Evaluation of national foresight activities: Assessing rationale, process and impact

Technological Forecasting and Social Change

Volumn 73, Issue 7, 2006, Pages 761-777

  Georghiou, Luke ^a   Keenan, Michael ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MANCHESTER   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EVALUATION; LEARNING SYSTEMS; MOTIVATION;

NATIONAL FORESIGHT ACTIVITIES; SYSTEMATIC KNOWLEDGE;

PUBLIC POLICY;

ECONOMIC ACTIVITY; ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT; ECONOMIC IMPACT; ECONOMIC POLICY; STRATEGIC APPROACH;

CENTRAL EUROPE; EURASIA; EUROPE; GERMANY; HUNGARY; UNITED KINGDOM; WESTERN EUROPE;

EID: 33746357564     PISSN: 00401625     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2005.08.003     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. S. Kuhlmann, et al., Improving distributed intelligence in complex innovation systems. Final report of the Advanced Science and Technology Policy Planning Network (ASTPP), Karlsruhe/Brussels 1999 (ISI/ European Commission).
2. Durand T. Twelve lessons from 'Key Technologies 2005': the French technology foresight exercise. J. Forecast. 22 (2003) 161-177
3. Havas A. Evolving foresight in a small transition economy. J. Forecast. 22 (2003) 179-201
4. H. Grupp, H.A. Linstone, National technology foresight activities around the globe-resurrection and new paradigms, Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 60, 85-94 (1999) p. 92.
5. K. Arrow. Economic welfare and the allocation of resources for invention, In R. Nelson (Ed), The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity, (Princeton: Princeton University Press), 1962, 609-625; re published in N. Rosenberg, The Economics of Technological Change (Harmondsworth: Pelican), 1974, 164-181, 1962.
6. OECD. Technology, Productivity and Job Creation-Best Policy Practice (1998), OECD, Paris
7. Lipsey R. Technology policies in neo-classical and structuralist-evolutionary models. STI Rev. 22 (1998) 31-73
8. Metcalfe J.S. Science policy and technology policy in a competitive economy. Int. J. Soc. Econ. 24 789 (1997 (September))
9. Smith K. Innovation as a systemic phenomenon: rethinking the role of policy. Enterp. Innov. Manag. Stud. 1 1 (2000) 73-102
10. In: Cassingena Harper J. (Ed). Vision Document, eFORESEE Malta ICT and Knowledge Futures Pilot (2003 (January))
11. M. Keenan, An evaluation of the implementation of the UK Technology Foresight Programme, Doctoral Thesis, PREST, University of Manchester, 2000.
12. Georghiou L. Third generation foresight-integrating the socio-economic dimension. Proceedings of the International Conference on Technology Foresight-The Approach to and Potential for New Technology Foresight. NISTEP Research Material vol. 77 (2001 (March))
13. L. Georghiou, Foresight concept and practice as a tool for decision-making, Plenary presentation, Technology Foresight Summit, Budapest, Hungary 27-29 March 2003, UNIDO, Vienna 2004 and http://www.unido.org/file-storage/download/?file_id=10631.
14. Scriven M. Evaluation Thesaurus. 4th ed. (1991), Sage, Beverly Hills, CA
15. Gibbons M., and Georghiou L. Evaluation of Research-A Selection of Current Practices (1986), OECD, Paris
16. NISTEP, 2nd Policy-oriented Research group, 5th technology forecast survey-future technology in Japan, NISTEP Report No. 25, Tokyo 1992.
17. Kuwahara T. Technology forecasting activities in Japan. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 60 (1999) 12
18. Buisseret T.J., Cameron H.M., and Georghiou L. What difference does it make? Additionality in the public support of R and D in large firms. Int. J. Technol. Manag. 10 10 4-6 (1995) 587-600
19. Georghiou L. Impact and additionality of innovation policy. In: Boekholt P. (Ed). Innovation Policy and Sustainable Development: Can Innovation Incentives Make a Difference (2002), IWT-Observatory, Brussels 7-22
20. Martin B.R., and Johnston R. Technology foresight for wiring up the national innovation system-experiences in Britain, Australia, and New Zealand. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 60 1 ((1999 January 2)) 37-54
21. Stufflebeam D.L. The metaevaluation imperative. Am J. Eval. 22 2 (2001) 183-209
22. Scriven M. An introduction to meta-evaluation. Educational Product Report No. 2 (1969) 36-38
23. M. Keenan, An evaluation of the implementation of the UK Technology Foresight Programme, Doctoral Thesis, PREST, University of Manchester, 2000.
24. Royal Academy of Engineering. A Preliminary Assessment of the Impact of Foresight (1998 (June)), RAE, London
25. Webster A. Technologies in transition, policies in transition: foresight in the risk society. Technovation 19 (1999) 413-421
26. Henkel M. Academic responses to the UK foresight programme. High. Educ. Manag. 12 1 (2000) 67-84
27. United Kingdom Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology. Science Shaping the Future: Technology Foresight and its Impacts (1997 (June)), POST, London
28. Office of Science and Technology, Blueprint for the Next Round of Foresight, available at http://www.foresight.gov.uk/Previous_Rounds/Foresight_1994_1999/Blue_Print_for_the_Next_Round_of_Foresight.html last accessed 19 August 2005.
29. Cuhls K., and Georghiou L. Evaluating a participative foresight process: 'FUTUR-the German research dialogue'. Res. Eval. 13 3 ((2004 December)) 143-153
30. Havas A. Evolving foresight in a small transition economy. J. Forecast. 22 (2003) 179-201
31. Evaluation of the Hungarian Foresight Programme, Report of an International Panel, May 2004, Hungarian National Office for Research and Technology, http://www.nkth.gov.hu/main.php?folderID=159 & articleID=3826 & ctag=articlelist & iid=1 last accessed 19 August 2005.