Search

The paper outlines a dialectical approach to analyse societal tendencies by emphasising future tensions, contradictions and antagonisms. First, the theoretical baseline of the approach is a commitment to the basic tenet of dialectical thinking: a perspective of the world as a process and a becoming. Second, the approach focuses on societal and socio-technical change trajectories and various dynamics in between. Third, it is based on systems and complexity thinking, particularly the idea of a societal system consisting of various parallel and contradictory trajectories. Methodologically, the approach emphasises dialectical thinking in two lenses: positions and processes. Dialectical positionality refers to basic dialectical positions as outcomes of the dynamics between the spatiotemporal trajectories in the societal system. Dialectical processuality refers to the processual nature of future-oriented dialectics, that is, the unravelling of the spatio-temporal processes and trajectories that lead to changes in the societal system. Dialectical processes are divided into two dynamic levels: trajectory and system. The paper presents stylised examples of positions and processes on these two levels. • The paper provides arguments for why dialectical thinking is important theoretical avenue for contemplating future technological transformations in liberal societies. • The paper conceptualises a future-oriented dialectics for the analysis of dialectical positions and dialectical processes in the context societal and socio-technical trajectories. • The dialectical positions emphasise arrangements that condition societal trajectories, such as tensions, contradiction and antagonisms. • The dialectical processes highlight societal development tendencies at the levels of trajectories and systems. • The paper provides stylised examples of the dialectical positions and processes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose |!|#8211; This paper aims to introduce a process for constructing long-term visions of the transport system. The vision building process is demonstrated by creating a concise test vision of the Finnish transport system in 2100.Design/methodology/approach |!|#8211; The vision building process combines four futures methods that support the long-term foresight approach: transition management, PESTE analysis, the futures table and the Delphi method. The process is validated with a test vision.Findings |!|#8211; A three-step vision building process for long-term transport system visions is structured. The three consecutive steps of the process are environmental scanning, constructing futures tables and visions, and describing visions. In addition, a demonstrative test vision is created to describe a possible future transport system in 2100 in a metropolitan Finland. The successful application of the developed method supports further work on creating full-scale strategy-driven visions.Originality/value |!|#8211; Futures studies analyzing transport systems and infrastructures tend to focus on short- to medium-term perspectives. This paper presents a unique method for constructing alternative long-term visions as far as 50 to 100 years into the future. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

While the expansion of foresight scope towards systemic processes and societal considerations has provided significant opportunities for learning and synchronised action between different business units and/or policy fields, it may also have caused digression and ambiguity in the practice and theory of the management of foresight processes. This is true, in particular, in contract research organisations that have faced major challenges to reorganise their foresight activities as part of the changes in their innovation practices. The paper examines the exercises and consequent responses to this shift at VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland. The paper develops and applies a coherent classification framework for foresight exercises. The framework provides practical support for the design and management of foresight projects, as well as supports the overall management of the portfolio of different kinds of foresight activities. The findings also point out the need for the modular process design that helps adjusting foresight exercises in different contexts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• The paper discusses Ansoffian and constructivist traditions of weak signal theories. • Despite the differences of these theoretical traditions, both approach weak signals as emerging and linearly evolving constructs. • We suggest a novel approach based on a relational theoretical perspective. • A relational theory of futures knowledge deciphers the questions of contexts, positions and relations of futures arguments and premises. • The approach is simultaneously complementary and contradictory compared to the Ansoffian and constructivist traditions. In this paper we propose a framework to re-think and widen the theoretical assumptions behind so-called weak signal theory in futures studies. This paper suggests that the present understanding of weak signals views the topic as a question of linear emergence, that is, a sequence of development that perceives the topic evolving from an embryo towards a full-blown future issue or trend. However, this viewpoint does not take into account the context and perspective – or positionality – of the perceiver. This issue has, we argue, wide-ranging effects on the identification and interpretation of weak signals. Thus, as a response to this gap, we outline a relational theory of futures knowledge that aims to consider this missing theoretical baseline and widen the understanding of the nature and formation of weak signals. The theory builds on selected tenets of behavioural economics, psychology, human geography and anthropology. This paper outlines the principles of current weak signal theory and depicts the relational theory. It also provides selected empirical examples to emphasise the points made. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]