Multicriteria methods for technology foresight

Journal of Forecasting

Volumn 22, Issue 2, 2003, Pages 235-255

  Salo, Ahti ^a   Gustafsson, Tommi ^a   Ramanathan, Ramakrishnan ^b  

^a AALTO UNIVERSITY   (Finland)

^b SULTAN QABOOS UNIVERSITY   (Oman)

Author keywords

Judgemental forecasting; Multicriteria decision making; Programme evaluation; R D project selection; Technology foresight

Indexed keywords

DECISION MAKING; EVALUATION; RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT; PROJECT MANAGEMENT; TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER;

FORESIGHT; MULTICRITERIA METHODS; PROGRAM EVALUATION;

TECHNOLOGICAL FORECASTING;

EID: 0037343358     PISSN: 02776693     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/for.850     Document Type: Article

References (71)

1. Bana e Costa CA, Ensslin L, Corrêa ÉC, Vansnick J-C. 1999. Decision support systems in action: integrated application in a multicriteria decision aid process. European Journal of Operational Research 113: 315-335.
2. Belton V, Gear T. 1983. On a shortcoming of Saaty's method of analytic hierarchies. Omega 11(3): 228-230.
3. Beroggi GEG. 1998. Decision Modeling in Policy Management: An Introduction to the Analytic Concepts. Kluwer Academic Publishers: Amsterdam.
4. Blair A, Nachtmann R, Oison J, Saaty T. 1987. Forecasting foreign exchange rates: an expert judgement approach. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences 21(6): 363-369.
5. Bongers FJ, Geurts JLA, Smits REHM. 2000. Technology and society: GSS-supported participatory policy analysis. International journal of Technology Management 19(3-5): 269-287.
6. Bots PWG, Hulshof JAM. 2000. Designing multi-criteria decision analysis processes for priority setting in health policy. Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis 9: 56-75.
7. Bunn DW, Salo AA. 1993. Forecasting with scenarios. European Journal of Operational Research 69: 291-303.
8. Charnes A, Cooper WW, Lewin AY, Seiford L. 1994. Data Envelopment Analysis:Theory, Methodology and Application. Kluwer: Boston, MA.
9. Charnes A, Cooper WW, Rhodes E. 1978. Measuring efficiency of decision making units. European Journal of Operational Research 2: 429-444.
10. CSIRO 1991. CRIRO Priority Determination 1990-Methodology and Results Overview. Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization: Canberra, Australia.
11. Cuhls K. 2003. From forecasting to foresight processes-new participative foresight activities in Germany. Journal of Forecasting 22(2-3): 93-111.
12. Cuhls K, Grupp H, Breiner S. 1996. Methodology for identifying emerging technologies-recent experiences from Germany. Journal of Science Policy and Research Management 11(3-4): 197-212.
13. Cuhls K, Kuwahara T. 1994. Outlook for Japanese and German Future Technologies. Physica-Verlag, Springer Publishers: Heidelberg.
14. Durand T. 2003. Twelve lessons drawn from 'Key Technologies 2005', the French technology foresight exercise. Journal of Forecasting 22(2-3): 161-177.
15. Dyer JS. 1990. Remarks on the analytic hierarchy process. Management Science 36(3): 249-258.
16. Edwards W. 1977. How to use multiattribute utility measurement for social decisionmaking. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics 7(5): 326-340.
17. Gavigan JP, Scapolo F. 1999. Matching methods to mission: a comparison of national foresight exercises. Foresight 1(6).
18. Geurts JLA, Joldersma C. 2001. Methodology for participatory policy analysis. European Journal of Operational Research 128: 300-310.
19. Gholam-Nezhad H. 1987. Oil price scenarios: 1989 and 1995. Strategic Planning and Energy Management 7(1): 19-31.
20. Grupp H. 1994. Technology at the beginning of the 21st century. Technology Analysis and Strategic Management 6: 371-401.
21. Grupp H, Linstone HA. 1999. National technology foresight activities around the globe. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 60: 85-94.
22. Gustafsson A, Salo AA, Gustafsson T. 2001. PRIME decisions: an interactive tool for value tree analysis. In Multiple Criteria Decision Making in the New Millennium, Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems 507, Köksalan M, Zionts S (eds). Springer-Verlag: Berlin; 165-176.
23. Hämäläinen RP. 1991. Facts or values-How do parliamentarians and experts see nuclear power? Energy Policy 19(5): 464-472.
24. Hämäläinen RP, Salo AA, Pöysti K. 1992. Observations about consensus seeking in a multiple criteria environment. In Proceedings of the Twenty-Fifth Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Vol. IV, Hawaii, January, 190-198.
25. Hämäläinen RP, Salo AA. 1997. Rejoinder: the issue is understanding the weights. Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis 6(6): 340-343.
26. Hartwich F, Janssen W. 2000. Setting research priorities: an example from agriculture using the analytic hierarchy process. Research Evaluation 9(3): 201-210.
27. Henriksen AD. 1997. A technology assessment primer for the management of technology. International Journal of Technology Management 13(5-6): 615-638.
28. Henriksen AD, Traynor AJ. 1999. A practical R&D project-selection scoring tool. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management 46(2): 158-170.
29. Joro T, Korhonen P, Wallenius J. 1998. Structural comparison of data envelopment analysis and multiple objective linear programming. Management Science 44(7): 962-970.
30. Keeney RL. 1992. Value-Focused Thinking: A Path to Creative Decisionmaking. Harvard University Press: Cambridge, MA.
31. Keeney RL. 1999. Developing a foundation for strategy at Seagate Software. Interfaces 29(6): 4-15.
32. Keenan M. 2003. Identifying emerging generic technologies at the national level: the UK experience. Journal of Forecasting 22(2-3): 129-160.
33. Keeney RL, MCDaniels TL. 1999. Identifying and structuring values to guide integrated resource planning at BC Gas. Operations Research 47(5): 651-662.
34. Keeney RL, Raiffa H. 1976. Decisions with Multiple Objectives: Preferences and Value Tradeoffs. John Wiley: New York.
35. Korhonen P, Wallenius J. 1990. A multiple objective linear programming decision support system. Decision Support Systems 6(3): 243-251.
36. Kuhlmann S, Boekholt P, Georghiou L, Guy K, Héraud J-A, Laredo P, Lemola T, Loveridge D, Luukkonen T, Polt W, Rip A, Sanz-Menendez L, Smits R. 1999. Improving Distributed Intelligence in Complex Innovation Systems. Final Report of the Advanced Science and Technology Policy Planning Network. Frauenhofer Institute, Systems and Innovation Research: Karlsruhe, Germany.
37. Liberatore MJ. 1987. An extension of the analytical hierarchy process for industrial R&D project selection and resource allocation. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management 34(1): 12-18.
38. Lockett G, Hetherington B, Yallup P, Stratford M, Cox B. 1986. Modeling a research portfolio using AHP: a group decision process. R&D Management 16(2): 151-160.
39. Loveridge D. 2001. Foresight-seven paradoxes. International Journal of Technology Management 21(7-8): 781-792.
40. MacLean M, Anderson J, Martin BR. 1998. Identifying research priorities in public sector funding agencies: mapping science outputs to user needs. Technology Analysis and Strategic Management 10(2): 139-155.
41. Martin BR. 1995. Foresight in science and technology. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management 7(2): 139-168.
42. Martin BR, Johnston R. 1999. Technology foresight for wiring up the national innovation system. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 60: 37-54.
43. Meyer-Krahmer F, Reiss T. 1992. Ex ante evaluation and technology assessment-two emerging elements of technology policy. Research Evaluation 2: 47-54.
44. Millet I, Harker PT. 1990. Globally effective questioning in the analytic hierarchy process. European Journal of Operational Research 48: 88-97.
45. Mustajoki J, Hämäläinen RP. 2000. Web-HIPRE: Global decision support by value tree and AHP analysis. INFOR 38(3): 208-220.
46. OECD. 1991. Choosing Priorities in Science and Technology. OECD; Paris.
47. OECD. 1996. Special Issue on Governmental Technology Foresight Exercises. STI Review 20.
48. Porter ME. 1990. The Competitive Advantage of Nations. The Free Press: New York.
49. Prasad AVS, Somasekhara N. 1990. The analytic hierarchy process for choice of technologies: an application. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 38: 151-158.
50. Ramanathan R. 1999. Selection of appropriate greenhouse gas mitigation options. Global Environmental Change: Human and Policy Dimensions 9(3): 203-210.
51. Ramanathan R. 2001. Comparative risk assessment of energy supply technologies: a data envelopment analysis approach. Energy-The International Journal 26: 197-203.
52. Ramanathan R, Ganesh LS. 1995. Using AHP for resource allocation problems. European Journal of Operational Research 80: 410-417.
53. Rappert B. 1999. Rationalising the future? Foresight in science and technology policy co-ordination. Futures 31: 527-545.
54. Roessner JD. 1985. The multiple functions of formal aids to decision making in public agencies. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management 32(3): 124-128.
55. Roveda C. 1999. Technology foresight with a focus on the benefits for SMEs. In Foresight at Crossroads: Technology Foresight Linking Innovation to Informed Action. Ministry of Trade and Industry: Helsinki; 74-85.
56. Roy B. 1991. The outranking approach and the foundations of ELECTRE methods. Theory and Decision 31: 49-73.
57. Saaty TL. 1980. The Analytic Hierarchy Process. MCGraw-Hill: New York.
58. Saaty TL, Vargas LG. 1991. Prediction, Projection and Forecasting. Kluwer Academic Publishers: Boston, MA.
59. Salmenkaita J-P, Salo A. 2002. Rationales for government intervention in the commercialization of new technologies. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management 14(2): 183-200.
60. Salo A. 1995. Interactive decision aiding for group decision support. European Journal of Operational Research 84: 134-149.
61. Salo A. 2001. Incentives in technology foresight. International Journal of Technology Management 21(7-8): 694-710.
62. Salo A, Gustafsson T. 2002. A group support system for foresight processes. International Journal of Technology Management (forthcoming).
63. Salo A, Hämäläinen RP. 1997. On the measurement of preferences in the analytic hierarchy process. Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis 6(6): 309-319.
64. Salo A, Hämäläinen RP. 2001. Preference ratios in multiattribute evaluation (PRIME)-elicitation decision procedures under incomplete information. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics (forthcoming).
65. Salo A, Salmenkaita J-P. 2002. Embedded foresight in RTD programs. International Journal of Technology, Policy and Management (forthcoming).
66. Schniederjans MJ. 1995. Goal Programming: Methodology and Applications. Kluwer Academic Publishers: Boston, MA.
67. Stewart TJ. 1992. A critical survey of the status of multiple criteria decision making theory and practice. Omega 20: 569-586.
68. Stirling A. 1997. Multicriteria mapping: mitigating the problems of environmental valuation? In Valuing Nature: Economics, Ethics and Environment', Foster J (ed.). Routledge: London.
69. Wagner CS, Popper SW. 2003. Identifying critical technologies in the United States: a review of the federal effort. Journal of Forecasting 22(2-3): 113-128.
70. Zeleny M. 1982. Multiple Criteria Decision Making. MCGraw-Hill: New York.
71. 2 emissions from OECD industries. Resource and Energy Economics 23: 63-83.