Foresight and horizon scanning processes aim to actively engage stakeholders in anticipating, recommending, and transforming technological, economic, environmental, political, social, and ethical futures. They do this through environmental scanning, horizon scanning, and addressing grand challenges. Effective foresight requires classifying and selecting grand challenges based on relevance, feasibility, and research dimensions. It also requires applying multiple approaches, promoting stakeholder engagement, developing emerging issue maps, and effective knowledge governance supported by social technologies and a worldviews approach. A wide range of tools are used to support these foresight and horizon scanning processes.

1. Grand Challenges and
S&T Foresight

2.  Foresight is a systematic,  Key/Emerging/Frontier Issues
 Environmental Scanning
participatory, prospective and
 Horizon Scanning
policy-oriented process which, with
 ART
the support of environmental and
 Anticipating
horizon scanning approaches, is  Recommending
aimed to actively engage key  Transforming
stakeholders into a wide range of  TEEPSE futures
activities anticipating,  Technological
recommending and transforming  Economic
(ART) technological, economic,  Environmental
 Political
environmental, political, social and
 Social
ethical (TEEPSE) futures.  Ethical

3. 1. Economic challenges
 need to engage business through a combination of
supply-side measures for promotion of RTD and demand-
side measures to create innovation-friendly markets –
see Aho Group Report
2. Social and environmental challenges
 causes and consequences of issues such as climate
change, food and energy security and the ageing society
 initial drive will have to come from governments.
3. Science and technology
 collective ability to respond to opportunities in frontier
research
GCs must be relevant, feasible and have research
dimension

4. 1. Water security and vulnerability 12. Work-life balance and
2. Energy security and vulnerability mental health
3. Health, illness and well-being 13. Science, technology and
4. Sustainability and climate ethics
change 14. Crime, security and justice
15. Governance, democracy
5. Ageing and demographic issues and citizenship
6. Food security and culture 16. Coexistence and conflict
7. Globalisation and localisation 17. Social pathologies and
8. Social cohesion and diversity ethics
9. Technological security, hazard 18. Social exclusion, poverty
and risk and affluence
10. Consumption and behavioural 19. Economic prosperity and
change growth dynamics
20. Urban and rural dynamics
11. Innovation, knowledge and 21. Education and skills
technology dynamics dynamics

5.  Need for a broad research agenda  Forward-looking
 addressing ‘wicked’ problems  Practices
 Players
 interconnecting knowledge
 Outcomes
 resolving conflicts in:
▪ definitions  Robust methodology
▪ methodology  Explanatory
▪ policy responses  Participatory
 Exploratory
 Need for a deep research agenda  Advisory
 Addressing grand challenges  Worldviews approach
 Addressing grand responses  Conservative
 Reformist
 Addressing emerging issues
 Radical
 Addressing knowledge governance
 Applying a ‘worldviews’ approach

6. 1st message
There are many ways of
addressing GCs and
shaping our future…

7. 3 4
5
1 2

8. ADDRESSING
GRAND CHALLENGES,
GRAND RESPONSES,
EMERGING ISSUES AND
KNOWLEDGE GOVERNANCE IN
Foresight & Horizon Scanning (FHS)

9. 1
 consensus about the need to address GCs  Classifying GCs
 huge amount of information on GCs  Economic
 problem of effective knowledge management (e.g. impact  Social &
of climate change on cities, consequences of ageing Environmental
population for workforce skills, etc.).  Science and
technology
 problem of interactions between various GCs (e.g. impact
of climate change on water and food security, impacts of  Selecting GCs
ageing or migration).  Geographical
 problem of Information overload, with studies at various relevance
levels of granularity, and considerable controversy in many  RTD relevance
topics.  Socio-economic
feasibility
 problem that GCs are NOT just “big problems”. They
represent agendas for RTD, innovation and the development  Defining GCs space
of conducive environments for adoption of innovations.  Strata
 problem of classifying GCs in terms of:  Linkages
▪ Geographical relevance  Borders of strata
 Control mechanisms
▪ Knowledge domain and RTD relevance
▪ Feasibility as an economic or social investment

10. 2
 GRs to GCs will almost certainly require:
 Applying multiple
 interdisciplinary knowledge development approaches to GRs
 multi-stakeholder contributions to and  Interdisciplinary
applications of this knowledge base  Multi-stakeholder
 a policy mix of actions (developing a policy  Policy mix
roadmap that spans several traditionally distinct
policy domains).  Promoting stakeholder
engagement through:
 Far too often specific efforts to address GCs –
 Delphi surveys
such as geoengineering plans, or calls for massive
 Expert workshops
change in consumer behaviour, smart metering and
 Gaming activities
carbon taxes (all these in the context of
 Scenario building
energy/climate change challenges) – are
conceptualised in very narrow ways.  Roadmapping
 Visualisation tools
 The social resistance, technical difficulties, leads and
lags in adjustment and transition, are poorly taken  Networking tools
into account.  Etc.

11. 3
 Applying horizon scanning & issue mapping  Developing a robust
 Mapping issues against GCs and GRs emerging issues MAP
 Monitoringissues
 Assessing factors shaping the trajectories of
 Analysing issues
▪ GCs
 Positioningissues
▪ GRs
 Paying particular attention to  Mapping emerging
‘issues’ such as:
▪ Seeds of change (“weak signals”)  Weak Signals and
▪ Potential surprises (“wild cards”) potential Wild cards
 Key technologies
 Using bottom-up approaches such as surveys,  Visions & scenarios
 TEEPSE drivers
citizen panels and web-based crowdsourcing
 SWOT & GCs
for the analysis of emerging issues relevant to  Roadmaps
GCs &GRs  Models
 Etc.

12. 4
 Effective knowledge governance (KG) requires:
 Overcoming language barriers, cultural differences,
 Identifying the right
balance of methods
competition and fragmentation of knowledge across
supporting:
disciplines, professions, and localities.
 Knowledge push
 Exploiting creative environments, commercialisation,
standardisation and innovations (technological & social)  Knowledge pull
 Governance involves the codification of knowledge and the  Using a wide range of
development of mechanisms to: KG strategies:
 Improve access/location  Balancing
interactivity
 Promote validation/evaluation
 Responding to ‘hot’
 Assess implications for action (both present and future) & current topics
 Promoting ‘gaming’
 KG must be supported by social technologies:
▪ rating
 situating and interconnecting codified knowledge
▪ scoring
 situating and interconnecting knowledge communities
▪ user rights
 enabling better communication and networking between
experts and stakeholders of different types ▪ badges & titles
▪ Etc.

13. 5
 Effective use of ‘worldviews’ approach requires
interactive/participatory settings capable of:  A worldviews approach
can help to identify:
 Identifying key features of different worldviews
 Key features
▪ using deskwork
 Key limitations
▪ using workshops by proponents, or
 Key similarities
▪ using experts familiar with the worldviews  Key ‘boundary
▪ enabling direct comparison around specific points objects’
 Identifying key limitations in their abilities to grasp
major problems and solutions  Worldviews approach
 Identifying key points of potential agreements about  Conservative
gaps in knowledge (though not necessarily about how  Reformist
to most effectively resolve these).  Radical
 Identifying key “boundary objects” for potential  Etc.
agreement about key features of a phenomenon, and
alignment in terms of action without necessarily
achieving consensus about many other things

14. 2nd message
We use a wide range of tools to support
foresight & horizon scanning processes
addressing Grand Challenges…

15. NEW
Methodology
Toolkit 44
methodology toolkit

17. 3rd message
We use networked innovation approaches to provide
information technology (IT) and software solutions to
government, business, research and education actors
at local, national and international levels.

18. “ Futures Thinking Applied
”
1 2 3 4

19. The Innovation Systems Company
www.futuresdiamond.com
“ Foresight Knowledge System
”
A European Union supported platform
aimed to explore, share and analyse
forward-looking practices, players and
outcomes in the world.
1 http://www.mappingforesight.eu

20. The Innovation Systems Company
www.futuresdiamond.com
“ Horizon Scanning Platform
”
A horizon scanning system on key issues
affecting the future of the health and
social care workforce planning in the
United Kingdom.
2 Beta 1.1 to be launched in April 2012

21. The Innovation Systems Company
www.futuresdiamond.com
“ Emerging Issues Platform
”
An interactive system to map emerging
issues, future 'shakers' (wild cards) and
'shapers' (weak signals) of science,
technology and innovation in the world.
3 http://bank.iknowfutures.eu

22. The Innovation Systems Company
www.futuresdiamond.com
“ Stakeholder Engagement System
”
An participatory system aimed to
improve short-medium-to-long-term
decision-making of public, private &
international actors.
4 http://delphi.iknowfutures.eu

23. “ Thank you for your attention
”
