Search results

This paper aims to introduce, unpack, explore, make sense and share Hiraya Foresight via the Engaged Foresight approach as a futures concept, framework and methodology to reconceptualize foresight and reframe anticipatory processes to enable the self and communities to reimagine visions of the future. This indigenous foresight process offers to strip the husk and break the shell of conscious, colonial anticipation and reveal and liberate unconscious imagination that enables ethical aspirations to emerge.

This paper introduces and examines the context, purpose and process of the four waves of the Hiraya Foresight Framework via the Engaged Foresight approach. These were constructed through the use of the Engaged Foresight approach, through workshops, a literature review and an action–learning approach. The first wave, lawak, looks into the breadth of foresight. The second wave, lalim, looks into the depth of foresight. Tayog, the third wave, looks into the peak of foresight. Finally, the fourth wave of foresight kababaang-loob contemplates the nature, values and wisdom of foresight.

This paper shares the processes, experiences and impacts through five case studies where the Hiraya Foresight Framework via the Engaged Foresight approach was applied. This paper shares the impacts of Hiraya Foresight in democratizing and indigenizing futures literacy.

This paper describes and offers Hiraya Foresight via the Engaged Foresight approach as an indigenous approach to decolonize futures studies and foresight practice.

This paper aims to depict foresight programmes as extended service encounters between foresight practitioners, sponsors, and other stakeholders. The implications of this perspective for evaluating the outcomes of such programmes are to be explored.

The range of activities comprising foresight is reviewed, along with the various objectives that may underpin these activities. The more substantial foresight programmes are seen in terms of a series of steps, in each of which various partners can be involved in generating service outcomes and later steps of the process. The arguments are illustrated with insights drawn from various cases.

A foresight programme is likely to feed into more than one policy process, so that the foresight activities can be linked to various stages of the policy cycles, as well as engaging participants with different degrees of influence on the policies in question. The outcomes of the foresight activity are also heavily shaped by the degree of involvement of various stakeholders, not least the sponsoring agency and any other groups it seeks to mobilise. Seeing foresight as a service activity brings to the fore the notion of co‐production, and the importance of the design of the service encounters involved.

The task of evaluating foresight is a challenging one, and comparison of foresight activities needs to bear in mind the different scale, scope, and ambitions of different programmes. Simple static comparison of formal inputs and outputs will miss much of the value and value‐added of the activity.

A dynamic approach to evaluation stresses the learning of lessons about the roles of multiple stakeholders – and the responsibilities of sponsors as well as practitioners.

Foresight programmes are frequently commissioned, and often have significant influence on decision‐making. Attempts to systematically evaluate these efforts have begun, and this essay stresses the need to be aware of the complex interactive nature of foresight, highlighted by viewing it in service terms.

This paper seeks to compare recent third generation technology foresight studies in South Korea and mainland China. Both studies were released in 2005.

Review of the foresight reports released by the Chinese and Korean governments (not available in English), interviews with the project leaders of foresight studies.

China is relatively behind Korea in the sophistication of its technology foresight methodology. Chinese foresight is second generation (technology focus) whereas Korea's is third generation (society focus). There is no example of policy up‐take of TF results in China so far but there was one very recent example in Korea. There was no private sector participation in using Chinese foresight results; however, there was limited participation in Korea. Foresight methodology should be generally enhanced.

A better link between policy‐making and foresight process is needed. This requires changes at both ends. Governance issues of foresight are addressed towards the end of the paper.

Original, unpublished competitive paper for the ASIALICS 2006 International Conference, Shanghai, April 2006.

The paper aims to present an integrated foresight framework and method to support decision-makers who are confronted with today’s complex and rapidly changing world. The method aims at reducing the degree of uncertainty by addressing the inertia or duration of unfolding trends and by placing individual trends in a broader context.

The paper presents a three-layered framework and method for assessing megatrends based on their inertia or duration. It suggests that if long-term trends and key future uncertainties are studied in conjunction at a meta-level and placed in a broader multi-layered framework of trends, it can result in new insights.

The application of the proposed foresight method helps to systematically place a wide range of unrelated trends and key uncertainties in the context of a broader framework of trends, thereby improving the ability to understand the inertia, direction and mutual interaction of these trends.

The elaboration of identified trends and key uncertainties is partly case-specific and subject to interpretation. It is aimed at illustrating the potential use of the framework.

The paper presents a new approach that may, by itself or in combination with existing foresight methods, offer new means for anticipating future developments.

The use of the proposed framework has potential to provide better insight in the complexity of today’s rapid-changing world and the major transitions taking place. It aims to result in sharper foresight by reducing epistemic uncertainty for decision-makers.

The paper demonstrates how megatrends, Kondratieff waves and century-long trends can be placed in an integrated framework and analysed in conjunction.

Lab on-a-chip (LOC) may lead to low-cost point-of-care devices for the diagnosis of human diseases, possibly making laboratories dispensable. However, as it is still an emerging technology, very little is known about its future impact on the diagnosis of human diseases, and on the laboratory industry. Hence, the purpose of this study is to foresee possible developments of this technology through a consultation with researchers in the field in two distinct time periods.

Based on Technology Foresight, this study addresses this gap by assessing the opinions of over five hundred LOC researchers and tracking changes in their views on the future of LOC diagnostic devices. These researchers participated in a two-wave global survey with an interval of two and a half years

Although second-wave (2020) respondents are less optimistic than those of the first wave (2017), the results of both surveys show that LOC diagnostic devices are expected to: move from proof-of-concept demonstrations to industrial development, becoming commercially feasible worldwide; integrate all laboratory processes, delivering cheaper, faster and more reliable diagnoses than laboratories; and provide low-cost point-of-care solutions, improving access to healthcare.

Although it would be desirable to collect and explore the views of different sets of stakeholders, the method of generating lists of survey respondents shows a bias toward academic/scientific circles because the respondents are authors of scientific publications. These publications may as well be authored by stakeholders from other fields but it is reasonable to assume that most of them are researchers affiliated with universities and research and development organizations. Therefore, this study lacks in providing an image of the future based on a more diverse set of respondents.

The results show that these devices are expected to radically change the diagnostic testing market and the way laboratories are organized, perhaps moving to a non-laboratory-based model. In conclusion, in the coming decades, these devices may promote substantial changes in the way human diseases are diagnosed.

Only a few studies have attempted to foresee the future of LOC devices, and most are based on literature reviews. Thus, this study goes beyond the existing research by providing a broad understanding of what the future will look like from the views of researchers who are contributing to the advancement of knowledge in the field. The researchers invited to take part in this study are authors of LOC-related scientific publications indexed in the Web of Science Core Collection.

The EU Framework Programme and the foresight community are both focusing on future developments in innovation. This paper seeks to answer the questions: How much can they learn from one another to enhance their visions on the future? Are both perspectives aligned?

This research used the Dynamo approach, which analyses the match and mismatch of innovation entities by characterising both by a codified taxonomy on innovation. This taxonomy is based on the experience of TNO in innovation. In total, 140 flagship foresight activities from the EFMN database are analysed, as well as the Working Programmes 2007‐2008 from FP7 Cooperation.

The findings show that the perspectives of FP7 and the foresight community on innovations in health are highly aligned. Some interesting mismatches are identified that can be taken up by FP8 and the foresight community. Only a limited number of innovation themes are not addressed by both perspectives.

These results can help the foresight community to focus on important innovation themes in health not generally addressed and give input to the new FP7 working for 2009‐2013.

The results of the study show a more detailed insight into what innovation topics foresight and FP7 are mentioning/addressing.

The paper sets out to explore the nature and degree of variation in foresight “style” across six world regions. The underlying hypothesis is that differences in regional context – in terms of political, socio‐economic, and cultural conditions – will affect foresight “style”. At the same time, a secondary hypothesis acknowledges that policy tool transfer and international learning might soften the influence of contextual conditions.

Using the data collected for more than 800 foresight exercises in six world regions, the paper considers eight different dimensions of foresight “style”, including domain coverage, time horizon, target groups, and methods used. It interprets regional differences (and similarities) with reference to dominant political and economic traditions in each region. In so doing, it tests the hypothesis that foresight “style” is influenced by regional context.

The analysis suggests that some foresight “style” dimensions vary between regions more than others. For example, there is marked variation in the domain areas covered by foresight across the world, while some regions appear to prefer particular methods over others. Time horizons also vary. For other dimensions, such as participation levels and the identity of target groups, there is a good deal of similarity. Thus, some dimensions of “style”, at least at the aggregate level, seem to be more influenced by regional context than others.

The paper is unique in being the first publication to survey such a large sample of foresight activity across a wide part of the globe.

The purpose of this paper is to envision the alternative futures of the design and manufacturing industry using an integrated foresight method based on scenario planning. Also, the authors aim at developing robust strategies for an enterprise that aims to be placed as a leading high-tech international design and manufacturing company in 2035.

The proposed approach is created by integrating several foresight methods such as Delphi, scenario planning, MICMAC and cross-impact analysis.

Automation and sustainable development are found as the fundamental driving forces in the design and manufacturing industry. Four scenarios based on these driving forces and expert knowledge are created: innovation adaptation, forced automation (business-as-usual), sustainable era and automationless scenarios. For the developed scenarios, a set of strategies are proposed by asking experts about the strategies which can be taken to make the enterprise competitive in all developed scenarios in 2035. The main macro-level outcome is that economic and technological drivers will be the most important factors for design and manufacturing, followed by environmental and social factors.

The proposed method uses the strengths of traditional scenario planning but overcomes its weaknesses by suggesting a systematic process for scenario building and easy application.