IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/scippl/v37y2010i1p31-40.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Critical success factors for government-led foresight

Author

Listed:
  • Jonathan Calof
  • Jack E Smith

Abstract

This paper reports on an integrated research program involving three related studies that examined successful foresight programs. It analyzes the key factors that appear to determine whether or not foresight, once launched by a government, can be successful. The study was performed by a team of researchers in Canada in the period 2005–2007. It found eight key factors, beyond the usual ones associated with the application of leading edge methods. The overall conclusion is that the methodology, appropriate budget and techniques alone are insufficient factors to explain the success of foresight programs. The interview results indicate that success is ultimately defined as the impact of the foresight exercise on government policy, and as the growth of the foresight function. Taken together, the results should help organizations establish the parameters for a successful foresight program. Copyright , Beech Tree Publishing.

Suggested Citation

  • Jonathan Calof & Jack E Smith, 2010. "Critical success factors for government-led foresight," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 37(1), pages 31-40, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:scippl:v:37:y:2010:i:1:p:31-40
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.3152/030234210X484784
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

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

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. 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).
    2. Haegeman, Karel & Marinelli, Elisabetta & Scapolo, Fabiana & Ricci, Andrea & Sokolov, Alexander, 2013. "Quantitative and qualitative approaches in Future-oriented Technology Analysis (FTA): From combination to integration?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 80(3), pages 386-397.
    3. 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).
    4. Rhisiart, Martin & Störmer, Eckhard & Daheim, Cornelia, 2017. "From foresight to impact? The 2030 Future of Work scenarios," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 203-213.
    5. Calof, Jonathan & Colton, Brian, 2024. "Developing foresight that impacts senior management decisions," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 198(C).
    6. Maxim A. Afanasyev & Mario Cervantes & Dirk Meissner, 2014. "Towards FET Concept: Pathway To Evaluation Of Foresight Effectiveness, Efficiency And Validity," HSE Working papers WP BRP 31/STI/2014, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    7. Rhisiart, Martin & Jones-Evans, Dylan, 2016. "The impact of foresight on entrepreneurship: The Wales 2010 case study," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 112-119.
    8. Merit Tatar & Tarmo Kalvet & Marek Tiits, 2020. "Cities4ZERO Approach to Foresight for Fostering Smart Energy Transition on Municipal Level," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-30, July.
    9. Paul Weigel & Manfred Fischedick & Peter Viebahn, 2021. "Holistic Evaluation of Digital Applications in the Energy Sector—Evaluation Framework Development and Application to the Use Case Smart Meter Roll-Out," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-31, June.

    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:oup:scippl:v:37:y:2010:i:1:p:31-40. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/spp .

    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.