1. A Conceptual Systemic Framework Proposal for Sustainable Technology Development: Incorporating Future Studies within a Co-Evolutionary Approach by A. İdil Gaziulusoy, Ph.D. Candidate Co-author Dr. Carol Boyle The University of Auckland International Centre for Sustainability Engineering and Research FEBRUARY 2007

2. GAZIULUSOY February 2007 Introduction SUSTAINABILITY ECONOMY SOCIETY ENVIRONMENT WHAT? conceptual priority: society operational priority: environment WHEN? long-term planning as operational context widens the length of time increases Sustainability is a “moving target” (Hjorth & Bagheri, 2006). Global Meta-System

3. X X X X X X X X X Operational Context N Operational Context 3 Operational Context 2 Operational Context 1 local Influence path Feed-back path presentfuture global Time Size of the Operational Context GAZIULUSOY February 2007 Introduction TEMPORAL-SPATIAL FRAME

4. Introduction COMPLEXITY “A crucial assumption of reductionism” is that we can break complex systems into parts and study these in isolation (Linstone, 1999). Frog Science versus Bicycle Science GAZIULUSOY February 2007

5. Introduction CO-EVOLUTION Environment Society Economy market operations technology industry animals humans companies ecosystems Environment Society Economy COMPLEX ADAPTIVE SYSTEMS GAZIULUSOY February 2007

6. EXTENT:RADICAL “Solutions are needed that break existing trends in current development processes.” (Weaver, Jansen, van Grootveld, van Spiegel, & Vergragt, 2000) Present technological paradigm New technological paradigm Sustainable Technology Development GAZIULUSOY February 2007

7. Sustainable Technology Development CONTEXT:CO-EVOLVING Technological Paradigm technology economy society GAZIULUSOY February 2007

8. CONTEXT:CO-EVOLVING Regulatory push/pull Environmental Cleff & Rennings (1999); Rennings (2000) Innovations Market pull Technology push Sustainable Technology Development GAZIULUSOY February 2007

9. CONTEXT:CO-EVOLVING Technology Economy Society Environment GOVERNANCE “Successful action depends on a combination of advances in scientific understanding, appropriate political programmes, social reforms and other institutional changes, as well as on the scale and direction of new investment. Organisational and social innovations would always have to accompany any technical innovations and some would have to come first” (Freeman, 1992) Sustainable Technology Development GAZIULUSOY February 2007

10. Incorporating Future Studies RELEVANCE Planning for sustainable technology development should: Have a long-term coverage; Be able to address complexity; Be able to deal with co-evolutionary change both as a result and as a cause; Should allow continuous feedback, reassessment and adjustment to cope with dynamic characteristics and changing requirements of sustainability concept; and Provide creative vision to guide the innovation path towards radical change. GAZIULUSOY February 2007

11. RELEVANCE Future StudiesEngineering Sustainable Development STD Sustainability Science Sustainability Engineering Technology Development GAZIULUSOY February 2007 Incorporating Future Studies

12. BACKCASTING AS A META-TOOL Future ? Present Incremental improvement # 1 Incremental improvement # 2 FORECASTING Planning STEP # 1 Incremental Change Incremental improvement # 3 Incremental improvement # ? Present Future SUSTAINABILITY BACKCASTING Foresighting STEP # 1 Backcasting STEP # 2 Radical Change Milestone # 1 Milestone # 2 Milestone # 3 Milestone # N GAZIULUSOY February 2007 Incorporating Future Studies

13. BACKCASTING AS A META-TOOL Backcasting is useful: when the problem to be studied is complex; many sectors and levels of society are involved; when there is a need for major change since dominant trends are part of the problem; and when the time horizon is long enough to allow considerable scope for deliberate choice (Dreborg, 1996) GAZIULUSOY February 2007 Incorporating Future Studies

14. CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK GAZIULUSOY February 2007 X X sector/ X X X Influence path Feed-back path presentfuture Time Size of the Operational Context Policy development Institutional innovations Social/cultural innovations Organisational innovations Technological innovations company country X X X local X X X X X X Operational Context N Operational Context 3 Operational Context 2 Operational Context 1 Influence path Feed-back path presentfuture global Time Size of the Operational Context Incorporating Future Studies

15. CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK Socio-Economic Domain Socio-Technical Domain (Socio-)Techno-Economic Domain “INDUSTRY” GOVERNANCE Technology Economy Society Environment GAZIULUSOY February 2007 Incorporating Future Studies

16. CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK INDUSTRY Institutional and Social Innovations Policy/Legislation Public Awareness Stakeholder Demand Company Vision Competitiveness Shareholder Values New Values Organisational Innovations Technological Innovations New Capabilities New Competencies GAZIULUSOY February 2007 Incorporating Future Studies

17. CONCLUSION GAZIULUSOY February 2007 Shift in the technological paradigm is needed; Incorporating future studies into technology planning can facilitate this shift; When planning for technologies co-evolutionary aspects of innovation should be considered; Backcasting is promising as a normative and analytical meta-tool for planning within a co-evolutionary approach; In a backcastıng exercise policy development should cover the longest time span to overlook and link institutional, social/cultural, organisational and technological innovations.