It’s 2020, and India has been spectacularly successful in improving the quality of its water treatment systems. The Ganges, India’s sacred river, has benefited from this progress — as two students from England discover...
&quot;Project Delphi&quot; was the name given to a US Air Force-sponsored Rand Corporation study, starting in the early 1950's, concerning the use of expert opinion . The objective of the original study was to &quot;obtain the most reliable consensus of opinion of a group of experts ... by a series of intensive questionnaires interspersed with controlled opinion feedback.&quot; Delphi may be characterized as a method for structuring a group communication process so that the process is effective in allowing a group of individuals, as a whole, to deal with a complex problem . Often, among a panel of geographically dispersed experts. The name Delphi was never a term with which the founders of the method were particularly happy. It was rather unfortunate that the set of procedures developed at RAND Corporation, and designed to improve methods of forecasting, came to be known as Delphi. The term implies something oracular, something occult, whereas precisely the opposite is involved; it is primarily concerned with making the best you can of a less than perfect fund of information. In 1969 the number of Delphi studies that had been done could be counted in three digits; today, in 1974, the figure may have already reached four digits.
The roadmap architecture is shown here, with a 20 year forward time horizon, comprising the following 3 broad layers: Market and industry drivers: the broad social, technological, economic, environmental and political trends and drivers that influence the automotive sector. The STEEPI factors were used to structure this layer. Performance measures and targets for the road transport system. The STEEPI factors were used to structure this layer, but with the Infrastructure replaced by ‘System’, on the basis that the remit of Foresight Vehicle does not include infrastructure, which is the responsibility of the Highways Agency in the UK. However, it is important to consider the road transport network as a system, including its interfaces with other systems, as some performance measures only make sense at the systems level. For example, being able to predict arrival time accurately depends on many different factors and sub-systems. Technology areas that can support the development of road vehicles, in response to the trends and drivers, and required road transport system performance. The Technology layer divided into five sub-layers, on the basis of existing Thematic Group activity within the Foresight Vehicle consortium: Engine & powertrain; Hybrid, electric & alternatively fuelled vehicles; Advanced software, sensors, electronics & telematics; Advanced structures & materials; and Design & manufacturing processes.
Version 1.0 of the Foresight Vehicle Technology Roadmap was published in 2002, as the final output of a project that involved 10 one-day workshops over a period of 10 months, bringing together a total of more than 130 participants representing more than 60 organisations from across the UK. The process involved the following steps: The first workshop (part of the Planning stage) was similar to the traditional ‘fast-start’ approach, covering the full scope of the Foresight Vehicle domain, providing an opportunity to test the concepts and techniques that would be deployed over the coming months. The second workshop focused on the top layer of the roadmap (market and industry trends & drivers). This was supplemented by desk research, incorporating published information (trends, forecasts and legislation). The third workshop focused on the middle layer of the roadmap (performance measures & targets for the road transport system). This was supplemented by additional desk research, incorporating published information (trends, forecasts and legislation). This was followed by a consultation workshop, involving a wider set of the Foresight Vehicle consortium, to test and refine the top two layers of the roadmap, prior to exploring technology. A set of five technology workshops, to identifying key technologies (and their evolution), in response to the trends, drivers, targets and performance measures identified in the previous workshops (as expressed in the top two layers of the roadmap), together with research priorities. A final workshop focused on synthesising the various components of the roadmap, and validating the emerging report. The final report was published in September 2002, as Version 1.0 of the roadmap. The roadmap was given a version number to demonstrate that it was still work-in-progress, and to encourage Version 2 to be developed.
A lot of information was gathered during the the Foresight Vehicle technology roadmapping project, and developing this to a level of quality and format that was suitable for publication was a challenge. The raw data collected in the workshops was ‘tidied up’, to ensure that each item of information was coherent, and where possible linked to a published source (e.g. forecast or legislation). The positioning of information was improved, in terms of timing, and also sub-themes. This diagram shows the final output from the first workshop (market and industry trends & drivers), for the ‘Social’ theme. Sub-themes are shown using colour. The information includes a vision statement, an assessment of the current position, a range of different forecasts, which represent the uncertainties associated with the future (for example, when oil demand might outstrip supply), together with some speculation and key questions. These ‘rich picture’ views represent more of a ‘landscape’ than a roadmap, in that clear routes to the future are not clear. This is necessary because the context within which industry, academia and government must innovate and act is complex, and there are many different stakeholders involved with many different aspirations and priorities. The set of ‘rich picture’ diagrams (28 in all) represent the lowest level of information in the roadmap (the finest level of granularity), and are included in the Appendices of the Roadmap as a resource.
A small part of the middle layer of the roadmap is shown here - the social aspects of the performance measures and targets for the road transport system.
Foresight and technology foresight for scg
eyes on tomorrow...
ศูนย์คาดการณ์เทคโนโลยีเอเปค APEC Center for Technology Foresight <ul><li>ก่อตั้งปี 1998 ภายใต้ Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC)
Mission of APEC CTF <ul><li>RESEARCH: APEC-wide Foresight Studies </li></ul><ul><ul><li>7 Projects finished since 1998, focusing on high impact area such as water, education, nanotechnology and energy
Methodologies include Delphi, Scenarios, and TRM </li></ul></ul><ul><li>CONSULTING: for Public and Private Sectors
T RAINING: Seminars and Workshops (2-3 times a year) </li></ul><ul><li>Conference on Foresight and Emerging Technologies </li></ul>T owards “Best Practice” in Technology Foresight
Our Customers <ul><li>Siam Cement Group, Premier Group, CDG Group, Ministry of Public Health, SCI Research and Innovation Co.,Ltd., CAT Telecom Pubic Company Limited, Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand, Department of Agriculture, Institute of Solar Energy Technology Development , Petroleum Institute of Thailand, TRIDI, KNIT, มหาวิทยาลัยเกษตรศาสตร์ , สำนักงานเลขาธิการรัฐสภา , TPA, SIRIM, NISTPASS, and many others . </li></ul>
Modes of Strategic Policy Learning (partly based on Ken Guy, 2006) Policy development Parallell activities: Intelligent benchmarking etc. Future options: Foresight etc. Past experience: Impact analysis, History etc. Current context: Policy analysis, structure and dynamics
Source: APEC Center for Technology Foresight Futures Studies Strategic Planning Policy Development Foresight The Foundations of Foresight
T he Johari Window KNOWN KNOWNS UNKNOWN KNOWNS KNOWN UNKNOWNS UNKNOWN UNKNOWNS Knowledge management e nvironment scanning trends imagination S trategic planning Foresight
The generic foresight process framework inputs analysis interpretation prospection outputs strategy Foresight Source : Voros (2003) Strategic intelligence scanning, Delphi Emerging issues/trends analysis Systems thinking, Causal Layered Analysis Scenarios, visioning, backcasts, roadmaps Reports, presentations, workshops, multimedia Strategy development & strategic planning: individual, workgroup, organisation, society, etc.
Global Strategic Trends Source: Global Strategic Trends – Out to 2040, Ministry of Defence UK (2010)
APEC Center for Technology Foresight www.apecforesight.org <ul><li>ธุรกิจที่มีนวัตกรรม 100 ไมล์ต่อชั่วโมง
what might happen – need to understand this your vision – need to create this
<ul>Causal Layered Analysis (CLA) </ul><ul>Discourse Analysis: worldview solution often in consciousness transformation </ul><ul>problem </ul><ul>causes </ul><ul>Systemic (social, economic, cultural) </ul><ul>Worldviews, ideologies </ul><ul>Myths-metaphors </ul><ul>Litany: official public description of issue </ul><ul>Social Science Analysis: short-term historical facts uncovered. Solution values with structures </ul><ul>Myth/Metaphor Analysis: solution can rarely be rationally designed </ul><ul>Source: Sohail Inayatullah (1998) </ul>
<ul>- Sohail Inayatullah </ul><ul><li>“ Causal layered analysis is based on the assumption that the way in which one frames a problem changes the policy solution and the actors responsible for creating transformation.” </li></ul>
<ul>Example of CLA </ul><ul><li>Litany … Bangkok traffic, pollution, waiting time ( Solution: hire consultant, build more roads, Actors: contractors, government )
Causes … urbanization, rapid development, economic growth ( Solution: telecommuting or use mobile phones , Actors: corporations, int’l agencies )
Worldview … Industrialism, Big City Outlook, Colonialism ( Solution: transform development model, deep decentralization, focus on agriculture , Actors: public intellectuals, social movements )
Myth … West is best, Bigger is Better ( Solution: focus on indigenous metaphors, on pre-modern modes of knowing , Actors: mystics, fringe artists ) </li></ul><ul>Source: UNESCO/World Futures Studies Federation workshop in Thailand (1993) </ul>
Expert A Expert B Foresight Committee moderator anonymity answer answer feedback feedback x (Expert Panel) Foresight Committee
Consensus through Delphi Planning of social services for the elderly - seeking opinions of community- and hospital-based doctors about seriousness and prevalence of health problems From Delphi Techniques and the Planning of Social Services - The Prevention of Dependency Among the Old (Giovanni Bertin)
Delphi Applications Within foresight studies, Delphi is usually used to tap the wisdom of a group, in order to: <ul><li>predict when S&T developments will occur
Policy Delphi The same 3 key features apply: anonymity / iteration / controlled feedback Example: “Government should bear the burden of health care across the population by providing 100% financial support to ensure universal and equitable access to services.” Desirability assessment very desirable desirable undesirable very undesirable 1 2 3 4 Feasibility assessment definitely possibly probably not definitely not 1 2 3 4 Importance assessment very important important not very important completely_ _unimportant 1 2 3 4
Evolution of technology roadmapping 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 Strategic planning Co-evolution Roadmapping approach supports integrated strategic planning Take up in electronics sector, defence and aerospace Semiconductor Technology Roadmap Take up in other sectors - companies - consortia - government Motorola develops technology roadmapping approach Forecasting Policy Foresight Futures & Scenario planning Science fiction 1997 Fast-start Generalisation Customisation Cambridge
Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory, emi-web.inel.gov/roadmap/factsheet.pdf VISION PRESENT
A Technology Roadmap Links the future to present, and resources to market/applications Where do we want to go? Where are we now? How can we get there? Source: Centre for Technology Management, University of Cambridge Time Market M 1 M 2 Product P 1 P 2 P 3 P 4 Technology T 1 T 3 T 4 T 2 R&D programmes RD 1 RD 2 RD 4 RD 6 RD 3 RD 5 Resources Capital investment / finance Staff / skills Supply chain
Foresight Vehicle technology roadmap: architecture Time Market / Industry drivers Performance measures and targets Technical Group areas +5 years Now Vision +10 years +15 years S T E E P I +20 years Trends drivers, key issues and uncertainties Evolution of required and desirable functional performance of road transport systems of the future Required and desired technological response, including research requirements
Foresight Vehicle TRM: process Planning (Oct ‘01) Market and industry trends and drivers Road transport system performance measures and targets Consultation Engine and powertrain (E&PT) Hybrid, electric and alternatively fuelled vehicles (HEV) Advanced software, sensors, electronics and telematics (ASSET) Advanced structures and materials (FASMAT) Design and manufacturing Processes (DMaP) Synthesis Reporting (Sept ‘02) Co-ordination, facilitation, data collection, analysis and structuring of information <ul><li>10 month duration
10 workshops </li></ul><ul><li>More than 130 participants
2002 2007 2012 2017 2022 Vision Social attitudes towards road transport and the environment? New working / living patterns Cheap, safe, reliable, clean convenient, comfortable transport for all 2030: population in the UK is forecast to increase by 3.3%, to 61 million 1,39,40,67 , after which it will decline to 57 million by 2050 73 2016: 4 million (25%) increase in housing (80% single-person), increasing demand for travel 1,67 Continued growth of cities and towns, mainly in South East Frustration with congestion and public transport continues ? (journey time no longer predictable) Increasing mobile working 80-85% of journeys by car 39,40,103 Increasing leisure time 39,40 Increasing complexity of lives ? Increasing concern about crime, security and safety 2000: 3,500 road traffic deaths and 40,000 serious injuries in UK, at an estimated cost of £13.3bn (40,000 deaths and 1.7 million injuries in EU, representing a cost of 2% of GDP) 8,37,39,40 Journey times increasing (70% longer by 2016 in peak travel periods) 67 Growth in personal mobility (70% of drivers use car for leisure day trips every week or month; 50% expect to be making more by 2020) 42 Vehicles sold increasingly as ‘lifestyle’ choices ? Increasing female vehicle purchase / ownership (women are more likely to describe their cars as ‘stylish’, ‘sporty’ or ‘fun’) 42 Shift in social attitudes to speeding Demand to reduce deaths and injuries on roads Trend towards career ‘downsizing’ for improved lifestyle ? Younger generation more IT-literate Increased use of car pools ? 2010: 50% increase in rail passenger miles 30 2010: 10% increase in bus passenger journeys 30 2012: Bicycle journeys double 31 2010: Passenger numbers through UK airports increase by 50% 30 2030: 22- 27% of UK population over retirement age, compared to 19% in 1998; pension costs rise from 4.5-5.5% of GDP 1,25,39,40 2015: 150% increase in international air traffic; 100% increase in domestic, compared to 1995 1 2031: 57% increase in UK road traffic, compared to 1996 80,103 2007: working at home becoming common (currently more than 66% of European organisations with more than 500 employees already practice teleworking) 28,39,40 2021: Households in South-east forecast to grow by 19% on 2001 levels 41 Between 8 and 20% of car-owning households experience vehicle-related crime each year, depending on region 41 1999: UK ‘leads’ world in vehicle theft (twice global average at 2.5%); cost of vehicle-related crime £6bn 46,47 2016: 25% increase in number of UK households, 80% of growth due to single person households; 1.3% rural land use predicted to change to urban land use 39,40 Legal issues and frameworks ? More residential traffic calming schemes and pedestrianisation of town centres Many different stakeholder groups, with different needs from transport system Balance between global, national and local solutions ? UK car-centric culture Shift from car ownership to car access ? Individual ‘time budget’ for travel remains constant ? 2010: 20-50% increase in European road passenger and haulage traffic 13,80 2010: 25% of UK workforce teleworking at least two days per week 57 2015: 400 million people live in megacities of more than 10 million inhabitants 57 Key: Health, safety & security Mobility & congestion Lifestyle & attitudes Demographics 2031: 40% increase in bus / coach vehicle miles, compared to 1996 1 2022: 70% increase in journey times in many UK cities 1996 80 Increasing proportion of women in paid employment (9.9 million in 1984 to 12.2 million in 1999) 73 75% of all journeys are under 5 miles and 45% are less than 2 miles 31 Nearly one third of UK households do not have a car (13 million people) 31 More than half of drivers exceed speed limits on motorways, dual carriageways and residential roads 66 People and jobs have moved out of the city and town centres 103 Example detailed roadmap content (1 of 28): Social trends & drivers <ul>"Rich picture" </ul><ul>"Landscape" </ul>
Example summary roadmap content: Social performance measures & targets Society Vehicle adaptability Urban people transport Effective selling and customer support 2005: 70% user satisfaction with all transport modes (measure of ‘convenience’) 2010: 80% user satisfaction with all transport modes 2005: Road traffic noise reduced by 3dBA from 1998 levels 2010: Road traffic noise reduced by 4dBA 2020: 85% user satisfaction with all transport modes 2020: Road traffic noise reduced by 6dBA; Homologated noise reduction of 4dBA and 8dBA for light and heavy vehicles, respectively Aim for ‘equitable’ mobility (same price for same journey for all groups in society) 2010: Vehicle security (resistance to attack) 5 - Door locks: 5 minutes; Secure storage area in vehicle: 5 minutes - Alarm systems: 5 minutes; Immobilisers: 20 minutes; Window glass: 2 minutes 2002 2007 2012 2017 2022 <ul>Beacons </ul>
LIQUID FUELS (conventional oil bitumen and heavy oil) Electricity And Heat 2005 2010 2030 GAS FUELS Electricity and Heat from renewable and gas fuels Stationary Transportation 2020 Biofuels GTL CG OIL BIOMASS NG Hydrogen LNG Renewable and Alternate Coal Gasification Coal bed methane Gas Hydrates
‘ First-cut’ roadmap <ul><li>In groups of two, generate 2-3 post-it notes for each broad layer (5 minutes)
Consider all layers & timeframes of roadmap </li></ul>… history, current plans, events, external actions, future possibilities, issues, vision <ul><li>Round table, each group place a post-it on chart, and share with group </li></ul>(limit discussion to points of clarification)… 2 rounds <ul><li>Generate as many additional post-it notes as possible and </li></ul>place on roadmap (‘parallel’ activity) - fill ‘white space’ <ul><li>Identify and discuss key strategic issues </li></ul>(‘arrow’ post-it notes)
Published over 830 titles and sold </li></ul>over 4.5 million copies <ul><li>Services over 2,000 companies </li></ul>a year
Three Scenarios TPA Corp. Concentrate on profit making activities, RBM, CEO, less synergy Value of Non-Profit Organization (NPO) From association to foundation, new dimension for learning, synergy and teamwork, Prime Minister’s Price in International Cooperation for NPO New Synergy Competition from universities, synergy spear-headed by consultancy, practical solution provider, expansion of service to provinces, closer relationship with China
Two Policy Issues <ul><li>Can TPA survive if Japan cuts off its financial support?
Should TPA become a private company since some of its operations are making profit? </li></ul>
Changes in Three Years <ul><li>Library@Company: TPA library management software in 100 companies
E-commerce: book selling and training management