Construct their Future: 40 Major Challenges for Québec Summary of the report on the socio-economic foresight workshop organized by the Conseil de la science et de la technologie (science and technology council, or CST) October 28 and 29, 2004 Bromont
INTRODUCTION: THE STS PERSPECTIVES PROJECT On October 28 and 29, 2004, approximately 100 key figures from a wide range of backgrounds attended a socio-economic foresight workshop held in Bromont, Québec. The theme of the gathering was Construct their Future, and the participants mandate was to draw up a list of about 40 major socio-economic challenges to be faced by Québec over the next 20 years. The activity was organized by the Conseil de la science et de la technologie (science and technology council, or CST) in conjunction with the CROP and 2000 Neuf companies. The Construct their Future workshop is part of a more vast and ambitious operation, STS (science, technology and society) Perspectives, a project directed by the Council since 2003. The three major objectives of the project are as follows: 1. Make all sectors of Québec society aware of the importance and use of science and technology in understanding and solving socio-economic problems. 2. Invite the scientific community to participate in setting and pursuing social and economic aims with a science and technology component. 3. Mobilize Québec s socio-economic development partners, including those from the scientific and technological sectors, with a view to identifying and taking up certain major socio-economic challenges over the course of the next two decades. The STS Perspectives project is an important component of the reflection process undertaken by the Council over the last few years concerning how to make science and technology more accessible and more relevant to Québec society. The core argument emerging from the process is that science and technology must be integrated in a more decisive and harmonious manner within all areas and sectors of Québec society in order to complete the transition to a true knowledge society. STS Perspectives proposes to orient some of Québec s research and innovation initiatives around a certain number of major socio-economic challenges, identified by representatives of Québec society themselves, that the province will have to face in the years ahead. The project has been divided into two main phases: 1. An identification phase, involving a pinning down of the major socioeconomic challenges for Québec society concerning which science and technology can make a significant contribution, whether by facilitating a better understanding of the problems or by handling and solving them. A series of interventions will first take place within society as a whole and then within Québec s research community. 2. An analysis and strategic foresight phase, during which researchers and users of knowledge and technology together establish objectives and strategies to meet the challenges chosen in the first phase.
The CST is the project manager while a sponsorship committee ensures that the various planning stages are respected. A steering committee, made up of Council members as well as experts from within and outside of Québec, has been designated to supervise the first phase of the project and make sure that its work is unfolding as it should. Phase I, which began in 2003, includes four stages: Stage 1: Stage 2: Stage 3: Stage 4: A public consultation, first by way of focus groups, then through a survey, in order to uncover Quebecers main concerns about the future as well as their perception of the major socio-economic problems that Québec will likely face over the next 20 years. The holding of a socio-economic foresight workshop, attended by approximately 100 key figures from a wide range of backgrounds representing various groups in society, in order to establish a list of about 40 socio-economic challenges that Québec will face in the two decades ahead. A consultation of Québec researchers in order to reduce the list of 40 or so challenges to around 10 challenges concerning which the possible contribution of science and technology is deemed most important. The drafting of thematic reports regarding the 10 or so chosen challenges by an equal number of specialized committees that will state and explain the challenges, along with their potential scientific and technological components. The second phase, i.e. the foresight and strategic analysis phase, will be based upon these 10 main socio-economic challenges that research and innovation can help take up. The Council will mobilize the various partners from the sectors concerned so that they can identify objectives and establish the best possible strategies to reach them. The Council itself will choose three or four challenges from the list and establish work groups, each with 10 or so members, that will include representatives from the fields of research and technological development, users of knowledge and technology, and individuals concerned about scientific culture and ethics. Other challenges may also be explored and taken up by certain partners.
STS Perspectives Overview of the project Phase I Identification of 10 major socio-economic challenges for Québec society, concerning which science and technology can make a significant contribution (15- to 20-year time frame) Stage 1 The Québec public s concerns about the future (survey) Stage 2 Structuring of 40 socio-economic challenges for Québec by key figures chosen from all sectors and communities (socio-economic foresight workshop) Stage 3 Selection of approximately 10 challenges by researchers based upon the anticipated contribution of science and technology (survey) Stage 4 Presentation of the challenges chosen in the form of thematic reports (work groups) Phase II Socio-economic foresight analysis and strategic plans concerning a certain number of challenges
Challenges for a future Québec The second stage of Phase 1 of STS Perspectives, the socio-economic foresight workshop, represents a key moment in the Council s initiative. It was preceded by a survey of 1,600 Quebecers designed to identify their opinions, attitudes and concerns about the future. The next stage, slated for the beginning of 2005, involves consulting thousands of university, industrial, college and government researchers from all disciplines in order to describe the potential contribution of science and technology with respect to the challenges chosen. We should point out, however, that the notion of foresight adopted by STS Perspectives does not so much involve predicting the future as preparing it. Hence the type of question raised when discussing the socio-economic challenges that Québec will face between now and 2025 is not What will happen in 20 years time? but rather What do we want to see happen over the next 20 years? The phrase Québec s major socio-economic challenges for the next 20 years is understood to mean both the problems looming on the horizon that must be addressed as soon as possible and new future opportunities that must not be missed if the future development of Québec is to be ensured. As a means of guaranteeing the validity of the results and increasing support for them within society, we wanted to carry out this task of identifying and formulating the major socio-economic challenges to be faced by Québec over the next 20 years in the most democratic manner possible. Mobilizing a relatively small number of carefully selected participants and banking on a structured and highly interactive approach in order to reach the desired results these are the key elements of the Construct their Future workshop. As a means of broadening the democratic foundations of the process even more, the workshop was preceded by a survey of 1,625 Quebecers 15 years of age and older, conducted during February 2004. The objective was to identify the major concerns of Québec s population with respect to the future, its main anxieties and aspirations. The public was not asked to articulate Québec s major socio-economic challenges as such during the survey. But the survey results would directly contribute to the reflection process undertaken by workshop participants called upon to take public opinion into account when structuring the major challenges to be faced by Québec. The choice of the 100 or so key figures who participated in the socio-economic foresight workshop took place in three phases: 1. The drawing up of a list of 100 sectors or fields of activity. 2. For each sector or field, two organizations (on average) were asked to suggest candidates based on a certain number of individual characteristics. 3. The final selection of participants was carried out based on the candidates proposed, according to parameters designed to ensure the best possible balance in the make-up of the gathering.
The list of 100 sectors and areas of activity was not designed to represent the actual weight that each represents in the economy or society. The objective was not to take a sampling of Québec s population (already done in the survey carried out during the previous stage) but rather to find participants from the broadest possible range of fields of activity. The 100 or so participants had to be high-calibre individuals in their respective sectors. The ideal candidate was a figure recognized by his or her own circle or community for exhibiting creativity, a sense of innovation, original thought, a capacity for working within groups, an aptitude for transcending the special interests of his or her own sector and contemplating Québec s development in a broader manner, a certain vision of Québec s future, and a social commitment within his or her community. In order to find participants who fit this profile as much as possible, some 200 associations and organizations of all sorts were contacted. One hundred and twenty key figures were invited to participate in the workshop. A few days before the event began, they were asked to submit a first proposal containing three to five challenges, and they eventually chose the ones that they would propose during the workshop from this list. They were also asked to formulate their challenges in respecting, as much as possible, the model provided in the participant s folder. Each challenge normally had to include three elements: A verb: develop, increase, eliminate, etc.; A subject: what the challenge involved; and An objective: in order to, so as to avoid, with the goal of. Each proposed challenge was to be accompanied by a short explanation of 50 words at the most. The science/technology dimension of the challenges were not taken into consideration by the participants at this stage of the project; this would instead be the responsibility of the researchers surveyed during the next stage. By a few days before the workshop, 107 of the 120 or so key figures invited had confirmed that they would attend and had sent in their challenges. A total of 416 challenges were received before the activity began. How the workshop proceeded The Construct their Future workshop was held at the Château Bromont, a resort hotel located in Bromont in the Eastern Townships. It began on October 28 at 4:00 p.m. and concluded on October 29 at 6:00 p.m. The planned procedure was for participants to gather at 10 tables with 10 or 11 people to a table. The groups were formed in part at random and in part by design so as to ensure as wide a variety of participants as possible at each table.
The workshop proceeded in three main steps: Workshop 1, Workshop 2 and the plenary session. Workshop 1 During the first period, comprising the evening of October 28 and the first half of the morning of October 29, the participants worked in 10 groups, of 10 (or 11) members each, with each group accompanied by a facilitator and a note taker. During a first sounding of the group, each participant in turn presented a challenge, making sure to avoid repeating those expressed earlier. Participants were asked to help each proposer better express and support his or her proposed challenge. The first 100 challenges expressed during this initial sounding were recorded on computer, printed, and distributed to participants on the evening of the 28 th after the workshop. The information was provided in order to help each person prepare a second challenge the following day. On the morning of the 29 th, a second list of 100 challenges was generated using the same method, for a grand total of 200 challenges. Each table produced 20 challenges, and those seated at the respective tables then voted upon their own choices. After the vote for each group was compiled, the 10 challenges receiving the fewest votes were discarded. Thus, by the middle of the morning of October 28, the original 200 challenges had been democratically cut in half. Workshop 2 During the second period (the second half of the morning of the 29 th ), the tables were paired in order to reduce the number of challenges by encouraging a combining of similar challenges coming from 2 different tables. With this goal in mind, the group facilitators and note takers took down the results of the vote at 2 neighbouring tables and grouped the challenges together according to certain related themes. Based on the themes they wished to discuss, approximately half the participants from each of the 10 paired tables voluntarily changed groups for this workshop. The lion s share of the work involved discussing very similar challenges and suggesting possible combinations. Once this was accomplished, the 20 participants from each pair of tables voted upon the condensed list of challenges, and only the 12 having received the most votes from each of the 5 pairs of tables were kept for the following stage (the plenary session). The grand total from the beginning of the afternoon of the 29 th was thus reduced from 100 to 60 challenges. The plenary session The afternoon of the 29 th was taken up by the plenary session. This meeting, led by Ms. Anne-Marie Dussault, included a general discussion of the 60 challenges that were democratically selected at the end of the morning, as well as discussions concerning the possible combining or improving of certain among them. In order to facilitate discussions at the plenary session, the 60 challenges were grouped together before the session began into three broad thematic units: economy and
education; resources and infrastructures; and health, society, culture and democracy, and others. Since some challenges had already been combined during the plenary session, only 53 challenges were put to a final vote at the end of the afternoon. Each participant had to choose the 40 challenges that he or she considered most important. The votes were compiled during the days following the workshop. At the end of the workshop, participants were asked to complete a questionnaire concerning their level of satisfaction (or dissatisfaction) with the workshop, and nearly everyone claimed to be delighted by their experience. The challenges themselves Forty-five challenges received votes from two thirds or more of the participants in the Construct their Future workshop. The Council decided not to reveal the number of votes received by each challenge, considering that the challenges selected should not be listed in order of importance. This reflected the Council s desire to avoid influencing the researchers response when they were consulted about these same challenges during the next stage. A cursory examination of the list, along with the reaction of the handful of scientists who were asked to examine them, convinced the Council that the challenges, as adopted during the Construct their Future workshop, would be difficult to include in their current form in the researchers consultation questionnaire planned for Stage 3 of STS Perspectives. Certain turns of phrase and choices of terms that emerged in the heat of the action during the Bromont discussions undermined the clarity and/or precision of the challenges presented. In addition, the redundancies characterizing a few of the challenges suggested that they be combined and that an effort be made to condense the list. The Council also decided to review all of the wordings in order to make them clearer and more precise while respecting the broader meaning, and in many cases, the literal sense of the challenges selected at the conclusion of the workshop. A new list was therefore drawn up, this time comprising 40 challenges. Next this list was transmitted to the workshop participants, along with a sheet explaining how the challenges had been re-worded. Participants were asked for their feedback. The opinions of Council members, the project s steering committee and the STS Perspectives sponsorship committee were also solicited and taken into account. The 40 challenges on the final list were organized into broad thematic groupings: A) Health and lifestyle habits; B) Environment and resources; C) Research, innovation and the economy; D) Education; E) Demographics and communities; and F) Culture and society.
A) Health and lifestyle habits 1. Increase the effectiveness of the public health system in an environment dominated by an aging population, while controlling costs. 2. Promote the adopting of sound lifestyle habits, based on a comprehensive and preventive vision of physical and psychological health, which includes making the public more responsible for its own state of health. 3. Improve the health and quality of life of senior citizens, especially by developing new models of housing. 4. Change Québec s dietary environment from a public health perspective by making healthful foods safer, cheaper and more accessible. 5. Foster the overall well-being of people experiencing a high level of psychological stress (suicide, depression, drug addiction, etc.). 6. Make sports and leisure activities more accessible for people of all generations. B) Environment and resources 7. Develop natural resources and residual materials more efficiently in keeping with a sustainable development approach, and make Québec a world leader in this area. 8. Improve the management and protection of water as a public good, especially as part of a Québec national water policy. 9. Make Québec a leader in the development of green energy sources, both as regards domestic production and in the development of exportable know-how. 10. Reorganize and develop, on a regional basis, a more environmentally friendly collective and individual transit system. 11. Move toward a zero waste system by making producers and consumers more accountable, especially as regards managing the life cycle of products. 12. Reduce our dependence on fossil fuels and make Québec a leader in the areas of energy efficiency, renewable energy, public transit and new environmental technologies. C) Research, innovation and the economy 13. Target strategic and priority niches in research, economic development and training, on the basis of both current strengths and emerging sectors.
14. Develop products and services with a high added value, within a context of globalization and the rise of emerging economies. 15. Help break down barriers separating the various fields of knowledge and encourage the integration of technological, organizational and social innovations with an eye to optimizing their socio-economic spin-offs. 16. Facilitate the emergence of a solidarity economy (cooperatives, community organizations and social economy initiatives). 17. Develop and support a job market with a high added value, in this way enabling organizations and companies, especially small and medium-sized businesses, to innovate and remain competitive within specific niches. 18. Develop a high quality food industry based on a diversified agriculture system and an optimal use of Québec s marine resources. 19. Encourage the establishing of regional networks within Québec, involving both people and technologies, so as to make services more accessible and promote a more diversified type of socio-economic development. 20. Ensure the survival of both family farms with a human dimension and the next generation of farmers. 21. Ensure the training of a highly qualified workforce by providing the financial means to guarantee access to post-secondary studies. 22. Strengthen, develop and stimulate the regional economy and the enterprising spirit of young people from all regions. D) Education 23. Encourage young people to learn languages other than French. 24. Make the teaching of science and technology (including their social and economic impacts) a higher priority, both at the primary and secondary levels. 25. Prioritize the development of schools in disadvantaged areas, and provide support for the teachers committed to them. 26. Make a high-quality education combining rigour, creativity, flexibility and a sense of civic responsibility universally accessible. 27. Increase the promotion and visibility of scientific and entrepreneurial careers among young people, especially among girls. 28. Reduce the drop-out rate, especially among boys.
29. Promote the quality and mastery of the French language among young people. E) Demographics and communities 30. Develop better conditions for increasing Québec s birth rate. 31. Attract and receive immigrants, harmoniously integrating them into society, including at the decision-making level, so that they may contribute to Québec s development at every level. 32. Ensure that the selected challenges to be met in order to construct Québec s future include the concerns of First Nations people and the Inuit. F) Culture and society 33. Stimulate the interest and participation of the entire Québec population in the exercising of democracy. 34. Make scientific ideas more accessible and understandable so that the general public can assimilate the new types of knowledge and take active part in public discussions. 35. Incorporate and develop ethical considerations within the decision-making processes of Québec society, in areas such as health care, education, genetics, etc. 36. Facilitate the emergence of alternative modes of work and the social participation of people between 60 and 75 years of age. 37. Offer consumers all the necessary information concerning the safety, environmental impacts, and origins of goods and services so that they can make informed decisions as to their purchases. 38. Find innovative ways to reconcile work and private life, including family life. 39. Adopt innovative interventions designed to combat poverty, and the factors that generate and maintain it, and to ward off the inevitable consequences of poverty: marginality, a feeling of powerlessness, inequity and violence. 40. Support and strengthen Québec s cultural sector (creation, heritage, the arts, etc.) by fostering broader public approval of the sector and expanding its national and international influence. The final list of 40 socio-economic challenges is to be forwarded to Stage 3 of the first phase of STS Perspectives, involving an extensive on-line survey of thousands of researchers from all disciplines and sectors: universities, industries, government,
colleges and many others. These individuals are being invited to take note of the 40 challenges and choose those concerning which science and technology could make a significant contribution in the years ahead, whether from the angle of providing a better understanding of the problems or developing elements of solutions. During Stage 4, the challenges that have received the most support from the researchers will be the focus of short publications to be disseminated in numerous circles and used to prepare the work of Phase 2. At this stage, groups of experts will be formed, with each group being responsible for briefly explaining one of the selected challenges, providing a first glimpse of the possible contributions of science and technology in meeting this challenge, and identifying the disciplines concerned.