IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/fufsci/v5y2023i1ne145.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The science behind “values”: Applying moral foundations theory to strategic foresight

Author

Listed:
  • Brent Mills
  • Alex Wilner

Abstract

“Values” play an oversized role in strategic foresight: they help define scanning frameworks, direct scanning efforts, inform change driver and scenario development, and underpin change within various systems and domains (e.g., politics, society, etc.). And yet, values are largely understudied within foresight. They are rarely defined consistently or explored with reference to a theoretical model of how values emerge or evolve. Rather, values are researched using dissimilar methods depending on the foresight research at hand, which can lead to gaps in analysis and inconsistency between foresight projects. Moral Foundations Theory (MFT), a social psychological theory that identifies common human moral values, offers a solution. MFT describes six moral values or “foundations”—care, fairness, loyalty, authority, sanctity, and liberty—each explained through the evolutionary development of humanity and detectable across cultures. Within foresight, MFT can be applied to understand and identify shifts in the influence of different values, which can result in more novel and unexpected conclusions. With these potential benefits available, we propose adopting and adapting MFT for use within the foresight to improve the way it approaches, identifies, and utilizes values. Our article unpacks MFT into its core tenets and illustrates how it can be used to inform scanning, change driver development, and scenario construction.

Suggested Citation

  • Brent Mills & Alex Wilner, 2023. "The science behind “values”: Applying moral foundations theory to strategic foresight," Futures & Foresight Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 5(1), March.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:fufsci:v:5:y:2023:i:1:n:e145
    DOI: 10.1002/ffo2.145
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/ffo2.145
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/ffo2.145?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. Alessandro Fergnani & Thomas J. Chermack, 2021. "The resistance to scientific theory in futures and foresight, and what to do about it," Futures & Foresight Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 3(3-4), September.
    2. Avnika B. Amin & Robert A. Bednarczyk & Cara E. Ray & Kala J. Melchiori & Jesse Graham & Jeffrey R. Huntsinger & Saad B. Omer, 2017. "Association of moral values with vaccine hesitancy," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 1(12), pages 873-880, December.
    3. Janis L Dickinson & Poppy McLeod & Robert Bloomfield & Shorna Allred, 2016. "Which Moral Foundations Predict Willingness to Make Lifestyle Changes to Avert Climate Change in the USA?," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(10), pages 1-11, October.
    4. Kerstin E. Cuhls, 2020. "Horizon Scanning in Foresight – Why Horizon Scanning is only a part of the game," Futures & Foresight Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 2(1), March.
    5. M. Lynne Markus & Kevin Mentzer, 2014. "Foresight for a responsible future with ICT," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 16(3), pages 353-368, July.
    6. Christian Mühlroth & Michael Grottke, 2018. "A systematic literature review of mining weak signals and trends for corporate foresight," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 88(5), pages 643-687, July.
    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. Amber Geurts & Ralph Gutknecht & Philine Warnke & Arjen Goetheer & Elna Schirrmeister & Babette Bakker & Svetlana Meissner, 2022. "New perspectives for data‐supported foresight: The hybrid AI‐expert approach," Futures & Foresight Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 4(1), March.
    2. Schmidtke, Kelly Ann & Kudrna, Laura & Noufaily, Angela & Stallard, Nigel & Skrybant, Magdalena & Russell, Samantha & Clarke, Aileen, 2022. "Evaluating the relationship between moral values and vaccine hesitancy in Great Britain during the COVID-19 pandemic: A cross-sectional survey," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 308(C).
    3. Rick Szostak, 2024. "Restoring democratic stability: A backcasting wheel approach," Futures & Foresight Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 6(3), September.
    4. Trisha Harjani & Hongwei He & Melody Manchi Chao, 2024. "The Moral Foundations of Vaccine Passports," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 190(1), pages 93-121, February.
    5. Julie Bayle-Cordier & Loïc Berger & Rayan Elatmani & Massimo Tavoni, 2023. "Breath, Love, Walk? The Impact of Mindfulness Interventions on Climate Policy Support and Environmental Attitudes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-29, July.
    6. James Derbyshire & Mandeep Dhami & Ian Belton & Dilek Önkal, 2023. "The value of experiments in futures and foresight science as illustrated by the case of scenario planning," Futures & Foresight Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 5(2), June.
    7. Ebadi, Ashkan & Auger, Alain & Gauthier, Yvan, 2022. "Detecting emerging technologies and their evolution using deep learning and weak signal analysis," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 16(4).
    8. Ertör-Akyazi, Pinar & Akçay, Çağlar, 2021. "Moral intuitions predict pro-social behaviour in a climate commons game," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 181(C).
    9. Callaghan, Timothy & Motta, Matthew & Sylvester, Steven & Lunz Trujillo, Kristin & Blackburn, Christine Crudo, 2019. "Parent psychology and the decision to delay childhood vaccination," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 238(C), pages 1-1.
    10. Nazemi, Kawa & Burkhardt, Dirk & Kock, Alexander, 2024. "Visual analytics for technology and innovation management: An interaction approach for strategic decision making," Publications of Darmstadt Technical University, Institute for Business Studies (BWL) 144741, Darmstadt Technical University, Department of Business Administration, Economics and Law, Institute for Business Studies (BWL).
    11. Anna Trunk & Hendrik Birkel & Evi Hartmann, 2020. "On the current state of combining human and artificial intelligence for strategic organizational decision making," Business Research, Springer;German Academic Association for Business Research, vol. 13(3), pages 875-919, November.
    12. Buckman, Cierra & Liu, Indran C. & Cortright, Lindsay & Tumin, Dmitry & Syed, Salma, 2020. "The influence of local political trends on childhood vaccine completion in North Carolina," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 260(C).
    13. Jordan Luttrell-Freeman & Timothy J. Bungum & Jennifer R. Pharr, 2021. "A Systematic Review of the Rationale for Vaccine Hesitancy among American Parents," Global Journal of Health Science, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 13(8), pages 1-77, August.
    14. Gerard P. Hodgkinson, 2021. "Why appealing to the virtues of scientific theory (and method) is necessary but insufficient for effecting systemic change: Commentary on Fergnani & Chermack, 2021," Futures & Foresight Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 3(3-4), September.
    15. Reddinger, J. Lucas & Charness, Gary & Levine, David, 2022. "Prosocial motivation for vaccination," SocArXiv emj6v, Center for Open Science.
    16. Andreas Pfnür & Benjamin Wagner, 2020. "Transformation of the real estate and construction industry: empirical findings from Germany," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 90(7), pages 975-1019, August.
    17. Mauno, Tuomas & Catelo, Fellice & Bengston, David N. & Pykäläinen, Jouni & Hujala, Teppo, 2023. "How to identify and interpret weak signals of change in the forest bioeconomy," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    18. Kate Chatfield & Elisabetta Borsella & Elvio Mantovani & Andrea Porcari & Bernd Carsten Stahl, 2017. "An Investigation into Risk Perception in the ICT Industry as a Core Component of Responsible Research and Innovation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-24, August.
    19. Ahti Salo, 2021. "Developing the needed scientific theory will not be easy: A commentary on Fergnani and Chermack 2021," Futures & Foresight Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 3(3-4), September.
    20. Anita Lavorgna & Leslie Carr, 2021. "Tweets and Quacks: Network and Content Analyses of Providers of Non-Science-Based Anticancer Treatments and Their Supporters on Twitter," SAGE Open, , vol. 11(1), pages 21582440211, March.

    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:1:n:e145. 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.