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. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. 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).
    6. 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.
    7. Fagerberg, Jan & Martin, Ben R. & Andersen, Esben Sloth (ed.), 2013. "Innovation Studies: Evolution and Future Challenges," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199686353, Decembrie.
    8. 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.
    9. 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.
    10. 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).
    11. 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.
    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. 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).
    3. 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).
    4. 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).
    5. 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.
    6. 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.
    7. 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).
    8. 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).
    9. 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.
    10. Ben R. Martin, 2016. "Twenty challenges for innovation studies," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 43(3), pages 432-450.
    11. 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).
    12. Rinaldo Evangelista, 2015. "Technology, development and economic crisis: the Schumpeterian legacy," Working Papers 23, Birkbeck Centre for Innovation Management Research, revised Jun 2015.
    13. Beiderbeck, Daniel & Evans, Nicolas & Frevel, Nicolas & Schmidt, Sascha L., 2023. "The impact of technology on the future of football – A global Delphi study," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 187(C).
    14. Mikaela Backman & Johan Klaesson & Özge Öner, 2017. "Innovation in the hospitality industry," Tourism Economics, , vol. 23(8), pages 1591-1614, December.
    15. Ammon J. Salter & Maureen McKelvey, 2016. "Evolutionary analysis of innovation and entrepreneurship: Sidney G. Winter—recipient of the 2015 Global Award for Entrepreneurship Research," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 47(1), pages 1-14, June.
    16. Stumpf, Lukas & Schöggl, Josef-Peter & Baumgartner, Rupert J., 2023. "Circular plastics packaging – Prioritizing resources and capabilities along the supply chain," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).
    17. Beiderbeck, Daniel & Frevel, Nicolas & von der Gracht, Heiko A. & Schmidt, Sascha L. & Schweitzer, Vera M., 2021. "The impact of COVID-19 on the European football ecosystem – A Delphi-based scenario analysis," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 165(C).
    18. Landström, Hans & Harirchi, Gouya, 2018. "The social structure of entrepreneurship as a scientific field," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(3), pages 650-662.
    19. Christina-Ioanna Papadopoulou & Efstratios Loizou & Fotios Chatzitheodoridis, 2022. "Priorities in Bioeconomy Strategies: A Systematic Literature Review," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(19), pages 1-15, October.
    20. Prommer, Lisa & Tiberius, Victor & Kraus, Sascha, 2020. "Exploring the future of startup leadership development," Journal of Business Venturing Insights, Elsevier, vol. 14(C).

    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.