IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/tefoso/v202y2024ics0040162524000854.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessing future potentiality of technologies from the perspective of “imaginary future generations” – A case study of hydrothermal technology

Author

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

Abstract

To guide technological innovation for sustainability, it is essential to develop a methodology for assessing the future potentiality of a technology from a long-term perspective. In this study, we propose an innovative method for assessing the future potentiality of technology from the perspective of imaginary future generations (IFGs) using a case study of hydrothermal technology and verify the effectiveness of the method. We conducted participatory deliberation experiments adopting the method and studied its effect on the formulation of scenarios for the adoption of hydrothermal technology in society in the year 2040, and on the assessment of the future potentiality and innovation of technology. Using deliberation experiments and questionnaires administered to the participants, we confirmed that IFGs had a significant effect on the adoption of technology in future scenarios and on the assessment results, with concomitant shifts in the relative weights of assessment indicators. We also found that the adoption of IFGs could lead to relativizing the value and positioning of a technology, and to shifting the requirements for the development and adoption of a technology. The results provide insights into the methodology to assess future potentiality of technologies and guide technology innovation from the viewpoint of futurability.

Suggested Citation

  • 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).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:tefoso:v:202:y:2024:i:c:s0040162524000854
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2024.123289
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0040162524000854
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techfore.2024.123289?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Naoko Nishimura & Nobuhiro Inoue & Hiroaki Masuhara & Tadahiko Musha, 2020. "Impact of Future Design on Workshop Participants’ Time Preferences," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(18), pages 1-25, September.
    2. 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.
    3. Tatsuyoshi Saijo, 2020. "Future Design: Bequeathing Sustainable Natural Environments and Sustainable Societies to Future Generations," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(16), pages 1-21, August.
    4. Farrukh, Clare & Holgado, Maria, 2020. "Integrating sustainable value thinking into technology forecasting: A configurable toolset for early stage technology assessment," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    5. Kaplan, Leah R. & Farooque, Mahmud & Sarewitz, Daniel & Tomblin, David, 2021. "Designing Participatory Technology Assessments: A Reflexive Method for Advancing the Public Role in Science Policy Decision-making," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
    6. 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.
    7. Shibly Shahrier & Koji Kotani & Tatsuyoshi Saijo, 2017. "Intergenerational sustainability dilemma and a potential solution: Future ahead and back mechanism," Working Papers SDES-2017-9, Kochi University of Technology, School of Economics and Management, revised Aug 2017.
    8. 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.
    9. Mao, Caixia & Koide, Ryu & Brem, Alexander & Akenji, Lewis, 2020. "Technology foresight for social good: Social implications of technological innovation by 2050 from a Global Expert Survey," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    10. Ren, Jingzheng & Liang, Hanwei & Chan, Felix T.S., 2017. "Urban sewage sludge, sustainability, and transition for Eco-City: Multi-criteria sustainability assessment of technologies based on best-worst method," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 29-39.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. De-León Almaraz, Sofía & Moustapha Mai, Tchougoune & Melendez, Iris Rocio & Loganathan, M.K. & Azzaro-Pantel, Catherine, 2024. "A holistic approach to assessing reliability in green hydrogen supply chains using mixed methods," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 209(C).

    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. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. Zhang Jingchao & Koji Kotani & Tatsuyoshi Saijo, 2021. "Are societies becoming proself? A topographical difference under fast urbanization in China," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(9), pages 12976-12993, September.
    4. 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.
    5. Keishiro Hara & Yukari Fuchigami & Takanobu Arai & Yutaka Nomaguchi, 2024. "Compatible effects of adopting imaginary future generations and systems thinking in exploring future challenges: Evidence from a deliberation experiment," Futures & Foresight Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 6(4), December.
    6. Marinković, Milan & Al-Tabbaa, Omar & Khan, Zaheer & Wu, Jie, 2022. "Corporate foresight: A systematic literature review and future research trajectories," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 289-311.
    7. 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.
    8. Undheim, Trond Arne, 2024. "In search of better methods for the longitudinal assessment of tech-derived X-risks: How five leading scenario planning efforts can help," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    9. Pankaj Koirala & Raja Rajendra Timilsina & Koji Kotani, 2021. "Deliberative Forms of Democracy and Intergenerational Sustainability Dilemma," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-18, July.
    10. Radtke, Jörg & Scherhaufer, Patrick, 2022. "A social science perspective on conflicts in the energy transition: An introduction to the special issue," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    11. Nik Masdek Nik Rozana & Wong Kelly Kai Seng & Mohd Nawi Nolila & Sharifuddin Juwaidah & Wong Wang Li, 2023. "Antecedents of sustainable food waste management behaviour: Empirical evidence from urban households in Malaysia," Management & Marketing, Sciendo, vol. 18(1), pages 53-77, March.
    12. Michinori Uwasu & Keishiro Hara & Masashi Kuroda & Ji Han, 2024. "Assessing the Spatiotemporal Dynamics of Environmental Sustainability in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(13), pages 1-14, June.
    13. Reichelt, Nicole & Nettle, Ruth, 2023. "Practice insights for the responsible adoption of smart farming technologies using a participatory technology assessment approach: The case of virtual herding technology in Australia," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 206(C).
    14. Mostafa E. Shahen & Shibly Shahrier & Koji Kotani, 2019. "Happiness, Generativity and Social Preferences in a Developing Country: A Possibility of Future Design," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-17, September.
    15. Ahn, Sang-Jin & Yi, Seung-Kyu, 2021. "Methodological framework for analyzing peace engineering: Focusing on Kaesong Industrial Complex and North Korean innovators in South Korea," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).
    16. Jairo Ortega & Sarbast Moslem & János Tóth & Tamás Péter & Juan Palaguachi & Mario Paguay, 2020. "Using Best Worst Method for Sustainable Park and Ride Facility Location," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-18, December.
    17. Edson Kogachi & Adonias Ferreira & Carlos Cavalcante & Marcelo Embiruçu, 2021. "Development of Performance Evaluation Indicators for Table Grape Packaging Units. 2. Global Indexes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-16, June.
    18. Gomes, Leonardo Augusto de Vasconcelos & Fleury, André Leme & Oliveira, Maicon Gouvêa de & Facin, Ana Lucia Figueiredo, 2021. "Ecosystem policy roadmapping," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 170(C).
    19. Pel, Bonno & Raven, Rob & van Est, Rinie, 2020. "Transitions governance with a sense of direction: synchronization challenges in the case of the dutch ‘Driverless Car’ transition," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 160(C).
    20. Katarzyna Halicka, 2020. "Technology Selection Using the TOPSIS Method," Foresight and STI Governance (Foresight-Russia till No. 3/2015), National Research University Higher School of Economics, vol. 14(1), pages 85-96.

    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:eee:tefoso:v:202:y:2024:i:c:s0040162524000854. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/00401625 .

    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.