IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/hig/fsight/v6y2012i3p62-74.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Best Practices of Evaluating S&T Foresight: Basic Elements and Key Criteria

Author

Listed:
  • Ekaterina Makarova

    ()

  • Anna Sokolova

    () (Institute for Statistical Studies and Economics of Knowledge, National Research University Higher School of Economics)

Abstract

As the impact of strategic decision-making at the corporate, sectoral and national levels increase, there are growing demands for high quality and solid Foresight outputs. In this regard, a timely detection and elimination of problems in Foresight projects is of great importance. A thorough evaluation of criteria and methods used in Foresight analysis would permit the improved effectiveness of Foresight activities. The results could be set against the aims to decide on the feasibility of projects and identify ways to improve them. Despite great interest in Foresight evaluation demonstrated by stakeholders at various levels, the general principles for conducting it have not yet been formulated, which hinders its development and the diffusion of successful expertise. The purpose of this paper is to identify the basic elements-criteria and methods—used in evaluating national Foresight. It presents the most interesting results for specific tasks, the themes examined, the methods and the findings, in general. In addition, the study allowed some inference about theory and practice of project management. The study reveals that a key motivation for evaluation of Foresight projects is to provide feedback to national Foresight organizations and identify areas for further development. Evaluation is used to guide Foresight (in varying degrees) and provide lessons learned for future projects (for example, simplifying implementation, involving business and social organizations, recognizing the need for better compliance with the methodology and objectives of the study participants). The paper serves to develop a general methodology for assessing national Foresight programmes. A further agenda is to develop a comprehensive analysis of Foresight, ensure comparability of results of Foresight evaluation initiatives in different countries, promote standardization of evaluation procedures. Note: Downloadable document is in Russian.

Suggested Citation

  • Ekaterina Makarova & Anna Sokolova, 2012. "The Best Practices of Evaluating S&T Foresight: Basic Elements and Key Criteria," Foresight and STI Governance (Foresight-Russia till No. 3/2015), National Research University Higher School of Economics, vol. 6(3), pages 62-74.
  • Handle: RePEc:hig:fsight:v:6:y:2012:i:3:p:62-74
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://foresight-journal.hse.ru/data/2013/09/23/1279019338/06-Sokolova-62-75.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dirk Meissner & Mario Cervantes, 2010. "Successful Foresight Study: Implications for Design, Preparatory Activities and Tools to Uses," Foresight and STI Governance (Foresight-Russia till No. 3/2015), National Research University Higher School of Economics, vol. 4(1), pages 74-81.
    2. Attila Havas & Doris Schartinger & Matthias Weber, 2010. "The impact of foresight on innovation policy-making: recent experiences and future perspectives," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 19(2), pages 91-104, June.
    3. Kerstin Cuhls, 2003. "From forecasting to foresight processes-new participative foresight activities in Germany," Journal of Forecasting, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 22(2-3), pages 93-111.
    4. Remer, Donald S. & Nieto, Armando P., 1995. "A compendium and comparison of 25 project evaluation techniques. Part 2: Ratio, payback, and accounting methods," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 101-129, December.
    5. Ozcan Saritas & Erol Taymaz & Turgut Tumer, 2006. "Vision 2023: Turkey’s National Technology Foresight Program – a contextualist description and analysis," ERC Working Papers 0601, ERC - Economic Research Center, Middle East Technical University, revised Jan 2006.
    6. Remer, Donald S. & Nieto, Armando P., 1995. "A compendium and comparison of 25 project evaluation techniques. Part 1: Net present value and rate of return methods," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 79-96, November.
    7. Eilat, Harel & Golany, Boaz & Shtub, Avraham, 2008. "R&D project evaluation: An integrated DEA and balanced scorecard approach," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 36(5), pages 895-912, October.
    8. Remer, Donald S. & Stokdyk, Scott B. & Van Driel, Mike, 1993. "Survey of project evaluation techniques currently used in industry," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 103-115, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    foresight; evaluation; project management; best practices;

    JEL classification:

    • O21 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Development Planning and Policy - - - Planning Models; Planning Policy
    • O32 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Management of Technological Innovation and R&D
    • O38 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Government Policy

    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:hig:fsight:v:6:y:2012:i:3:p:62-74. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Nataliya Gavrilicheva) or (Mikhail Salazkin). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/hsecoru.html .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.