 10.How is selection influenced by the Codified outputs? 11.How is selection influenced by the Methods Mix?
Classifying methods by their nature Qualitative Methods providing meaning to events and perceptions. Such interpretations tend to be based on subjectivity or creativity often difficult to corroborate (e.g. brainstorming, interviews) 1.Backcasting 2.Brainstorming 3.Citizens panels 4.Conferences/workshops 5.Essays /Scenario writing 6.Expert panels 7.Genius forecasting 8.Interviews 9.Literature review 10.Morphological analysis 11.Relevance trees /logic charts 12.Role play / Acting 13.Scanning 14.Scenario /Scenario workshops 15.Science fictioning (SF) 16.Simulation gaming 17.Surveys 18.SWOT analysis 19.Weak signals /Wildcards Quantitative Methods measuring variables and apply statistical analyses, using or generating (hopefully) reliable and valid data (e.g. economic indicators) 20. Benchmarking 21. Bibliometrics 22. Indicators / time series analysis 23. Modelling 24. Patent analysis 25. Trend extrapolation / impact analysis Semi-quantitative Methods which apply mathematical principles to quantify subjectivity, rational judgements and viewpoints of experts and commentators (i.e. weighting opinions) 26. Cross-impact / structural analysis 27. Delphi 28. Key / Critical technologies 29. Multi-criteria analysis 30. Polling / Voting 31. Quantitative scenarios / SMIC 32. Roadmapping 33. Stakeholder analysis Source: Popper (2008)
Popper (2008) 1 How is selection influenced by the intrinsic nature of methods? very high influence
How is selection influenced by their capabilities? 2 Pre-Foresight Recruitment Generation Action Renewal Rationales Project team * Sponsor(s) The Foresight - skills Objectives Partners Orientation Diamond Sub-contractors Resources Steering Group - Core team * Experts - Time - Thematic - Money Methods relying - Sectoral - heavily Infrastructure on the tacit - Regional -knowledge Cultural of people - National - Political with privileged - International Approaches access to relevant Champions Time information horizon or with - Thematic Methodology accumulated - Workplan knowledge International - Activities Panels - Tasks Methodologist - Deliverables Facilitators Scope Rapporteurs - Context - Methods Coverage relying heavily on codified information, data, indicators, etc. Existing knowledge is amalgamated, analysed and synthesised Tacit knowledge is codified New knowledge is generated (e.g. elucidation of emerging issues, creation of new visions and images of the future, etc.) KNOWLEDGE Transforming - Networking - Policy-making - Decision-making - Step 3: generating (new) knowledge through the exploration, analysis and anticipation of possible futures Step 2: mobilising and engaging key stakeholders Advising Learning Methods relying heavily on the - Strategies - Process inventiveness and ingenuity of - Policy Options - Products very skilled individuals - Recommendations Evaluation - - Impacts - Efficiency - Appropriateness Methods Dissemination relying - Shared Visions - Foresight heavily Culture on - the participation Step 5: and evaluating shared views of Step 4: shaping the future experts through and strategic planning non-experts (2008) Step 1: scanning and understanding major S&T developments, trends and issues
How is selection influenced by their capabilities? 2 (Even if unintentionally!) high influence Popper (2008) If you take into account that, on average, foresight studies use from 5 to 6 methods
Two questions related to the attributes of methods: 1. 1 How is selection influenced by the nature of methods? 2. 2 How is selection influenced by the capabilities of methods? Nine questions related to the elements of foresight processes: 3. 3 How is selection influenced by the Geo-R&D context? 4. 4 How is selection influenced by the Domain coverage? 5. 5 How is selection influenced by the Territorial scale? 6. 6 How is selection influenced by the Time horizon? 7. 7 How is selection influenced by the Sponsorship? 8. 8 How is selection influenced by the Target groups? 9. 9 How is selection influenced by the Participation scale? 10.How is selection influenced by the Codified outputs? 11.How is selection influenced by the Methods Mix?
How is selection influenced by key elements of the Process? Pre-Foresight Recruitment Generation Action Renewal Fundamental Elements of a Foresight Process 11 methods mix 3 geo-r&d context 8 target groups 10 codified outputs 4 5 6 7 domain coverage territorial scale time horizon sponsorship ASPIRATION 9 participation scale ENGAGEMENT & INTERACTION participative & networking approaches KNOWLEDGE & SHARED VISION prospective approaches COMMITMENT & TRANSFORMATION planning & decision-making approaches INTELLIGENCE & WISDOM evaluative approaches Step 5: learning Step 4: shaping the future through strategic planning Step 3: generating (new) knowledge through the exploration, analysis and anticipation of possible futures Step 2: mobilising and engaging key players Step 1: scoping the objectives and activities of the exercise
How is selection influenced by the Geo-R&D Context? high influence 3 Popper (2008) Methods that rely on the availability of knowledge about emerging or cutting-edge technologies are more often used in high-r&d intensity countries. E.g.: roadmapping (in North America) modelling (in high-r&d Asia)
How is selection influenced by the Time horizon? moderate influence 6 For example: For more than 50 years: Technology roadmapping Modelling and simulation Backcasting Gaming Also interesting Popper (2008) <10 years +15 years +20 years +30 years +50 years Scanning: its use increases as the time horizon gets longer Delphi: its use decreases as the time horizon gets longer SWOT: No cases with >30 years Bibliometrics: No cases with >20 years
How is selection influenced by the Participation scale? moderate influence 9 Main findings include: Popper (2008) in cases involving between 50 and 500 people relatively higher use of expert panels scanning stakeholder analysis in projects with participation levels above 200 people much higher use of scenarios brainstorming SWOT Delphi in very large scale projects lower use of interviews larger use of Delphi
How is selection influenced by the Codified Outputs? high influence 10 For example: Popper (2008) For the analysis of trends and drivers: Trend extrapolation For the identification of research and other priorities: Expert panels For the generation of lists of key technologies: Expert panels Delphi For forecasts: Trend extrapolation Modelling and simulation For technology roadmaps: Future workshops Key technologies
How is selection influenced by the Methods Mix? 11 very high influence Frequency of combinations Popper (2008) L (or blank) = below 19% M = 20-39% H = 40-59% VH = above 60%
Let us visualise the Methods Mix Frequency of combinations Popper (2008) L (or blank) = below 19% M = 20-39% H = 40-59% VH = above 60% Popper (2008)
Mapping methods used with Roadmapping Frequency of combinations Popper (2008) L (or blank) = below 19% M = 20-39% H = 40-59% VH = above 60% Popper (2008) Popper (2008)
Now, imagine you want to use scenarios What other methods would you use?
2010 Mapping methods used with Scenarios What do we know from 886 case studies?
How to design a foresight methodology?
The Foresight Diamond Let us explore 2 demo cases with 6 methods (2008) http://www.e-elgar.co.uk/bookentry_main.lasso?id=3977
Methodology X (Forward) Scanning Delphi 2010 Methodology X (Forward) Wild cards SWOT Evidence + Broad Expertise + Wild Creativity + Interaction + Local Expertise + Strategic Creativity Wild Cards Expert Panel Delphi Citizen Panel Citizen panel Expert panel Scanning SWOT
Methodology X (Backward) SWOT Expert panels Citizen panels Methodology X (Backward) Expert Panels Delphi Wild cards SWOT Citizen Panels Strategic Creativity + Local Expertise + Interaction + Wild Creativity + Broad Expertise + Evidence Wild Cards Delphi Scanning Scanning
How to combine methods to produce visions beyond business as usual? 5 lessons for better information/data gathering in foresight
First: Consider less frequently used methods
First: Consider less frequently used methods We could legitimately ask ourselves if the reason why we were unable to have better foresight capable of, at least, considering the possibility of experiencing turbulent moments in, for example, the financial or the real estate sectors, could be credited to the apparent Euro-reluctance to: experiment with the wide-ranging virtues of gaming or modelling and simulation, undertake time-consuming, but certainly more systematic, multicriteria or cross-impact analyses, identify through citizens panels important socio-economic issues (including weak signals) showing, for example, the unsustainability of mortgage lenders conditions; promote, especially in highly specialised S&T projects, the involvement of domain expertise based on, for example, the number of citations or publications shown by bibliometrics; exploit the, often controversial, but sometimes enlightening stakeholders mapping; widen understanding of issues and problems by using relevance trees; build hierarchical solution pathways to these problems with the help of morphological analysis; walk our way back from a roughly defined future via backcasting; or thoroughly walk our way forward from the present into a well-defined future through technology roadmapping. Source: Popper (2009)
Second: Try to improve prospective analysis
Second: Try to improve prospective analysis By using more and improved Scanning (with better use of web-based tools) advanced data and text mining tools to analyse documents; statistical aids for network/cluster analysis and visualisation structures; co-word and co-citation methods (for instance, to provide guidance as to new clusters of ideas in scientific areas). wiki-scan tools (more on this later ) Modelling (using econometric analysis and system dynamics). Computer tools are employed to create and visualise a large set of scenarios, drawing on different assumptions about how the world Roadmapping (with more sophisticated computer aids to organise and visualise the process and its results) Expert opinion tools such as Delphi drawing upon computers and networking, e.g. web-based questionnaire surveys and more discursive approaches. Expert systems to guide practitioners and managers through the process of carrying out foresight from decision support for managing the foresight process, to aids for application of specific techniques.
Third: Consider surprising and emerging issues (Wild Cards & Weak Signals)
What if? Abrupt ocean acidification Fish stock crisis Many rivers start running dry all year long When the Lights Go Off Major EU country elects neo fascist leader Pay as you pollute Collapse of the Euro Monetary System Transhumanism becomes a significant force Nano Cheats Gaining a micro advantage To be or not to be seen/invisibility spray available (in Boots) Nano enabled self diagnosis and self treatment become pervasive - Doc in a box Nano War The beginning of the end Source: iknow see www.iknowfutures.eu
Fourth: Recognise the power of interdisciplinarity
Recognising key sub-areas Using the Mapping Foresight (2009) report to show what we know about information/data gathering in foresight In a way, research in Social Sciences is the binder of all research topics in the foresight exercises. This is quite the opposite with research within Humanities, which have the least salient links to other research topics in the exercise. A Natural sciences A04 Chemical Science (key broker) A06 Biological Science B Engineering & Technology B02 Industrial Biotechnology & Food Sciences B04 Manufacturing Engineering B09 Environmental Engineering (key broker) B10 Materials Engineering B11 Biomedical Engineering B12 Electrical and Electronic Engineering B13 Communications Technologies (key broker) C Medical sciences C01 Medicine General C05 Pharmacology & Pharmaceutical Sciences C12 Public Health & Health Services (key broker) D Agricultural sciences D01 Crop and Pasture Production (key broker) E Social sciences E01 Education E02 Economics E03 Commerce, management, tourism & services E04 Policy and Political Science (key broker) E05 Studies in human society Source: Popper (2009)
Fifth: Remember how are foresight methods selected
Fifth: Remember how are foresight methods selected Foresight methods are selected in a (not always coherent or systematic) multi-factor process. So far this process has been dominated by the intuition, insight, impulsiveness and sometimes inexperience or irresponsibility of practitioners and organisers. Two factors with very high influence: Intrinsic nature Methods Mix Three factors with High influence: Capability to gather and process knowledge Geo-R&D context Codified outputs Some factors with Moderate influence: Participation scale Time horizon see other factors in figure below Popper (2008)
Thank you! rafael.popper@manchester.ac.uk
Further reading The Handbook of Technology Foresight (2008) Luke Georghiou, Jennifer Cassingena Harper, Michael Keenan, Ian Miles and Rafael Popper (Eds) From futures to foresight Ian Miles (Chapter 2) Foresight methodology Rafael Popper (Chapter 3) Foresight in Latin America Rafael Popper & Javier Medina (Ch. 12) Policy Transfer and Learning Luke Georghiou & Jennifer Cassingena Harper (Ch 14) Evaluation and Impact of Foresight Luke Georghiou and Michael Keenan (Chapter 15) New Frontiers: Emerging Foresight Ian Miles et al. (Chapter 16) Foresight, Volume 10, Number 6, 2008 Editors introduction to the European Foresight Monitoring Network Maurits Butter, Felix Brandes, Michael Keenan and Rafael Popper Comparing foresight style in six world regions Michael Keenan and Rafael Popper How are foresight methods selected? Rafael Popper Mapping Foresight (2009) Rafael Popper NOTE: This is the final report of the Mapping Workpackage of the EFMN project. The report will be printed by the European Commission in 2009. A limited number of hardcopies will be produced but its electronic versions will be freely available in the EC and EFMN websites.