IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/fufsci/v5y2023i3-4ne163.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Designing research strategy and technology innovation for sustainability by adopting “imaginary future generations”—A case study using metallurgy

Author

Listed:
  • Keishiro Hara
  • Iori Miura
  • Masanori Suzuki
  • Toshihiro Tanaka

Abstract

To mobilize science and technology for sustainability, it is essential to develop a method for explicitly considering the needs and preferences of future generations in designing research strategies and technology innovations. In this study, we conducted a participatory deliberation experiment on research strategy design of hydrothermal reactions and slag, to analyze whether the adoption of imaginary future generations (IFGs), which is a social system that has been proven to be effective for overcoming shortsightedness and activating futurability of people and society in pursuit of sustainability, could change the direction of research and development (R&D) and thereby innovation. A questionnaire survey was administered to the participants after each deliberation session to verify whether treatments, such as analyzing past R&D initiatives and adopting IFGs in deliberations, would change participants’ perceptions about criteria related to designing R&D programs. The results of the deliberation experiment showed that the contents and ideas of research strategies, such as research visions, methodologies and anticipated benefits, were changed by the adoption of IFGs. The criteria used for designing R&D also altered according to changes in research strategy. The findings showed that adopting IFGs and examining issues from the viewpoint of “futurability” could shift the direction of research agendas and technological innovation. Furthermore, the findings could provide insights into how to design R&D strategies and generate innovations in pursuit of sustainability by reflecting upon the needs of and benefits to future generations.

Suggested Citation

  • Keishiro Hara & Iori Miura & Masanori Suzuki & Toshihiro Tanaka, 2023. "Designing research strategy and technology innovation for sustainability by adopting “imaginary future generations”—A case study using metallurgy," Futures & Foresight Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 5(3-4), September.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:fufsci:v:5:y:2023:i:3-4:n:e163
    DOI: 10.1002/ffo2.163
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/ffo2.163
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/ffo2.163?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. Toshiaki Hiromitsu & Yoko Kitakaji & Keishiro Hara & Tatsuyoshi Saijo, 2021. "What Do People Say When They Become “Future People”??Positioning Imaginary Future Generations (IFGs) in General Rules for Good Decision-Making," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-27, June.
    2. van Oudheusden, Michiel & Charlier, Nathan & Rosskamp, Benedikt & Delvenne, Pierre, 2015. "Broadening, deepening, and governing innovation: Flemish technology assessment in historical and socio-political perspective," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(10), pages 1877-1886.
    3. Mander, Sarah. L. & Bows, Alice & Anderson, Kevin. L. & Shackley, Simon & Agnolucci, Paolo & Ekins, Paul, 2008. "The Tyndall decarbonisation scenarios--Part I: Development of a backcasting methodology with stakeholder participation," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(10), pages 3754-3763, October.
    4. Tatsuyoshi Saijo, 2020. "Future Design: Bequeathing Sustainable Natural Environments and Sustainable Societies to Future Generations," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(16), pages 1-21, August.
    5. Rau, Henrike & Goggins, Gary & Fahy, Frances, 2018. "From invisibility to impact: Recognising the scientific and societal relevance of interdisciplinary sustainability research," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 266-276.
    6. Yoshinori NAKAGAWA & Keishiro HARA & Tatsuyoshi SAIJO, 2017. "Becoming Sympathetic to the Needs of Future Generations:A Phenomenological Study of Participation in Future Design Workshops," Working Papers SDES-2017-4, Kochi University of Technology, School of Economics and Management, revised May 2017.
    7. Reed, M.S. & Ferré, M. & Martin-Ortega, J. & Blanche, R. & Lawford-Rolfe, R. & Dallimer, M. & Holden, J., 2021. "Evaluating impact from research: A methodological framework," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(4).
    8. Hussain, M. & Tapinos, E. & Knight, L., 2017. "Scenario-driven roadmapping for technology foresight," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 160-177.
    9. Popp, David, 2005. "Lessons from patents: Using patents to measure technological change in environmental models," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(2-3), pages 209-226, August.
    10. Tavella, Elena, 2016. "How to make Participatory Technology Assessment in agriculture more “participatory”: The case of genetically modified plants," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 119-126.
    11. Ahn, Sang-Jin, 2017. "Institutional basis for research boom: From catch-up development to advanced economy," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 237-245.
    12. Fischer, Carolyn & Parry, Ian W. H. & Pizer, William A., 2003. "Instrument choice for environmental protection when technological innovation is endogenous," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 523-545, May.
    13. Michinori Uwasu & Yusuke Kishita & Keishiro Hara & Yutaka Nomaguchi, 2020. "Citizen-Participatory Scenario Design Methodology with Future Design Approach: A Case Study of Visioning of a Low-Carbon Society in Suita City, Japan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-17, June.
    14. Yusuke Kishita & Takuma Masuda & Hidenori Nakamura & Kazumasu Aoki, 2023. "Computer‐aided scenario design using participatory backcasting: A case study of sustainable vision creation in a Japanese city," Futures & Foresight Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 5(1), March.
    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. Michinori Uwasu & Yusuke Kishita & Keishiro Hara & Yutaka Nomaguchi, 2020. "Citizen-Participatory Scenario Design Methodology with Future Design Approach: A Case Study of Visioning of a Low-Carbon Society in Suita City, Japan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-17, June.
    2. Hara, Keishiro & Miura, Iori & Suzuki, Masanori & Tanaka, Toshihiro, 2024. "Assessing future potentiality of technologies from the perspective of “imaginary future generations” – A case study of hydrothermal technology," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 202(C).
    3. Raja R. Timilsina & Yoshinori Nakagawa & Koji Kotani, 2020. "Exploring the Possibility of Linking and Incorporating Future Design in Backcasting and Scenario Planning," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-14, November.
    4. Costantini, Valeria & Crespi, Francesco, 2008. "Environmental regulation and the export dynamics of energy technologies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(2-3), pages 447-460, June.
    5. Keishiro Hara & Michinori Uwasu & Hideki Kobayashi & Shuji Kurimoto & Shinsuke Yamanaka & Yoshiyuki Shimoda & Yasushi Umeda, 2012. "Enhancing Meso Level Research in Sustainability Science—Challenges and Research Needs," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 4(8), pages 1-15, August.
    6. Tatsuyoshi Saijo, 2020. "Future Design: Bequeathing Sustainable Natural Environments and Sustainable Societies to Future Generations," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(16), pages 1-21, August.
    7. Timothy N. Cason & Frans P. Vries, 2019. "Dynamic Efficiency in Experimental Emissions Trading Markets with Investment Uncertainty," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 73(1), pages 1-31, May.
    8. Popp, David & Newell, Richard G. & Jaffe, Adam B., 2010. "Energy, the Environment, and Technological Change," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 0, pages 873-937, Elsevier.
    9. Saijo, Tatsuyoshi, 2017. "Future Design," Economic Review, Hitotsubashi University, vol. 68(1), pages 33-45, January.
      • Tatsuyoshi Saijo, 2019. "Future Design," Working Papers SDES-2019-5, Kochi University of Technology, School of Economics and Management, revised Jun 2019.
    10. Toshiaki Hiromitsu & Yoko Kitakaji & Keishiro Hara & Tatsuyoshi Saijo, 2021. "What Do People Say When They Become “Future People”??Positioning Imaginary Future Generations (IFGs) in General Rules for Good Decision-Making," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-27, June.
    11. Rajeev Singh & Helmut Yabar & Rie Murakami-Suzuki & Noriko Nozaki & Randeep Rakwal, 2016. "Analysis of Linkages between Environmental Policy Instruments and Innovation: A Case Study of End-of-Life Vehicles Technologies in Japan," Journal of Sustainable Development, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 9(2), pages 181-181, January.
    12. Brian Chi-ang Lin & Siqi Zheng & Nicolò Barbieri & Claudia Ghisetti & Marianna Gilli & Giovanni Marin & Francesco Nicolli, 2016. "A Survey Of The Literature On Environmental Innovation Based On Main Path Analysis," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(3), pages 596-623, July.
    13. Llinos Haf Spencer & Mary Lynch & Gwenlli Mair Thomas & Rhiannon Tudor Edwards, 2023. "Intergenerational Deliberations for Long Term Sustainability," Challenges, MDPI, vol. 14(1), pages 1-16, February.
    14. Dotti, Nicola Francesco & Walczyk, Julia, 2022. "What is the societal impact of university research? A policy-oriented review to map approaches, identify monitoring methods and success factors," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    15. Zhang, Hui & Cao, Libin & Zhang, Bing, 2017. "Emissions trading and technology adoption: An adaptive agent-based analysis of thermal power plants in China," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 23-32.
    16. Karp, Larry, 2008. "Correct (and misleading) arguments for using market based pollution control policies," Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley, Working Paper Series qt8rw5801j, Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley.
    17. Grimaud, André & Lafforgue, Gilles & Magné, Bertrand, 2011. "Climate change mitigation options and directed technical change: A decentralized equilibrium analysis," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 938-962.
    18. Lehmann, Paul, 2010. "Combining emissions trading and emissions taxes in a multi-objective world," UFZ Discussion Papers 4/2010, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research (UFZ), Division of Social Sciences (ÖKUS).
    19. Perino, Grischa & Requate, Till, 2012. "Does more stringent environmental regulation induce or reduce technology adoption? When the rate of technology adoption is inverted U-shaped," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 64(3), pages 456-467.
    20. Dietrich Earnhart & Sarah Jacobson & Yusuke Kuwayama & Richard T. Woodward, 2020. "Discretionary Exemptions from Environmental Regulation: Flexibility for Good or for Ill," Department of Economics Working Papers 2020-04, Department of Economics, Williams College.

    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:3-4:n:e163. 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.