Designing for impacts of Foresight Dr. Michael Keenan PREST, University of Manchester, UK FORLEARN M

1
Designing for impacts of ForesightDr. Michael
KeenanPREST, University of Manchester,
UKFOR-LEARN Mutual Learning Workshop,
BrusselsOctober 2005
2
Outline

• A few background points on foresight
• Thinking about typologies and their usefulness
• Thinking about impacts

3
What does a Foresight exercise look like?

• Many shapes and sizes!
• Common aspects experts, panels, project team,
  fixed budget and time, sponsor, reporting and
  recommendations
• Typical variations methodological
  sophistication, degree of participation, budget
  and time available, time horizon, coverage,
  organisational configuration, etc.

4
Orientation of Foresight
PRODUCT/ CODIFIED OUTPUT
MIXED
PROCESS/ NETWORK, TACIT OUTPUTS
5
Typical stakeholders in a Foresight exercise

• Foresight is about providing a framework for
  ongoing DIALOGUE between various societal actors,
  such as
• Government
• Industry
• Academe - natural social scientists
• Others, e.g. NGOs, trades unions, the media,
  banks, schools, the general public, etc.
• An important benefit for these actors is mutual
  (and collective) learning

6
Starting levels for Foresight(Not mutually
exclusive)

• Territorial National (most visible),
  Sub-national (regional, city-region /
  municipality), Supranational (bilateral,
  multilateral, International Organisation), Global
• Domain economic, social, environmental,
  technology, scientific discipline
• Alternative starting points
• Flows (e.g. rivers, pollutants, people, traffic,
  goods and services, etc.)
• Networks (e.g. people, organisations,
  infrastructures, etc.)
• Markets (e.g. goods, services, labour)

7
Using typologies to determine foresight approach

• Central question To what extent is it possible
  to codify the foresight approach that should be
  taken according to its context, i.e. region,
  problem, expected impacts?
• Depends upon what we mean by codification
• Typologies that provide prescriptions
• Questions that provide options and guidance
• Typology approach first assumes that regions,
  problems and opportunities, expected impacts, and
  foresight methods can all be reliably typified
  is this possible?
• Typologies must then be related to one another,
  i.e. it should be possible to say that Region
  Type A Problem Type G Expected Impact Type C
  Method D

8
Tracing the links . . .
Regional characteristics
Types and degree of participation Time
horizon Resources available Coverage Organisati
onal configuration
Methodological approach, i.e. combination
and sequence of methods
Problem definition
Expected impacts
9
Some common aims of foresight(types of expected
impacts?)

• Contributing to new styles of governance
• Supporting decision-making
• Defining and refining policy
• Determining investment priorities
• Building visions
• Forming new networks
• Changing mindsets
• Improving policy implementation
• Others
• Providing anticipatory intelligence
• Developing mutual trust between actors
• Building new identities
• Generating consensus

10
Regional and Problem typologies

• Political
• Decision-making powers and styles of the region
• Budgetary resources
• Socio-economic
• Industrial sectors and organisation
• Knowledge generation and exploitation capability
• Wealth distribution
• Human capital
• Social capital
• Problem / Opportunity framing (gt typology?)
• What is the focus?
• Who are the stakeholders?

11
Variety (types?) of methods
12
Matching approach to typologies

• Are typologies the way forward?
• Perhaps a process of elimination should be
  preferred are there any aims or methods that
  appear to be inappropriate for the region?
• Part of a process of questioning that guides
  practitioners to an appropriate foresight
  approach
• Multiple foresights in a region

13
Combining and sequencing methods

• Methods are rarely used in isolation rather,
  they are used in complementary sequences gt
  methodology
• Useful to think about tasks involved in foresight
  as a starting point, for example
• Enrolment of participants
• Background data gathering, possibly forecasting
• Ideas generation
• Interaction between and engagement of
  participants
• Analysis and assessment
• Synthesis and prioritisation
• Dissemination and implementation
• Consider the context in an iterative manner

14
Thinking about impacts . . .

• Need to take a broad view of WHAT constitutes an
  impact and WHERE it might be found
• WHAT tangibles and intangibles and their
  interdependency
• WHERE systemic view
• Requires an understanding of policy, business,
  innovation, etc. processes
• But also an appreciation of the scope of
  intervention that is possible with foresight
• Impacts over time
• Challenge of measuring impacts
• Selling the benefits of foresight and expectation
  management

15
Distinguishing signal from noise

• Foresight is not always tuned to needs of
  recipients
• Information needs to be presented in a way that
  policy/strategy mechanisms can receive and absorb
  it
• Timing needs to synchronise with policy cycles /
  opportunities
• Level of recommendations needs to match available
  funding or capacity for reform
• BUT occasionally it is the policy/strategy
  structure that needs to change in the light of
  foresight information

16
Foresight in action (1)
FORESIGHT AS POLICY ADVICE
Highlights the longer term
More rational decision making over space and time
gt
Extends perspectives
FORESIGHT AS ADVOCACY COALITION-BUILDING
Highlights a given challenge
Commitment to realisation of a shared vision
gt
Gathers support around it
17
Foresight in action (2)
FORESIGHT AS SOCIAL TECHNOLOGY
Old debates, new frames
Hybrid fora for strategic reflection, debate
action
gt
Wide participation
FORESIGHT AS PRODUCTION OF SYMBOL
Being foresightful
Resource for new or existing policy positions
gt
Production of meanings
18
Impacts

• Foresight as policy advice
• Decisions, resource allocations
• Foresight as advocacy coalition building
• New agenda formation
• Foresight as social technology
• Broadened participation, new networks and
  communities
• Foresight as production of symbols
• Reference to foresight, its processes, and its
  results

19
Summary remarks

• Typologies are useful for highlighting
  differences and creating an appreciation that one
  size does not fit all
• However, they are unsuited to a mechanistic
  treatment where it can be said that Region A
  requires Method C to be used things are more
  complicated than this!
• Iterative questioning approach should be
  preferred that might draw upon typologies
• Impacts a broad view is necessary and a
  greater understanding of foresights action

20
Questions and Comments?

• Dr. Michael Keenan
• Michael.Keenan_at_man.ac.uk