IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/fufsci/v5y2023i2ne144.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Constructing Delphi statements for technology foresight

Author

Listed:
  • Per Dannemand Andersen

Abstract

Since its introduction decades ago, the Delphi method has become a popular instrument of broad application within the field of technology foresight and for wider science, technology, and innovation policy‐making. The Delphi method has also attracted interest from a methodological perspective. The literature on the Delphi method demonstrates a research gap on the issue of Delphi statements and respondents' understanding of those statements. Based on a systematic literature review, this paper examines the existing knowledge and practices in constructing Delphi statements. A key contribution of the paper is a set of practical recommendations for constructing Delphi statements for technology foresight. Furthermore, the paper suggests future research on the topic.

Suggested Citation

  • Per Dannemand Andersen, 2023. "Constructing Delphi statements for technology foresight," Futures & Foresight Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 5(2), June.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:fufsci:v:5:y:2023:i:2:n:e144
    DOI: 10.1002/ffo2.144
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/ffo2.144
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/ffo2.144?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Fagerberg, Jan & Verspagen, Bart, 2009. "Innovation studies--The emerging structure of a new scientific field," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 218-233, March.
    2. Celiktas, Melih Soner & Kocar, Gunnur, 2010. "From potential forecast to foresight of Turkey's renewable energy with Delphi approach," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 1973-1980.
    3. Fagerberg, Jan & Martin, Ben R. & Andersen, Esben Sloth (ed.), 2013. "Innovation Studies: Evolution and Future Challenges," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199686353.
    4. Hurmekoski, Elias & Lovrić, Marko & Lovrić, Nataša & Hetemäki, Lauri & Winkel, Georg, 2019. "Frontiers of the forest-based bioeconomy – A European Delphi study," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 86-99.
    5. Samantha Miles, 2017. "Stakeholder Theory Classification: A Theoretical and Empirical Evaluation of Definitions," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 142(3), pages 437-459, May.
    6. Winkler, Jens & Moser, Roger, 2016. "Biases in future-oriented Delphi studies: A cognitive perspective," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 63-76.
    7. David Moher & Alessandro Liberati & Jennifer Tetzlaff & Douglas G Altman & The PRISMA Group, 2009. "Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(7), pages 1-6, July.
    8. Andersen, Per Dannemand & Hansen, Meiken & Selin, Cynthia, 2021. "Stakeholder inclusion in scenario planning—A review of European projects," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    9. Bonaccorsi, Andrea & Apreda, Riccardo & Fantoni, Gualtiero, 2020. "Expert biases in technology foresight. Why they are a problem and how to mitigate them," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    10. Arnout R.H. Fischer & Meike T. A. Wentholt & Gene Rowe & Lynn J. Frewer, 2014. "Expert involvement in policy development: A systematic review of current practice," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 41(3), pages 332-343.
    11. Norman Dalkey & Olaf Helmer, 1963. "An Experimental Application of the DELPHI Method to the Use of Experts," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 9(3), pages 458-467, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Christoph Markmann & Alexander Spickermann & Heiko A. von der Gracht & Alexander Brem, 2021. "Improving the question formulation in Delphi‐like surveys: Analysis of the effects of abstract language and amount of information on response behavior," Futures & Foresight Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 3(1), March.
    2. Peppel, Marcel & Ringbeck, Jürgen & Spinler, Stefan, 2022. "How will last-mile delivery be shaped in 2040? A Delphi-based scenario study," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 177(C).
    3. Tiberius, Victor & Gojowy, Robin & Dabić, Marina, 2022. "Forecasting the future of robo advisory: A three-stage Delphi study on economic, technological, and societal implications," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).
    4. Prommer, Lisa & Tiberius, Victor & Kraus, Sascha, 2020. "Exploring the future of startup leadership development," Journal of Business Venturing Insights, Elsevier, vol. 14(C).
    5. Di Zio, Simone & Bolzan, Mario & Marozzi, Marco, 2021. "Classification of Delphi outputs through robust ranking and fuzzy clustering for Delphi-based scenarios," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    6. Rinaldo Evangelista, 2018. "Technology and Economic Development: The Schumpeterian Legacy," Review of Radical Political Economics, Union for Radical Political Economics, vol. 50(1), pages 136-153, March.
    7. Laura Studen & Victor Tiberius, 2020. "Social Media, Quo Vadis? Prospective Development and Implications," Future Internet, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-22, August.
    8. Volkmar, Gioia & Fischer, Peter M. & Reinecke, Sven, 2022. "Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning: Exploring drivers, barriers, and future developments in marketing management," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 599-614.
    9. Frevel, Nicolas & Beiderbeck, Daniel & Schmidt, Sascha L., 2022. "The impact of technology on sports – A prospective study," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).
    10. Alberto Gherardini & Alberto Nucciotti, 2017. "Yesterday’s giants and invisible colleges of today. A study on the ‘knowledge transfer’ scientific domain," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 112(1), pages 255-271, July.
    11. Fritschy, Carolin & Spinler, Stefan, 2019. "The impact of autonomous trucks on business models in the automotive and logistics industry–a Delphi-based scenario study," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 148(C).
    12. Mauksch, Stefanie & von der Gracht, Heiko A. & Gordon, Theodore J., 2020. "Who is an expert for foresight? A review of identification methods," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    13. Ávila-Robinson, Alfonso & Islam, Nazrul & Sengoku, Shintaro, 2022. "Exploring the knowledge base of innovation research: Towards an emerging innovation model," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).
    14. Ana Teresa Santos & Sandro Mendonça, 2022. "The small world of innovation studies: an “editormetrics” perspective," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(12), pages 7471-7486, December.
    15. Ben R. Martin, 2016. "Twenty challenges for innovation studies," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 43(3), pages 432-450.
    16. Sillman, J. & Hynynen, K. & Dyukov, I. & Ahonen, T. & Jalas, M, 2023. "Emission reduction targets and electrification of the Finnish energy system with low-carbon Power-to-X technologies: Potentials, barriers, and innovations – A Delphi survey," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    17. Eduardo A Undurraga & Yara A Halasa & Donald S Shepard, 2013. "Use of Expansion Factors to Estimate the Burden of Dengue in Southeast Asia: A Systematic Analysis," PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(2), pages 1-15, February.
    18. Davies, Andrew & Manning, Stephan & Söderlund, Jonas, 2018. "When neighboring disciplines fail to learn from each other: The case of innovation and project management research," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(5), pages 965-979.
    19. Callegari, Beniamino & Nybakk, Erlend, 2022. "Schumpeterian theory and research on forestry innovation and entrepreneurship: The state of the art, issues and an agenda," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    20. Haddad, Christian & Benner, Maximilian, 2021. "Situating innovation policy in Mediterranean Arab countries: A research agenda for context sensitivity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(7).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:fufsci:v:5:y:2023:i:2:n:e144. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1002/(ISSN)2573-5152 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.