Workshop 2:
Foresight and Participation (Part 1)
Thursday 8 June at 15.00-17.00
Chair: Markku Sotarauta
Local Leadership in the Global Knowledge Networks
Markku Sotarauta (Research Unit for Urban and Regional Development Studies, University of Tampere, Finland)
The knowledge economy, information society, however each of us chooses to label the emerging societal phase and whatever characteristics we choose to highlight, is so complex, blurred, dynamic and penetrating that regions, or rather organisations and people engaged in regional development, are forced to learn new skills and become more skilled not only in administrating resources and formulating development programmes, but also in leading transition and interactive processes. It is always easier to find out the elements of success and/or failure in retrospect than to find new development paths for the future and new modes of action in the middle of uncertain and open-ended situations. It seems that true leadership is becoming more and more important and hence attention should be directed to studying and to the developing of capabilities needed in leading development processes. This brings up a question why leadership has not been among the debated issues in regional development studies, even though, at gut level, scholars and practitioners know that different individuals can make different choices under similar constraints, and thus leadership matters. It is also possible to gain analytical leverage if we would understand better the transformational consequences of powerful individuals and their interaction in the context of regional development. All choices and activities are subject to many constraints, and leaders often are the ones who stretch these constraints, either for good or bad. At all events, leadership in regional development is more or less an interdependent process, no one can lead the development process, or even some fragments of it, alone (if at all). Consequently leadership is here seen as shared and/or dispersed. It consists of individuals, coalitions and their capabilities exercised in interaction to achieve joint and/or separate aims, consciously or unconsciously. Therefore the question is quite largely about directing emergence rather than controlling it, and hence leadership is one part of a complex constantly evolving interactive development process, with an important role to play. But what is to lead in a complex, ambiguous and muddled process of regional economic development? How to go before or to induce or to act as guide if one does not have formal power to do it? How to go ahead of, if one has formal position but is not respected? This paper tentatively seeks for answers to these questions, among others, by discussing leadership in the context of promotion of knowledge-based economic development in several regions of Finland.
The French Territorial Foresight Between Participation and Exploration
Fabienne Goux Baudiment (proGective, private Research Center in Futures Studies, France)
The French Territorial ‘prospective’ (here translated as ‘foresight’) sprang from the French school of futures studies as early as 1963, more than 40 years ago. This paper aims to present: 1. a brief history of this trend showing the evolution from a top-down approach to a bottom-up one, including the role of both decentralization and ‘governance’ (as a kind of democratization of the local authorities decision-making) on the territorial foresight process; with a specific emphasis about the 90’s; 2. the analysis of the shift that is occurring for three years on: a shift from the participatory process, which is now a receding trend, to the old exploratory process which is growing up again. Beyond the description of the shift itself and its reasons from the decision-makers’ point of view, the analysis will point out its impacts, both in theory and methods, illustrated by brief case studies. This paper will conclude with two main openings: how the global pressure in the next ten years could impact the development of futures studies (esp. territorial foresight) beyond the current trend to move from “project for a territory” to “project for a society” (role of identity). Key words: futures studies, French territorial 'prospective', normative approach, exploratory approach, strategy, decentralisation, regional planning, participation, decision-making, governance, regional development.
Designing Technology Foresight within the Science – Society Dialogue The Romanian Case Study
Dan Grosu (National School for Political Studies and Administration, Romania, Adrian Curaj (National University Research Council, Romania)
This paper offers an insight in the way foresight is used as an instrument to generate the science-society dialogue, both at regional and national level, in countries where this issue was neglected for a very long time. Participation and involvement of different actors are key characteristics of any foresight project; these activities can and should be perceived as science-society dialogues and carried out as such. When recognizing that experts, stakeholders and decision-makers debating the future role of science and technology in society is at stake in the foresight process, one should ask if all the relevant societal groups are involved in the dialogue in a significant way. Therefore, attention should be drawn towards the democratic dimensions of a foresight strategy, including its regional dimension. But one should also remember that foresight is about change and a foresight strategy is understood within the framework of a meta-strategy of change determined by the context of the whole foresight process. It follows that the design of the foresight exercise relies on the design of a model for the science-society dialogue, with characteristics induced by a specific meta-strategy of change. The model designed for the conduct of science–society dialogues in the Romanian foresight exercise is a succession of interrelated “agoras” defined according to three central criteria: dimensions of forum, participation and interactivity. Participants understanding and expectations about the role of agoras, that is to support debate rather than substitute the decision-making process, proves to be crucial for the implementing of the foresight exercise
'Open and transparent dialogue' in international investment projects?
Salla Laasonen (Finland Futures Research Centre, Turku School of Economics, Finland)
Participatory planning, appraisal and decision-making have become an integral part of policy in the public sector. Fairly recently, we have witnessed their expansion into the private sector as well. Companies are now keenly declaring that they engage in “open and transparent stakeholder dialogue” with society. What makes this argument particularly noteworthy is that dialogue is presented as a guarantee of corporate accountability and sustainability. While considerable expectations have been placed on this open dialogue, numerous potential obstacles exist, particularly in respect to dialogue with civil society and non-governmental organisations (NGOs), who can be characterized as the “local voice” of environmental and social aspects. Here, the focus is on the dialogue on international investment projects. The preconditions for meaningful participatory processes at the project level are evaluated against the characteristics of participatory processed at the policy level. Dialogue at the policy level entails certain important features absent at the project level, which are seen as potential obstacles to meaningful dialogue. While voluntary actions of business combined with sectoral blurring of society, the conceptual vagueness of the field, and profitability requirements can be recognized as such obstacles, it is argued that the currently prevailing managerial approach to stakeholder evaluation poses the greatest one. In light of these factors, it is justified to question the currently prevailing optimism on dialogue at the international investment project level. In order to further the preconditions for dialogue, a critical emphasis should be placed on these potential obstacles, which are currently often overlooked.