Abstract
Although foresight has become increasingly relevant at the international level, little methodological attention has been given to the challenges that arise from the geographical dispersion of participants or the consideration of their national and regional idiosyncrasies.This paper addresses these challenges in connection with coordination tools for the ‘Open Method of Coordination’ — most notably ERA-NETs and European Technology Platforms — which are facilitated by the European Commission with the aim of contributing to the establishment of the European Research Area (ERA). Specifically, it is argued that the successful management of these tools calls for multi-stakeholder processes which pose demands such as scalability, modularity and dependability on the design and deployment of foresight methodologies.The authors report experiences from a recent foresight process that was conducted in Finland to support the development of the Strategic Research Agenda (SRA) of the Forest-Based Sector Technology Platform. The encouraging results from this process and the broader potential of internet-based decision support systems are discussed in view of European coordination tools.
References
Carlsson B. (2006) Internationalization of Innovation Systems: A Survey of the Literature // Research Policy. № 35. Р. 56-67.
Edquist C. (ed.) (1997) Systems Innovation: Technologies, Institutions and Organisations. London: Pinter.
European Commission (2001) European Governance: A White Paper. Brussels: European Commission. COM(2001) 428.
European Commission (2002) Thinking, Debating and Shaping the Future: Foresight for Europe. Final Report of the High Level Expert Group for the European Commission, 24 April. Brussels: European Commission.
European Commission (2003) Innovation Policy: Updating the Union's Approach in the Context of the Lisbon Strategy. Brussels: European Commission. COM (2003) 112.
European Commission (2004a) Science and Technology, The Key to Europe's Future - Guidelines for Future European Union Policy to Support Research. Brussels: European Commission. COM (2004) 353.
European Commission (2004b) Stimulating Technologies for Sustainable Development: An Environmental Technologies Action Plan for the European Union. Brussels: European Commission. COM (2004) 38.
European Commission (2005) Report on European Technology Platforms and Joint Technology Initiatives: Fostering Public-Private R&D Partnerships to Boost Europe's Industrial Competitiveness. Brussels: European Commission. SEC (2005) 800.
Finnish Forest Industries (2006): http://english.forestindustries.fi/.
Forest-Based Sector Technology Platform (FTP) (2005) Guidelines for Preparing the Forest-Based Sector Technology Platform's Strategic Research Agenda. Forest-Based Sector Technology Platform. http://www.forestplatform.org/.
Georghiou L. (2001) Evolving frameworks for European collaboration in research and technology // Research Policy. V. 30. P. 891-903.
Helmer O. (1983) Looking Forward: A Guide to Futures Research. Beverly Hills: Sage.
Jewell T. (2003) International foresight's contribution to globalization // Foresight - The Journal of Futures Studies, Strategic Thinking and Policy. V. 5. № 2. Р. 46-53.
Kaiser R., Prange H. (2004) Managing Diversity in a System of Multi-Level Governance: The Open Method of Co-Ordination in Innovation Policy // Journal of European Public Policy. V. 11. № 2. Р. 249-266.
Kemp R., Schot J., Hoogma R. (1998) Regime Shifts to Sustainability Through Processes of Niche Formation: The Approach of Strategic Niche Management // Technology Analysis and Strategic Management. V. 10. № 2. Р. 175-197.
Kuhlmann S., Edler J. (2003) Scenarios of Technology and Innovation Policies in Europe: Investigating Future Governance // Technological Forecasting and Social Change. V. 70. P. 619-637.
Kоnnоlа T., Brummer V., Salo A. (2006) Diversity in Foresight: Insights from the Fostering of Innovation Ideas. Submitted manuscript. http://www.sal.hut.fi/Publications/m-index.html.
Kоnnоlа T., Unruh G.C., Carrillo-Hermosilla J. (2006) Prospective Voluntary Agreements for Escaping Techno-Institutional Lock-in // Journal of Ecological Economics. № 57. Р. 239-252.
Liesiо J., Mild P., Salo A. (2006) Preference Programming for Robust Portfolio Modeling and Project Selection // European Journal of Operational Research, forthcoming. http://www.rpm.hut.fi.
Linstone H.A. (1999) Decision Making for Technology Executives: Using Multiple Perspectives to Improve Performance. Boston/London: Artech House. P. 31-76.
Lundvall B-Е. (ed.) (1992) National Systems of Innovation: Towards a Theory of Innovation and Interactive Learning. London: Pinter.
Martin B.R., Johnston R. (1999) Technology Foresight for Wiring Up the National Innovation System. Experiences in Britain, Austria, and New Zealand // Technological Forecasting and Social Change. V. 60. P. 37-54.
Metcalfe J.S. (1995) Technology Systems and Technology Policy in an Evolutionary Framework // Cambridge Journal of Economics. V. 19. № 1. Р. 25-46.
Pochet P. (2005) The Open Method of Co-ordination and the Construction of Social Europe. A Historical Perspective / Zeitlin J., Pochet P. (eds.). The Open Method of Coordination in Action: The European Employment and Social Inclusion Strategies. P.I.E. Brussels: Peter Lang. P. 19-33.
Porter A., Roper A.T., Mason T.W., Rossini F.A., Banks J. (1991) Forecasting and Management of Technology. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Powell W., DiMaggio P. (eds.) (1991) The New Institutionalism in Organisational Analysis. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
Prange H. (2003) Technology and Innovation Policies in the European System of Multi-Level Governance // Techikfolgenabschаtzung - Theorie und Praxis. V. 12. № 2. P. 178-187.
Rio Gonzаlez P. (2005) Analysing the Factors Influencing Clean Technology Adoption: A Study of the Spanish Pulp and Paper Industry // The Journal of Business Strategy and the Environment. V. 14. P. 20-37.
Rotmans J., Kemp R., van Asselt M. (2001) More Evolution than Revolution. Transition Management in Public Policy // Foresight. V. 3. № 1. Р. 15-31.
Salo A. (2001) Incentives in Technology Foresight // International Journal of Technology Management. V. 21. № 7. Р. 694-710.
Salo A., Cuhls K. (2003) Technology Foresight - Past and Future // Journal of Forecasting. V. 22. № 2-3. P. 79-82.
Salo A., Gustafsson T. (2004) A Group Support System for Foresight Processes // International Journal of Foresight and Innovation Policy. V. 1. № 3-4. P. 249-269.
Salo A., Konnola T., Hjelt M. (2004) Responsiveness in Foresight Management: Reflections from the Finnish Food and Drink Industry // International Journal of Foresight and Innovation Policy. V. 1. № 1. P. 70-88.
Salo A., Liesio J. (2006) A Case Study in Participatory Priority-Setting for a Scandinavian Research Program // International Journal of Information Technology and Decision Making. V. 5. №1. Р. 65-88.
Salo A., Salmenkaita J-P. (2002) Embedded Foresight in RTD Programs // International Journal of Policy and Management. V. 2. № 2. P.167-193.
Schot J., Rip A. (1997) The Past and Future of Constructive Technology Assessment // Technological Forecasting and Social Change. V. 54. P. 251-268.
Shim J.P., Warkentin M., Courtney J.F., Power D.J., Sharda R., Carlsson C. (2002) Past, Present, and Future of Decision Support Technology // Decision Support Systems. V. 33. P. 111-126.
Smith K. (2000) Innovation as a Systemic Phenomenon: Rethinking the Role of Policy // Enterprise and Innovation Management Studies. V. 1. № 9. P. 73-102.
Smits R., Kuhlmann S. (2004) The Rise of Systemic Instruments in Innovation Policy // International Journal of Foresight and Innovation Policy. V. 1. № 1. P. 4-32.
Unruh G.C. (2000) Understanding Carbon Lock-in' // Energy Policy. V. 28. № 12. P. 817-830.
Webster A. (1999) Technologies in Transition, Policies in Transition: Foresight in the Risk Society // Technovation. V. 19. P. 413-421.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.