Interpreting Foresight Process Impacts: Second International Seville Seminar on Future-Oriented Technology Analysis (FTA): Impacts on policy and decision making 28th- 29th September 2006 Interpreting Foresight Process Impacts: Steps towards the Development of a Framework conceptualising the Dynamics of ‘Foresight Systems’ Effie Amanatidou1, Ken Guy2 1University of Manchester/OPTIMA, PhD researcher – ATLANTIS, Director STP Unit 2 Wise Guys Ltd., Director

Presentation Contents Interpreting Foresight Process Impacts:Steps towards the Development of a Framework conceptualising the Dynamics of ‘Foresight Systems’ Presentation Contents Research Problem and Purpose Statement Interpretation of Foresight impacts Conceptual Framework of emerging societies Contribution of Foresight Developing an Impact Assessment Framework Objectives Hierarchy Approach for developing an IAF - Foresight system Approach for developing an IAF - Wider Environment The Logic Model Conclusions

Research Problem & Purpose Statement Interpreting Foresight Process Impacts:Steps towards the Development of a Framework conceptualising the Dynamics of ‘Foresight Systems’ Research Problem & Purpose Statement Lack of common impact assessment framework for foresight exercises irrespective of case - specific aims, objectives, levels and focus of implementation Need for a common impact assessment framework for good practices, coordination and benchmarking Need for a ‘higher level’ of reference ‘Lisbon’ agenda and more participatory governance Purpose Statement develop an impact assessment framework as a tool with which to examine the impact of foresight exercises in developing a more participatory ‘knowledge society’, thus enabling the assessment of foresight according to criteria common across different countries or regions.

Conceptual Framework for the Emerging Societies Interpreting Foresight Process Impacts:Steps towards the Development of a Framework conceptualising the Dynamics of ‘Foresight Systems’ Conceptual Framework for the Emerging Societies Fact- driver Social move. Ways K mediated ICTs Condition factor Servi ices Kbased Indus. Intang ibles Active participation Social trust Informed publics K-based input economy Coping with risk society Dominant role of knowledge Actors allign Dealing with uncertainty Knowledge creation, absorption learning Innovation- based growth Social capital Skills- compet. Net- working Social change Tech.

Contribution of Foresight Interpreting Foresight Process Impacts:Steps towards the Development of a Framework conceptualising the Dynamics of ‘Foresight Systems’ Contribution of Foresight Fact- driver Social move. Ways K mediated ICT Condition factor Kbased Indus Social trust Informed publics K-based input economy Active participation Servi ices Coping with risk society Dominant role of knowledge Dealing with Uncertainty Knowledge creation, absorption learning Intang ibles Actors allign Innovation- based growth Net- working Skills- compet Social capital Tech. change Social change

Objectives Hierarchy for Foresight exercises Interpreting Foresight Process Impacts:Steps towards the Development of a Framework conceptualising the Dynamics of ‘Foresight Systems’ Objectives Hierarchy for Foresight exercises Higher Level Goals Related Preconditions Specific Skills Competences Technological and Social change (Social) Trust CR KS Intermediate Goals IP DU AP INNO CDA AA N SC Lower Level Goals Lower Level Goals: AA: Aligning actors N: Facilitating networking SC: Increasing levels of social capital Intermediate Goals: IP: Creating informed publics DU: Dealing with uncertainty AP: Promoting active participation INNO: Supporting innovation-based growth CDA: Increasing knowledge creation, diffusion and absorption Higher Level Goals: CR: Coping with the ‘risk society’ KS: Enhancing the ‘knowledge society’

Interpreting Foresight Process Impacts:Steps towards the Development of a Framework conceptualising the Dynamics of ‘Foresight Systems’ Approach for developing the Impact Assessment Framework – Foresight System (based on the cases of UK, Sweden and Malta) Actors Processes Inputs Objectives Principles / criteria related to actors: Non-fragmented institutions Mutual interests – common goals Interdependence Principles/ criteria Principles / criteria Principle/ criteria N AA IP CDA DU AP SC Principles / criteria related to objectives: Clear, non-divergent objectives Well grounded logic of intervention Clear focus Principles / criteria related to processes: managing of expectations openness transparency inclusiveness - early public engagement media coverage, promotion Principles / criteria related to inputs / outputs:  quality  relevance  timing

Foresight System Wider Environment Interpreting Foresight Process Impacts:Steps towards the Development of a Framework conceptualising the Dynamics of ‘Foresight Systems’ Approach for developing the Impact Assessment Framework – Wider Environment (based on the cases of UK, Sweden and Malta) Degree of inter-institutional communication and collaboration Degree of inter-disciplinary collaboration Degree of public-private sector divide Institutional settings Actors’ configuration - communication Changing political circumstances Interested customers with absorptive capacities Engage those who make policy, have ability to take action Actors factors factors Objectives Structure of innovation process – advance-ment of KS Processes Governance Policy-making culture Wider Environment Foresight System factors Society in favour of change / innovation Perception of other actors’ roles, and interests Degree of divisiveness and individuality in the society Generation gap Fragmentation in policy system Degree of development of planning processes and consultation Degree of party political divide Timing and level of commitment factors Inputs Socio-cultural context

Impact Assessment Framework - Foresight System Interpreting Foresight Process Impacts:Steps towards the Development of a Framework conceptualising the Dynamics of ‘Foresight Systems’ Impact Assessment Framework - Foresight System (specifically for impacts related to networking and actors’ alignment) Actors Processes Inputs Objectives Principles / criteria related to actors: Inter-institutional communication and collaboration Mutual interests Low dependence Principles/ criteria Principles / criteria Principle/ criteria Principles / criteria related to processes: inclusiveness flexibility Sustainability of networks created Principles / criteria related to objectives: Goals alignment AA N Principles / criteria related to inputs / outputs: compatibility / complementary areas of expertise

Foresight System Wider Environment Interpreting Foresight Process Impacts:Steps towards the Development of a Framework conceptualising the Dynamics of ‘Foresight Systems’ Impact Assessment Framework – Wider Environment (specifically for impacts related to networking and actors’ alignment) Alignment of solution with funder gover/nce solutions and current trends players with other players compet. and collab. techn. Degree of inter-institutional communication and collaboration Low dependencies Goals alignment Institutional settings Actors’ configuration - communication Actors factors factors Structure of innovation process – advance-ment of KS Objectives Processes Governance Policy-making culture Wider Environment Foresight System Trust Perceptions alignment Peoples individual characteristics Social context factors The degree the government and regulatory contexts promotes networking factors Inputs Socio-cultural context

Funding, Personnel, Past results, Data, Experts, etc. Interpreting Foresight Process Impacts:Steps towards the Development of a Framework conceptualising the Dynamics of ‘Foresight Systems’ The Logic Model (incorporating Objectives Hierarchy-Foresight System-Wider Environment) Upper System Goals Foresight System internal criteria related to: Actors Processes Objectives Inputs/ Outputs Wider environment external factors related to: Institutional settings, Actors’ configuration – communication Governance / Policy-making culture Socio-cultural context Structure of innovation process – advancement of KS CR KS Strategic Goals/Impacts IP DU AP INNO CDA Lower level Goals/Impacts AA N SC Outcomes immediate impacts New combinations stakeholders Visions for the future Changes of mindsets Multi-disciplinary research …… Foresight activities Scoping Appointment of experts Commission studies, workshops Communication of findings Inputs Funding, Personnel, Past results, Data, Experts, etc.

Interpreting Foresight Process Impacts:Steps towards the Development of a Framework conceptualising the Dynamics of ‘Foresight Systems’ Conclusions It is possible to assess foresight exercises in terms of their contribution to more participatory ‘knowledge societies’. In doing this it is important to understand how foresight influences specific impact areas. This in turn presupposes understanding of the dynamics of foresight systems and their interaction with the wider environment. It is possible to build models that help identify internal criteria and external factors to understand how a foresight system works and how it should work. Each impact area should also be studied separately in order not to miss additional area-specific internal criteria and external factors that have to be considered. The impact assessment framework can then be built according to the Logic Model approach.