Poiesis and Praxis 9 (1):101-123 (2012)
Abstract |
Looking back on the many prophets who tried to predict the future as if it were predetermined, at first sight any forward-looking activity is reminiscent of making predictions with a crystal ball. In contrast to fortune tellers, today’s exercises do not predict, but try to show different paths that an open future could take. A key motivation to undertake forward-looking activities is broadening the information basis for decision-makers to help them actively shape the future in a desired way. Experts, laypeople, or stakeholders may have different sets of values and priorities with regard to pending decisions on any issue related to the future. Therefore, considering and incorporating their views can, in the best case scenario, lead to more robust decisions and strategies. However, transferring this plurality into a form that decision-makers can consider is a challenge in terms of both design and facilitation of participatory processes. In this paper, we will introduce and critically assess a new qualitative method for forward-looking activities, namely CIVISTI, which was developed during an EU project of the same name. Focussing strongly on participation, with clear roles for citizens and experts, the method combines expert, stakeholder and lay knowledge to elaborate recommendations for decision-making in issues related to today’s and tomorrow’s science, technology and innovation. Consisting of three steps, the process starts with citizens’ visions of a future 30–40 years from now. Experts then translate these visions into practical recommendations which the same citizens then validate and prioritise to produce a final product. The following paper will highlight the added value as well as limits of the CIVISTI method and will illustrate potential for the improvement of future processes.
|
Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) |
Categories |
No categories specified (categorize this paper) |
ISBN(s) | |
DOI | 10.1007/s10202-012-0121-6 |
Options |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
Download options
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Into Blue Skies—a Transdisciplinary Foresight and Co-Creation Method for Adding Robustness to Visioneering.Mahshid Sotoudeh & Niklas Gudowsky - 2017 - NanoEthics 11 (1):93-106.
Similar books and articles
Forward-Looking Activities: Incorporating Citizens' Visions.Niklas Gudowsky, Walter Peissl, Mahshid Sotoudeh & Ulrike Bechtold - 2012 - Poiesis and Praxis 9 (1-2):101-123.
Into Blue Skies—a Transdisciplinary Foresight and Co-Creation Method for Adding Robustness to Visioneering.Mahshid Sotoudeh & Niklas Gudowsky - 2017 - NanoEthics 11 (1):93-106.
Towards the Desired Future of the Elderly and ICT: Policy Recommendations Based on a Dialogue with Senior Citizens.Steven Eggermont, Heidi Vandebosch & Stef Steyaert - 2006 - Poiesis and Praxis 4 (3):199-217.
Making Sense of the Future: Visions and Transition Pathways of Laypeople and Professionals From Six EU Countries.E. Iacovidou & W. Wehrmeyer - 2014 - Global Bioethics 25 (4):211-225.
Visions of In Vitro Meat Among Experts and Stakeholders.Inge Böhm, Arianna Ferrari & Silvia Woll - 2018 - NanoEthics 12 (3):211-224.
How Smart Grid Meets In Vitro Meat: On Visions as Socio-Epistemic Practices.Arianna Ferrari & Andreas Lösch - 2017 - NanoEthics 11 (1):75-91.
Democracy and Epistocracy.Paul Gunn - 2014 - Critical Review: A Journal of Politics and Society 26 (1-2):59-79.
One Site—Multiple Visions: Visioneering Between Contrasting Actors’ Perspectives.Franziska Engels, Anna Verena Münch & Dagmar Simon - 2017 - NanoEthics 11 (1):59-74.
Visioneering and the Role of Active Engagement and Assessment.Laura Yenisa Cabrera Trujillo - 2014 - NanoEthics 8 (2):201-206.
DoGood: Examining Gamification, Civic Engagement, and Collective Intelligence.Sebastian Rehm, Marcus Foth & Peta Mitchell - 2018 - AI and Society 33 (1):27-37.
‘You Wouldn’T Have Your Granny Using Them’: Drawing Boundaries Between Acceptable and Unacceptable Applications of Civil Drones.Philip Boucher - 2016 - Science and Engineering Ethics 22 (5):1391-1418.
Electronic Identity Management in Sweden: Governance of a Market Approach. [REVIEW]Åke Grönlund - 2010 - Identity in the Information Society 3 (1):195-211.
Negotiating Plausibility: Intervening in the Future of Nanotechnology.Cynthia Selin - 2011 - Science and Engineering Ethics 17 (4):723-737.
European Public Advice on Nanobiotechnology—Four Convergence Seminars.Marion Godman & Sven Ove Hansson - 2009 - NanoEthics 3 (1):43-59.
Analytics
Added to PP index
2019-12-20
Total views
4 ( #1,283,197 of 2,520,404 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #405,718 of 2,520,404 )
2019-12-20
Total views
4 ( #1,283,197 of 2,520,404 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #405,718 of 2,520,404 )
How can I increase my downloads?
Downloads