PREST

1
The Quality of the Future - three approaches to
Foresight

• Ian Miles
• PREST/IoIR
• University of Manchester
• Long Term Strategic Planning

Ian.Miles_at_man.ac.uk
2
Development and Diffusion of Technology Foresight
3
Current Status of Technology Foresight
Much corporate futures work, many consultants
otherwise US less receptive to Foresight
National Science Technology Council - National
Summit on Innovation in 1999 critical
technologies
USA
Much decentralised work in regions
Active and experimental new
programme
Europe
Japan
4
ST Foresight

• Wave of international attention began in
  early/mid 1990s (after long period of discussion
  of prioritisation in new context for ST)
• Shows little sign of abating, with approach
  promoted by EU, embedded in many government
  agencies
• As developed in Europe, Foresight differs from
  earlier futures studies

5
Three Features of European Foresight 1
Futures studies
Prospective

• Focus on long-term developments.
• Often with a focus on ST evolution and
  breakthroughs
• Many established forecasting methods.
• But also stress on alternative futures. Examine
  how to shape the future(s) not to predict a
  pre-ordained future

6
Three Features of European Foresight 2
Long-term, anticipatory, alternatives
Futures studies
Planning and ST Decision-making
Prospective

• Link to substantial decisions was weak in much
  futures work
• which was not embedded in user organisations,
  semi-detached.
• Foresight approaches reflect a
• crisis in ST priority setting as internal
  mechanisms break down
• and the rise of broader aspects of innovation,
  development, risk

Policy Related
7
Structuring Strategic Priorities
High feasibility High attractiveness
Low feasibility High attractiveness
Different strategies are implied by different
locations
KEY PRIORITIES
Intermediate Areas
Emerging Areas
High feasibility Low attractiveness
Low Low
8
Example of Priority Setting
9
Three Features of European Foresight 2
Long-term, anticipatory, alternatives
Futures studies
Planning and ST Decision-making
Prospective

• Link to substantial decisions was weak in much
  futures work
• which was not embedded in user organisations,
  semi-detached.
• Foresight approaches reflect a
• crisis in ST priority setting as internal
  mechanisms break down
• and the rise of broader aspects of innovation,
  development, risk

Policy Related
10
Three Features of European Foresight 3
Long-term, anticipatory, alternatives
Futures studies
Planning and ST Decision-making
Prospective
Network Society
ST priority setting broader aspects of
innovation, development, risk
Policy Related
Particip-ative
11
Three Features of European Foresight 3
Long-term, anticipatory, alternatives

• Three factors involved in knowledge-based network
  orientation
• Technocratic rationale knowledge widely
  distributed, need to access and combine
• Democratic rationale consulting and involving
  more stakeholders, providing legitimacy and
  moving above party politics and special interests
• Enlistment rationale agency is widely
  distributed, need to provide ownership for
  grand visions

Futures studies
Prospective
Planning and ST Decision-making
Network Society
ST priority setting broader aspects of
innovation, development, risk
Policy Related
Particip-ative
12
Three Features of European Foresight
Long-term, anticipatory, alternatives
Futures studies
Planning and ST Decision-making
Prospective
Network Society
ST priority setting broader aspects of
innovation, development, risk
Accessing expertise pools, stakeholders, agents
(actors)
Policy Related
Particip-ative
13
Organising Large Foresight Programmes
14
Achievements
Distinctive forms taken in different
Foresight exercises, reflecting learning
processes and different rationales
PRODUCT ORIENTATION reports, plans, priority
lists, etc
PROCESS ORIENTATION networks, contacts,
embedded visions, etc. .
Prospective
Full-spectrum Foresight Typically organised
with an overall steering committee, then panels
covering specific areas of technology development
or application, networking and consultation
events, etc.
Policy Related
Particip-ative
15
Determinants of Quality

• Mutual learning and sharing of knowledge as to
  good practice for structure and processes in
  emerging Foresight communities. But...
• no single recipe. Many ways to organise
  Foresight Programmes, many forms of Programme -
  related to local needs and circumstances.
• Foresight Programmes require high-level
  commitment sponsors and product champions, links
  to decision-making, ownership. And
• mobilising larger communities through panels and
  consultation. Diffusing and building
  capabilities, networking.
• Monitoring and management mechanisms - but still
  need to upgrade evaluation practice (as compared
  to monitoring).

16
Foresight Quality

• Different sorts of Foresight Programme and
  Exercise
• Different Objectives - prioritising research
  opportunities, informing innovation policies,
  invigorating innovation networks, etc. ...
• imply different notions of quality, different
  sorts of evaluation
• Predictive accuracy is less the issue than useful
  intelligence and system effects.

17
Foresight Quality

• PRODUCT ORIENTATION Validity of outcomes more
  than a matter of accuracy of predictions
• Use of results (identifying opportunities,
  demands, SWOTs etc.)
• PROCESS ORIENTATION new and improved networks
• Embedded Foresight culture
• EVALUATION efforts - still fairly rudimentary

18
Some Foresight websites

• Numerous government sites
• e.g. http//foresight.gov.uk
• http//www.nistep.go.jp/index-e.html
• EU websites
• e.g. http//www.cordis.lu/foresight/home.html
• Research and academic sites
• e.g. http//www.itas.fzk.de/ and
  http//www.jrc.es/home/areas/te_foresight_fs.html
• PREST carries much material and see handbooks
  at http//www.eurofound.eu.int/transversal/foresig
  ht.htm and http//www.cordis.lu/foresight/CGRF.pdf
  

19
End of Presentation