ارزیابی تأثیر آینده نگاری برسیاستگذاری علم، فناوری و نوآوری

نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشگاه تربیت مدرس

2 دانشگاه صنعتی امیرکبیر

چکیده

تغییر جهت فعالیتهای آیندهنگاری از سیاست تحقیقوتوسعه به سمت بستر گستردهتر سیاست اجتماعی، سبب ظهور شکافی در ادبیات، در زمینة ارتباط میان آیندهنگاری و سیاستگذاری علم، فناوری و نوآوری  شده است. اغلب پژوهشهای موجود، بر سازماندهی و پیادهسازی آیندهنگاری و تبدیل دستاوردهای حاصل از این فعالیتها به سیاست متمرکز میشوند. با وجود تلاش برخی از پژوهشها، هنوز شکل دادن به آیندهنگاری به عنوان یک ابزار سیاستگذاری علم، فناوری و نوآوری در قالب چارچوب نظری، یک کمبود در ادبیات موضوع به شمار میآید. از اینرو، هدف این مقاله ارائة یک چارچوب برای ارزیابی اثرات آیندهنگاری بر سیاستگذاری، با تأکید بر نقش آن به عنوان ابزار هوشمندی سیاستی است. در این راستا از روششناسی ترکیبی با رویکرد طراحی اکتشافی ترتیبی  استفاده شد. در بخش کیفی، چارچوب مفهومی پژوهش، با بهرهگیری از مفهوم آیندهنگاری انطباقی و روش تحلیل تطبیقی پایدار  تعیین گردید و سپس، به منظور اعتبارسنجی آن، در بخش کمّی از آزمون دوجملهای استفاده شد. ابزار گردآوری دادههای کمّی، پرسشنامه بود که توسط 15 نفر از خبرگان حوزة آیندهنگاری و سیاستگذاری علم، فناوری و نوآوری در دانشگاهها و مراکز پژوهشی کشور تکمیل گردید. تمامی فرضیههای پژوهش و  اعتبار چارچوب پیشنهادی پژوهش مورد تایید قرار گرفت.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Evaluating the Impacts of Foresight on Science, Technology and Innovation (STI) Policy-Making

نویسندگان [English]

  • Leila Namdarian 1
  • Alireza Hassanzadeh 1
  • Mehdi Majidpour 2
1 Tarbiat Modares University
2 Amirkabir University of Technology
چکیده [English]

Technology foresight has shifted from R&D policy to the broader context of social policy. So the foresight literature shows that there is a gap between foresight and policy-making. Most of the literature is focused on organizing and implementing foresight activities and converting foresight outcomes into policy. Despite the attempts made by some studies, forming foresight as an instrument for science, technology and innovation (STI) policy-making in a theoretical framework is still lacking in the literature of the subject. This paper tries to bridge the existing gap, with an emphasis on foresight role as a policy intelligence instrument, and uses a mixed method for this purpose. The mixed method approach in this paper is the sequential exploratory design "characterized by the collection and analysis of qualitative data followed by the collection and analysis of quantitative data". First, the conceptual framework is developed in the qualitative part of this study by the concept of adaptive foresight and constant comparative method of analysis (CCM). Second, in the quantitative part, quantitative tests are done to evaluate the factors, dimensions and components of the developed theoretical framework. A questionnaire is used as data collection tool, and to test the proposed model, a sample of 15 experts in the field of foresight and policy-making answer the questions on the questionnaire. The results confirm the dimensions of the proposed framework.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Policy-related Functions of Foresight
  • Impacts of Foresight
  • Adaptive Foresight
  • Constant Comparative Method
  • Policy intelligence

Amanatidou, E. (2012). Grand challenges – a new framework forforesight evaluation? EU-SPRI Conference. Manchester.

Arora-Jonsson, S. (2000). Networking for dialogue and action. An example from the Forests, Trees and People Program. Forests journal, 40(41), 54-58.

AusAID. (2011). Theory of Policy Dialogue Success. Policy Dialogue Evaluation Working Paper, 3(1), 12-34.

Boeije, H. (2002). A Purposeful Approach to the Constant Comparative Method in the Analysis of Qualitative Interviews. Quality & Quantity, 36(2), 391–409.

Börzel, T. A. (1997). What's So Special About Policy Networks? An Exploration of the Concept and Its Usefulness in Studying European Governance. European Integration online Papers (EIoP), 16(1).

BOUNDLESS. (2013). Policy Implementation. بازیابی از https://www.boundless.com/political-science/domestic-policy/policy-makingprocess/policy-implementation

Bradford, N. (2004). Place Matters and Multi-level Governance: Perspectives on a New Urban Policy Paradigm. Policy Options, 25(2), 31-53.

Calof, J., & Smith, J. (2010). Critical success factors for government-led foresight. Science andPublic Policy , 37(1), 31-40.

Creswell, J. W., Plano-Clark, V. L., Gutman, M. L., & Hanson, W. E. (2003). Advanced mixed methods research designs”, In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research Thousand Oaks. CA: Sage: John Willy & Sons.

DaCosta, O., Warnke, P., Cagnin, C., & Scapolo, F. (2008). The impact of foresight onpolicy-making: insights from the FORLEARN mutual learning process. Technology Analysis& Strategic Management, 20(3), 369–387.

Dean, J., Holmes, S., & Smith, S. (1997). Understanding business networks: evidences from the manufacturing and service sectors in Australia. journal of small business management, 35(1), 78-84.

E, A., & K, G. (2008). Interpreting foresight process impacts: Steps towards the development of a framework conceptualizing the dynamics of ‘foresight systems. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 75(3), 539–557.

Elmore, R. (1980). Backward Mapping: Implementation Research and Policy Decisions. political science quarterly, 94(4), 601-616.

FORLEARN. (2006, November 24th ). For-Learn mutual learning consolidation workshop improving the use of foresight in policy making. Results from a dialogue between foresight practitioners and users. بازیابی از http://forlearn.jrc.es/gu

Georghiou, L. (2003). Impact and additionality of innovation policy. IWT-Observatory, Brussels, 7–22.

Georghiou, L., & Keenan, M. (2005). Evaluation of national foresight activities: Assessing rationale, process and impact. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 73(6), 761–777.

Georghiou, L., & Keenan, M. (2008). Evaluation and impact of foresight. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

Havas, A., Schartinger, D., & Weber, M. (2010). The impact of foresight on innovation policy-making: recent experiences and future perspective. Research Evaluation, 2(4), 91–104.

Ladikas, M., & Decker, M. (2004). Assessing the Impact of Future-Oriented Technology Assessment. new technology foresight, forecasting & assessment methods. Seville .

Loveridge, D., Cuhls, K., Keenan, M., & N. M. (2001). The practice of national Foresight programs. A new analytical framework. Ideas in Progress, 23(3), 31-46.

Martin, B., & Johnston, R. (1999). Technology Foresight – the potential for wiring up the National Innovation System. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 60(12), 37–54.

Perkin, E., & Court, J. (2005). Networks and Policy Processes in International Development: a literature review. London: Working Paper.

Popper, R., Keenan, M., & Medina, J. (2010). Evaluating Foresight – The Colombian Case. Foresight Brief, 119(1), 2-4.

Rowe, G., & Frewer, L. (2004). Evaluating Public Participation Exercises: A Research Agenda. Science, Technology and Human Values, 29(4), 512-556.

Schartinger, D., Wilhelmer, D., Holste, D., & Kubeczko, K. (2012). Assessing immediate learning impacts of large foresight. Emerald, 14(1), 41-55.

Schlossstein, D., & Park, B. (2006). Comparing recent technology foresight studies in Korea and China: towards foresight-minded governments. Journal of Foresight, 8(6), 48-70.

Smits, E., Kuhlmann, S., & Shapira, P. (2010). the theory and practice of innovation policy” international handbook. UK: Edward Elgar.

Tübke, A., Ducatel, K., & P. Gavigan, J. (2001). Strategic PolicyIntelligence, Current Trends, the State of Play, and Perspectives. بازیابی از http://ftp.jrc.es/EURdoc/eur20137en.pdf

Unido . (2005). Organization and methods. Unido technology foresight manual. Vienna.

Van Meter, D., & Van Horn, C. (1974). The policy implementation process: A conceptual framework. Administration and Society. London: MC Growhill.

Walker, S., M.A, C., & Margare, N. (2007). Quality Decision-Making: Procedures and practices in drug Development and the regulatory review. London, UK: CMR International, Institute for Regulatory Science.

Warnke, P., & Heimeriks, G. (2006). Technology foresight as innovation policy instrument – learning from science and technology. Future-Oriented Technology Analysis: Impact of FTA Approaches on Policy and Decision-Making . SEVILLE.

دانایی فرد, ح., الوانی, س.,  آذر, ع. (1383). روش شناسی پژوهش کمی در مدیریت: رویکردی جامع. تهران: صفار اشراقی.

میرزا امینی, م. (1385). هوشمندی راهبردی در سیاستگذاری: روند تکامل آینده پژوهی و آیندهنگاری در حوزه سیاستگذاریهای علم و فناوری اروپا. فصلنامه تخصصی پارکها و مراکز رشد, 2(2), 32-36.