scenarios and Foresight

1,321
-1

Published on

a 2002 look at use of scenarios in Foresight programmes

Published in: Economy & Finance, Technology
0 Comments
4 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
1,321
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
143
Comments
0
Likes
4
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • scenarios and Foresight

    1. 1. Scenarios, Foresight, Knowledge Platforms [email_address]
    2. 2. Scenarios, Foresight, Knowledge Platforms [email_address] <ul><li>Based on two projects, mainly and on three presentations: </li></ul><ul><li>1 process and results of genomics exercise </li></ul><ul><li>2 some lessons from this (as cnveyed to sponsor) </li></ul><ul><li>3 Success scenario approach applied to nanotechnology </li></ul>
    3. 3. Part 1 “Genomics” <ul><li>Workshop and preparatory material commissioned by Research Council to aid selection decisions (funding decisions already taken - but see later) </li></ul><ul><li>Client wanted “traditional” scenario workshop - focusing on change in S&T impacting on Soc sci - not on alternatives for soc sci as such </li></ul>
    4. 4. ESRC Genomics Scenarios - material from evaluation session with sponsor Clem Bezold Institute for Alternative Futures Ian Miles Centre for Research and Innovation
    5. 5. Project Overview <ul><li>Input for Forecasts and Scenarios: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Dec. Design Meeting </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>IAF/CRIC Research (-> series of documents) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Interviews with 22 Experts (activists, social scientists, scientific researchers, business professionals) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Convened January 2002 Workshop. </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Used three different “lenses” to help clarify the role of Social Science Research for Genomics </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>COUNCIL group collaboration software </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>24 Participants </li></ul></ul>
    6. 6. Multiple Approaches for Determining Priorities 4 reports prepared - fed into workshop - result was new reports and workshop report plus LEARNING, NETWORKING Key Drivers for Genomics Thematic Priorities Genomics Applications Scenarios Priorities for Social Science
    7. 7. Design workshop -> report -> scenario workshop: Key Drivers of Genomics <ul><li>Functionality of Genomics </li></ul><ul><li>Regulation of Genomics </li></ul><ul><li>Business Forces and Beyond </li></ul><ul><li>Genomics Itself </li></ul><ul><li>Politics and Geopolitics </li></ul><ul><li>Demand </li></ul><ul><li>Social Attitudes </li></ul><ul><li>Social Mobilization </li></ul><ul><li>Governance of Knowledge </li></ul><ul><li>Events </li></ul><ul><li>Risk </li></ul><ul><li>Environment </li></ul>
    8. 8. Thematic Priorities -> Themes for Social Science <ul><li>Specificities of Genomics </li></ul><ul><ul><li>nature and impact of scientific activity </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Science and Technology Knowledge </li></ul><ul><ul><li>relationship between public and private science </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Regulatory Issues </li></ul><ul><ul><li>privacy and data protection </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Social and Health Policy Challenges </li></ul><ul><ul><li>insurability and health impacts </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Interfaces Between Disciplines </li></ul><ul><ul><li>effects on social and economic structures </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Cultural Implications and Institutional Resources </li></ul><ul><ul><li>social science in relation to natural sciences </li></ul></ul>
    9. 9. Using Archetypal IAF Scenarios <ul><li>4 Scenarios constructed out of variations of the Drivers: </li></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Genomics, Inc. </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Broken Promises </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Out of Our Control </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Genomics for All </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><li>First shot prepared before workshop, break-out groups elaborated </li></ul>
    10. 10. Social Science Research Priorities – How as well as What <ul><li>Priorities related to Research Organizations and Process: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Interdisciplinarity – outreach to natural scientists </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Engaged Research – provide context for innovation </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>International Research – role of developing world </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Conflict and Inequality – social division and equity </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Communication of Results – enhance dialogue </li></ul></ul>
    11. 11. What Social Science Research Priorities – <ul><li>Priorities related to Genomics Research Issues for Social Science: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Social Perceptions and Ethical Structures </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Critical Analysis of Key Social Constucts </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Business and Economics </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>International Politics and Institutions </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Cultural Reception and Consumption Practices </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Co-Evolution of Laws and Legal Structures </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Food and Agricultural Applications </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Mobilization of Groups </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Inter-relations Between Technologies </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Corporations, Innovation, Technology Transfer </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Genomics Innovation and the State </li></ul></ul>
    12. 12. Foresight and Social Research Priorities: <ul><li>Lessons from the </li></ul><ul><li>Genomics Scenarios Exercise </li></ul>
    13. 13. Types of Lesson <ul><li>Results of the Exercise: publications and other outputs, specific recommendations and areas of uncertainty or controversy </li></ul><ul><li>Lessons concerning prioritisation in genomics-related research - related to the specific exercise, and to Foresight more generally </li></ul><ul><li>Lessons that might be applied to prioritisation in (social) research more widely </li></ul>
    14. 14. Some lessons related to the design and implementation <ul><li>Timing problems in terms of fit with ESRC genomics prioritisation and selection processes </li></ul><ul><li>Evolution of client demands and motivations </li></ul><ul><li>Scope for closer client involvement in process design (design workshop issues) </li></ul>
    15. 15. Some lessons related to the workshop process <ul><li>Problematic involvement of competing would-be centres </li></ul><ul><li>Too few natural scientists and industry representatives (conflict of dates, etc) </li></ul><ul><li>Scope for more scripted sessions? </li></ul>
    16. 16. Some lessons related to the methods <ul><li>Valuable use of technological aids - need for UK capabilities here? </li></ul><ul><li>Scenario methodology - need for development of social science analysis and exploitation of various methods (what linkage to existing professionals?) </li></ul>
    17. 17. Impacts (just some…) <ul><li>Changed structural ideas for funding as well as election inputs </li></ul><ul><li>generated internal unease about soc sci capabilities, (staff learning) </li></ul><ul><li>led then to decision to spread funding, to add plans for new interdisciplinary facilities, to support use of scenario methods for communication </li></ul><ul><li>Internal communication about issue, thus ongoing support </li></ul>
    18. 18. Part 2 Success Scenarios: <ul><li>The example of a nanotechnology scenario workshop - material used in workshop (excerpts) </li></ul>
    19. 19. Success for the UK in Nanotechnology Applications by 2006 CRIC Success in Nanotechnologies
    20. 20. Why this Workshop? <ul><li>The Wave of Interest in Nanotechnology </li></ul><ul><li>Where does the UK stand? </li></ul><ul><li>What should the UK do? </li></ul><ul><li>What would constitute ‘Success’? </li></ul><ul><li>What are the Drivers and Shapers of, - and Barriers to - Change? </li></ul><ul><li>How could we get to Success? What would it look like? </li></ul>
    21. 21. Success Scenarios <ul><li>WHAT? </li></ul><ul><li>Credible, optimistic </li></ul><ul><li>Expert consensus if possible </li></ul><ul><li>Informed by benchmarking and other inputs </li></ul><ul><li>WHY? </li></ul><ul><li>“ Stretch target” </li></ul><ul><li>Shared visions, improved understanding </li></ul><ul><li>Better indicators of progress </li></ul><ul><li>Action points </li></ul>
    22. 22. Previous Workshops <ul><li>INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY IN THE UK </li></ul><ul><ul><li>A SCENARIO FOR SUCCESS IN 2005 </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Commissioned by: Dr. John Taylor, Director-General of the Research Councils </li></ul><ul><li>Office of Science and Technology </li></ul><ul><li>Department of Trade and Industry </li></ul><ul><li>Funded by: The Economic and Social Research Council </li></ul><ul><li>Conducted by: Centre for Research on Innovation and Competition (CRIC), </li></ul><ul><li>University of Manchester and UMIST </li></ul>Contents Executive Summary 1 . I ntroductio n 1.1 What would ‘success’ look like by 2005? 1.2 Developing the Scenario 1.3 The Workshop Participants 2. The 2005 Scenario and its Rationale 2.1 Technological Change by 2005 2.2 Entrepreneurship, New Business Models and Venture Capital 2.3 Content 2.4 Innovative Business Use of ICTs ... 2.5 Skilled Workers and Innovative Consumers 2.6 Importance of the Science Base 2.7 Government Action 2.7.1 Government as an Innovative... and User of ICTs 2.7.2 Government Providing the Framework for Competition 2.7.3 Government Encouraging Entrepreneurship 2.8 Indicators of Success for the UK in ICTs by 2005 3. The Economic Dimensions of the Scenario 3.1 The Distinction between Production and Diffusion 3.2 How the Contribution of ICT Production to the Economy is Measured 3.3 Estimates of the Contribution Made to the Economy by ICT Production 3.3.1 Value Added 3.3.2 Employment 3.3.3 Trade and the Balance of Payments 3.4 How the Contribution of ICT Diffusion to the Economy is Measured 3.5 Estimates of the Contribution Made to the Economy by ICT Diffusion 3.5.1 Improvements to Industry Performance 3.5.2 Lower Prices and Higher Quality Goods and Services for UK Households 4 . Conclusions <ul><li>BIOTECHNOLOGY IN THE UK </li></ul><ul><ul><li>A SCENARIO FOR SUCCESS IN 2005 </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Commissioned by: Dr. John Taylor, Director-General of the Research Councils </li></ul><ul><li>Office of Science and Technology </li></ul><ul><li>Department of Trade and Industry </li></ul><ul><li>Funded by: The Economic and Social Research Council </li></ul><ul><li>Conducted by: Centre for Research on Innovation and Competition (CRIC), </li></ul><ul><li>University of Manchester and UMIST </li></ul>
    23. 23. 6 Application Areas Informatics Drug Delivery Systems Tissue Engineering, medical implants & devices Novel Materials Sensors and actuators Instrumentation, tooling and metrology N
    24. 24. “ Snapshot” Example - Informatics Confidential
    25. 25. The Workshop will: <ul><li>Build on these starting points to develop improved success scenarios to tell us: </li></ul><ul><li>   What will drive change? </li></ul><ul><li>   What will success look like? </li></ul><ul><li>   What will enable us to get there? </li></ul><ul><li>   How will we know we are on track? </li></ul><ul><li>   What do we need to do to make it happen? </li></ul>
    26. 26. Success Scenarios <ul><li>Starting from the benchmarking studies and “snapshots” for the 6 application areas: </li></ul><ul><li>Where does the UK stand? </li></ul><ul><li>What does a SUCCESS SCENARIO look like? </li></ul><ul><li>What are the Drivers and Shapers of, - and Barriers to - Change? </li></ul><ul><li>How could we get to Success? What actions are required? </li></ul>
    27. 27. Working Sessions <ul><li>Issues to Consider </li></ul><ul><li>Current State of UK </li></ul><ul><li>Major Issues Arising for the Near Future </li></ul><ul><li>Any Surprises? </li></ul><ul><li>Metrics for Success and Failure </li></ul>6 WORKING GROUPS, FEEDBACK INTO PLENARIES
    28. 28. Drivers of Change <ul><ul><li>Access to technology: </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>New knowledge in the UK and internationally </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Local and global markets and competition: </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>demand pull from users’ </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>appreciation of opportunities from knowledge </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Other issues </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Special features that distinguish your area ? </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>UK’s special advantages or problems compared to competitors? </li></ul></ul></ul>
    29. 29. What would constitute ‘Success’? <ul><li>Indicators </li></ul><ul><li>key products and applications </li></ul><ul><li>impact of products on end-user performance </li></ul><ul><li>local and global end-user markets - size and UK share </li></ul><ul><li>industry structure - large firms, SMEs, spin-outs </li></ul><ul><li>business model (e.g. high value added) </li></ul><ul><li>where are the UK companies in the supply chain? </li></ul><ul><li>effect on GDP/employment? And impact on inward investment? </li></ul><ul><li>our competitors, and how we compare </li></ul><ul><li>where is the leading-edge research? where UK stands? </li></ul><ul><li>other features </li></ul><ul><li>How much change by 2006? </li></ul>
    30. 30. What Enables Change <ul><ul><li>Quality of research </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Ownership of research </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Availability of skilled people </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Sources of finance </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Instrumentation, standards </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Infrastructure and manufacturing capabilities (e.g. fabrication facilities) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Structure and organisation of industry and markets </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Regulatory Environment </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Policies for Health Services and other public sector markets </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Intellectual Property Regimes </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Other issues (please add your own) </li></ul></ul>
    31. 31. How do we know we are beating the competition? <ul><ul><li>Relative performance with other countries: </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>UK research recognised by global firms as leading edge </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>UK firms assembling high value added patent portfolios </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Venture capitalists and inward investors investing in UK start-ups </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>International collaborations </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>End users seeking/ recognising value of UK products (market share) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Availability/size of facilities in the UK </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Number of graduates and post-graduates in relevant disciplines </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Other issues (please add your own) </li></ul></ul>
    32. 32. What do we do to make it happen? <ul><ul><li>S teps which need to be taken to maximise the likelihood of your success scenarios </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Research </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>People </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Facilities </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Finance and taxation </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Access to technology [and international collaboration] </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Regulatory issues </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Other issues] </li></ul></ul></ul>
    33. 33. (End of workshop presentation) - much produced on fly!
    34. 34. June 2002 - the “output” - but action already
    35. 35. Foresight.gov.uk has been “refocused” <ul><li>But issues of long-tem challenges do not go away </li></ul><ul><li>And need to source and combine knowledge inputs from many and novel sources is intensified </li></ul><ul><li>Thus scenario techniques - OF MANY KINDS (some more Foresight-like) - are revitalised, in business as well as in state, and especially in RTD. </li></ul>
    36. 36. Real End of Presentation Thanks! CRIC Success in Nanotechnologies
    1. A particular slide catching your eye?

      Clipping is a handy way to collect important slides you want to go back to later.

    ×