La Palma Research Centre hosted the Foresight Methodology Workshop of the Horizon 2020 project Mineral Intelligence Capacity Analysis (MICA) in Las Palmas de Gran Canaria on 10–11 May 2017. The project was concerned with intelligence on mineral raw materials, and the workshop looked at how foresight methods could serve that purpose. My contribution drew on a set of international foresight exercises carried out over the previous decade, ranging from regional foresight in a Chilean mining region to European horizon scanning and global roadmapping in manufacturing (Könnölä, 2017). This post revisits the presentation and its four key messages: foresight serves the whole policy cycle, foresight designs are always customised, foresight tools are never the first step, and the value of foresight depends on engaging the 'client'. The slides are attached.

1. Foresight for the whole policy cycle

Foresight is often associated with the early stages of policy-making, when agendas are set and long-term visions are articulated. Its contribution, however, extends across the whole policy cycle. In agenda setting, foresight offers visions, a better understanding of change and greater legitimacy and transparency in the choice of priorities. In policy definition, it generates policy options and new ideas and builds ownership among those who will implement them. Ex-ante impact assessment benefits from the exploration of impacts under alternative futures, while implementation can draw on new policy configurations and a more responsive system. Evaluation, in turn, gains from prospective considerations, closing a learning loop that feeds the next round of agenda setting (Könnölä, 2017).

Underlying this is a view of the future as open. The 'futures cone' distinguishes between possible, plausible, probable and preferable futures, with business as usual forming only a narrow strand within a much wider space of potential developments (Voros, 2003). Foresight exercises differ in which part of the cone they address. Some concentrate on probable developments to support planning, others explore the plausible and the possible to test strategies against surprise, and many seek to articulate preferable futures that stakeholders are willing to work towards.

The regional foresight programme in Antofagasta, Chile, illustrated these contributions in a setting close to the interests of the raw materials community. Between 2011 and 2013, VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland cooperated with the Chilean Mining Technological and Scientific Research Centre (CICITEM) to improve the human capacities of CICITEM as a facilitator of regional innovation, especially in knowledge and technology management. The cooperation pursued capacity building in institutional leadership, knowledge management, innovation culture and innovation capabilities; self-sustained innovation capacity at CICITEM; and the capability to create a strategic vision for regional innovation and to facilitate joint innovation activities in the mining cluster (Dufva et al., 2016). Water, under pressure from climate change and mining, became the focus of the foresight pilot.

The contributions of the exercise can be read at four levels (Dufva et al., 2015). At the landscape level, participants gained a better understanding of global developments and networks and of Antofagasta's position in the global system, together with skills to scan and project these developments and engagement with international stakeholders. At the innovation-system level, the exercise identified key barriers and drivers in the regional system and its water-related sub-systems, actions to overcome the barriers and a vision of a desired future, and it brought stakeholders from different sectors together for the first time. At the organisational level, it produced a roadmap for research related to water and mining, strengthened the foresight culture and capability of CICITEM and improved its contacts and status. At the individual level, participants improved their understanding of the regional context and of futures thinking and learnt to conduct foresight through training and hands-on engagement in the design and management of the exercise. VTT's own innovation programme on the mineral economy pointed in a similar direction, combining competences such as hydrometallurgy, powder metallurgy and life cycle assessment with business models and foresight, and working towards a circular mineral economy based on valuable element recovery, residue utilisation, substitution of critical raw materials, remanufacturing, reuse and recycling (Könnölä, 2017).

2. Foresight designs are always customised

There is no single foresight method and no standard design. In the mapping of regional foresight exercises presented in the talk, literature review, scenarios, expert panels, futures workshops, brainstorming and SWOT analysis were the most frequently used methods, followed by questionnaires and surveys, trend extrapolation, interviews, environmental scanning, Delphi and megatrend analysis, while backcasting, stakeholder mapping, key technologies, structural analysis and technology roadmapping were used less often (Könnölä, 2017). Methods can be positioned along several dimensions: quantitative and qualitative, face-to-face and online, intuitive and rational, subjective and objective, creative and evidence-based. Good designs tend to combine methods across these dimensions rather than settle at one end of each.

Much of the value lies in integration. A typical integrated process begins with the search for signals and moves on to creating, curating and evaluating drivers. The drivers are clustered and structured into scenarios, from which success scenarios are defined. Roadmaps then reorganise the drivers, create solutions and evaluate them against the scenarios before the most promising ones are selected, after which the process turns to analysing future markets, identifying partners and defining actions (Könnölä, 2017). Three cases from the talk show how such combinations are tailored to purpose.

The first, 'Facing the Future', was a horizon scanning exercise carried out in 2009 by the Institute for Prospective Technological Studies of the European Commission's Joint Research Centre (JRC-IPTS) for the Bureau of European Policy Advisers (BEPA) (Boden et al., 2010). Horizon scanning was organised around four interlinked activities: scoping, scanning, synthesising and coordinating. BEPA and JRC-IPTS selected six areas of analysis in February; forward-looking reports were reviewed and synthesised to identify issues in March; an online survey of 270 experts assessed the issues in April; multi-criteria analyses of the survey results followed in May; an expert workshop with 19 experts and 22 policy-makers combined the issues in June; and the final report was compiled by November. The multi-criteria analysis used RPM Screening (Könnölä et al., 2007) to compare issues under alternative preference structures. A mean-oriented analysis ranked relevance above novelty and probability, a rare-event-oriented analysis gave priority to inverse probability, and a variance-oriented analysis highlighted issues on which expert views diverged. Issues that scored well independently of the criteria preferences could thus be distinguished from those whose position depended on how the criteria were weighted, which made the prioritisation transparent and traceable (Könnölä et al., 2012).

The second case was a Web 2.0 foresight platform set up by JRC-IPTS for the European Institute of Innovation and Technology (EIT) (Haegeman et al., 2012). After preparation and a pilot, the platform opened a first phase for collecting ideas and a second phase for assessing them. Once the platform closed, a first report on the ideas was presented to the EIT Governing Board, and a background document prepared the ground for a workshop with selected experts and Board members, which led to the final report. The online and face-to-face stages were designed to complement each other, so that broad participation could be combined with focused deliberation among decision-makers.

The third case, the IMS2020 project on intelligent manufacturing systems, showed the particular challenges of global foresight (Cagnin & Könnölä, 2014). The process combined mapping, two online surveys, workshops on key area topics (KAT) and interviews. Drivers were grouped under policy and governance (e.g. aligned and coordinated policy and regulation, global multi-level collaboration, collective values and behaviours), industrial and international R&D cooperation (e.g. breakthrough technologies, cooperation across value chains, new markets, standardisation and knowledge management) and knowledge and society (e.g. education, competences and skills, energy, natural resources and environmental footprint). Scenario design options ranged from two-axis matrices to morphological combinations of factors. The IMS2020 scenarios were built on a policy and governance axis and an international industrial R&D axis, nested with knowledge society and environmental sustainability dimensions, and four snapshots were positioned within this space. The resulting vision called for rapid and adaptive user-centred manufacturing leading to customised and 'eternal' life-cycle solutions, for highly flexible and self-organising value chains, and for sustainable manufacturing made possible by cultural change among individuals and corporations and by a regulatory framework co-designed by governments, industries and societies. The final roadmap linked research and technological development topics, research actions and their expected impacts, and KAT visions and objectives to the IMS2020 vision over horizons of one to three, three to seven, seven to ten and ten to fifteen years.

3. Foresight tools are never the first step

A wide range of tools is available to support foresight, many of them digital. Technology maps visualise technology and patent landscapes at different levels of detail, helping clients to define strategic objectives, explore their position and follow innovation dynamics; at the Insight Foresight Institute these were developed in partnership with Tecmine. Online foresight platforms, developed with Orchidea, support structured engagement of stakeholders and experts through the submission, commenting and assessment of emerging issues, innovation ideas and challenges, with filtering and graphical presentation of results. RPM Screening, based on Robust Portfolio Modelling, allows interactive multi-criteria analysis of issues according to relevance, novelty, feasibility or other criteria (Könnölä et al., 2007, 2012). Online surveys run on commercial platforms make consultation user-friendly and efficient to manage, with flexible export of results (Könnölä, 2017).

None of these tools should be the starting point. They are always tailored to the needs of the client, and their value depends on the quality of the scoping, the questions asked and the people engaged. A technology map without a clear strategic question, or an online platform without a community willing to contribute, tends to produce data rather than insight. The choice of tools follows from the purpose of the exercise and from the policy or strategy process it is meant to inform.

4. Engaging the 'client'

The conclusions drew these experiences together. Complexity and uncertainty call for foresight and resilience. Different future-oriented technology analysis (FTA) systems are complementary, and their diversification strengthens the capacity to anticipate. Methods are best combined in a modular and responsive way, so that the design can adapt as the process unfolds. Close interaction with sponsors and clients is needed throughout, from scoping to the use of results, because foresight creates value only when its insights are taken up in decisions (Könnölä, 2017). For the raw materials community, these lessons suggest building foresight into the policy cycle, combining scanning, scenarios and roadmaps in designs tailored to the questions at hand, and engaging policy-makers, industry and researchers from the outset.

Access to the presentation: https://www.slideshare.net/slideshow/foresight-methods-and-practice-lessons-learned-from-international-foresight-exercises/76021158?utm_source=clipboard_share_button&utm_campaign=slideshare_make_sharing_viral_v2&utm_variation=control&utm_medium=share 

References

Boden, J. M., Cagnin, C., Carabias, V., Haegeman, K., & Könnölä, T. (2010). Facing the future: Time for the EU to meet global challenges (EUR 24364 EN). Publications Office of the European Union. https://doi.org/10.2791/4223

Cagnin, C., & Könnölä, T. (2014). Global foresight: Lessons from a scenario and roadmapping exercise on manufacturing systems. Futures, 59, 27–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2014.01.007

Dufva, M., Könnölä, T., & Koivisto, R. (2015). Multi-layered foresight: Lessons from regional foresight in Chile. Futures, 73, 100–111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2015.08.010

Dufva, M., Könnölä, T., & Koivisto, R. (2016). Building regional foresight capability in Antofagasta, Chile (EFP Brief No. 260). European Foresight Platform. https://if-institute.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Building_Regional_Foresight_in_Antofagasta_Chile_EFP-Brief-No.260.pdf

Haegeman, K., Cagnin, C., Könnölä, T., & Collins, D. (2012). Web 2.0 foresight for innovation policy: A case of strategic agenda setting in European innovation. Innovation: Management, Policy & Practice, 14(3), 446–466. https://doi.org/10.5172/impp.2012.14.3.446

Könnölä, T. (2017, May 10–11). Foresight methods and practice: Lessons learned from international foresight exercises [Presentation slides]. Foresight Methodology Workshop, Mineral Intelligence Capacity Analysis project, Las Palmas, Spain. https://www.slideshare.net/slideshow/foresight-methods-and-practice-lessons-learned-from-international-foresight-exercises/76021158

Könnölä, T., Brummer, V., & Salo, A. (2007). Diversity in foresight: Insights from the fostering of innovation ideas. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 74(5), 608–626. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2006.11.003

Könnölä, T., Salo, A., Cagnin, C., Carabias, V., & Vilkkumaa, E. (2012). Facing the future: Scanning, synthesizing and sense-making in horizon scanning. Science and Public Policy, 39(2), 222–231. https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scs021

Voros, J. (2003). A generic foresight process framework. Foresight, 5(3), 10–21. https://doi.org/10.1108/14636680310698379

The Euro-CASE Innovation Platform brings together European academies of engineering to examine the barriers in national innovation systems that prevent innovative SMEs in Europe from scaling up. Its analysis combined a generic review with sector 'deep dives', and the Royal Academy of Engineering of Spain (RAI) led the deep dive on industrialisation. The deep-dive workshop took place in Madrid on 30–31 January 2017, chaired by José Manuel Sanjurjo (RAI), and preparatory foresight was coordinated by Totti Könnölä and Francisco J. Jariego from Insight Foresight Instute.

Building on a background discussion paper and the results of the Euro-CASE survey, the workshop explored industrial innovation towards 2030 through industrial platform ecosystems: value networks that engage industrial providers and customers as well as research and technology organisations, universities, start-ups and other SMEs, investors, public agencies and regulators. Particular attention was paid to the future role of SMEs and the barriers they face in scaling up, and participants drew recommendations to inform European policy-making.

The findings fed into the platform report Barriers to Innovation and Scale-up of Innovative SMEs (Euro-CASE, 2017). Its industrialisation analysis stresses that keeping an advanced production base competitive remains a high priority; that jobs will shift from the physical towards cyber and convergence domains; that much of SMEs' existing software and hardware may become obsolete; and that policy should foster broad collaboration across incumbents and newcomers, sectors and public and private actors, much of it organised around digital platforms, with a focus on transformation rather than on correcting market failures alone.

References

Euro-CASE. (2017). Barriers to innovation and scale-up of innovative SMEs (Euro-CASE Innovation Platform report). https://www.euro-case.org/wp-content/uploads/Eurocase/Publications/PDF/Euro-CASE_Innovation-Platform-II-Report.pdf

Euro-CASE. (n.d.). Euro-CASE platforms: Innovation. https://www.euro-case.org/?p=35001

Insight Foresight Instit ute. (2017, March 31). SMEs, innovation and industrialisation for Europe 2030. https://if-institute.org/smes-innovation-and-industrialisation-for-europe-2030 

IMS2020 was an FP7 project funded by the NMP division of the European Commission within the Intelligent Manufacturing Systems (IMS) framework. It was conducted by an international consortium of 15 core partners and a large group of supporting members from Europe, Japan, Korea, Switzerland and the USA. The main objective was the creation of five research roadmaps towards IMS by 2020 and beyond, in the key areas of sustainable manufacturing, products and services; energy-efficient manufacturing; key technologies; standardisation; and innovation, competence development and education.

JRC-IPTS devised and coordinated the scenario work. Four scenario snapshots for 2025 were built on four impact dimensions, and a joint vision drew on the scenario features that partners rated desirable and at least somewhat likely. Research topics were refined through an open wiki and prioritised in an online survey with 359 participants, and the roadmaps set out research topics and supporting actions for international cooperation.

International foresight exercises are characterised by geographical dispersion, organisational and cultural differences, and the diversity arising from a large number of participants with different expectations and needs. Building on the experience of designing and managing the Intelligent Manufacturing Systems (IMS) 2020 project, this article develops four principles for the design and management of global foresight exercises.

The first principle, understanding interconnected innovation systems, ensures that participants position the foresight exercise and their own activities in a global context. The second, responsiveness towards diverse languages and cultures, strengthens commitment and encourages learning and creative problem solving. The third, capacity to reconfigure international networks, takes advantage of existing organisational structures and facilitates the timely and efficient mobilisation of stakeholder communities. The fourth, 'glocal' impact orientation, connects foresight activities to both local and international decision-making structures. Because global projects are heterogeneous, all four principles need to be implemented with a scalable design approach.

IMS2020 combined scenarios, vision-building and roadmapping on intelligent and sustainable manufacturing systems. Four scenario snapshots for 2025 informed a shared vision, and research topics were refined through an open wiki and prioritised in an online survey with 359 participants.

Cagnin, C., & Könnölä, T. (2014). Global foresight: Lessons from a scenario and roadmapping exercise on manufacturing systems. Futures, 59, 27–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2014.01.007 

This report presents the outcomes of the Geopolitical Industrial Decarbonisation Scenarios workshop, convened on behalf of the Eye of Europe Horizon Europe project by the Insight Foresight Institute. Bringing together 30 participants from across the European Union—including policymakers at EU, national, and regional levels, industry leaders, energy and climate specialists, and foresight and forecasting experts—the workshop explored how the EU can navigate mounting geopolitical uncertainty while accelerating industrial decarbonization on a 2050 horizon.

The discussion was structured around two core aims. First, participants examined a suite of forward-looking geopolitical scenarios, assessing how divergent power dynamics, energy trade patterns, and technological trajectories could either hinder or catalyse the transition to a net-zero industrial base in the EU countries. Particular attention was paid to supply-chain resilience, strategic autonomy in critical materials, and the interplay between carbon border adjustments and global climate diplomacy. Second, the workshop sought to surface emergent research and innovation (R&I) needs and opportunities that would equip EU actors to thrive across the scenarios. Priorities highlighted include advanced electrification processes for hard-to-abate sectors, low-carbon hydrogen and synthetic-fuel value chains, circular-economy business models, and data-driven tools for real-time decarbonisation monitoring.

Outputs from the session feed directly into the Eye of Europe project’s multi-workshop learning cycle. Immediate products comprise this extended report for attendees; aggregated insights captured in the public Pilot Logbook Part I – What we did and Part II – What we learned; and distilled policy recommendations to be released in the Eye of Europe Policy Brief: Foresight Perspectives on Key R&I Topics. Beyond documentation, the Insight Foresight Institute will leverage the findings to stimulate agenda-setting dialogues with EU bodies and industrial stakeholders, ensuring that identified R&I pathways inform Horizon Europe programming and other EU-level funding instruments. Workshop materials and presentations are retrievable via the futures4europe.eu knowledge-sharing portal, reinforcing the project’s commitment to an open foresight community.

A 𝗳𝘂𝗹𝗹-𝗱𝗮𝘆 𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗻𝘁 focused on shaping the future of European manufacturing. Right after the 𝗘𝗙𝗙𝗥𝗔 𝗠𝗮𝗻𝘂𝗳𝗮𝗰𝘁𝘂𝗿𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗣𝗮𝗿𝘁𝗻𝗲𝗿𝘀𝗵𝗶𝗽 𝗗𝗮𝘆𝘀 𝟮𝟬𝟮𝟱, MASTT2040 — in collaboration with EFFRA — is hosting a gathering of industry leaders, researchers, and policymakers to explore the next frontier of Manufacturing as a Service. Stay tuned, the 𝗳𝘂𝗹𝗹 𝗮𝗴𝗲𝗻𝗱𝗮 and more details will be released shortly!

Event date: 23rd October 2025
Time: 09:00-16:00
Place: Brussels (Hermeslaan 7, 1831 Machelen) and online
Contacts: info@mastt2040.eu

As part of ‘the Eye of Europe’ Horizon Europe Project, Insight Foresight Institute organised an in-person stakeholder workshop on ‘Geopolitical & industrial decarbonisation scenarios to identify R&I opportunities for the EU’ on 10-11 April 2025 in Madrid, Spain. This workshop gathered experts specialised in different areas related to circular economy, decarbonisation, sustainability, innovation, geopolitics etc. 

The workshop consisted of debating around a primary issue on the EU’s agenda: how to navigate geopolitical issues to keep decarbonising the continent towards sustainable and competitive sectors. 

For that matter, strategic alliances, resistant supply chains, and proactive management in global trade and diplomacy were needed. Several issues were identified, clustered in four themes:
- Geopolitical and Regional Alliances (relation with the EU)
- Industrial Competitiveness
- Energy Security and Supply
- Supply Chains (Raw Materials)
- Supply Chains (Manufacturing)

Participants were invited to attend this two day workshops starting with introductory presentations. Once participants were put into context, the common scenario work began. An interactive session was held in the plenary and then in small groups. The second day, the key visions shared the day before were gathered and an introduction was made to roadmapping on R&I needs and emerging areas. Roadmapping on specific themes for emerging R&I were discussed in small groups. The findings were shared in the plenary.

Date: 10 & 11/04/2025
Location: Calle Orense, 34, Madrid, Spain
Format: In-person
Participants: Experts on industrial decarbonisation, geopolitics, circular economy, sustainability, R&I, technology, European Union etc.

For more information, please contact totti.konnola@if-institute.org

In the fast-evolving landscape of Manufacturing-as-a-Service (MaaS), the EU faces the crucial challenge of navigating the uncertainties of emerging changes, disruptions, and opportunities in the sector. This uncertainty demands a strategic approach to guide decision-making in the European manufacturing industry up to 2040. In this context, the MASTT2040 project uses inclusive foresight methods to build a shared understanding, engage key stakeholders, and craft a strategic roadmap, addressing short, medium, and long-term goals. The project’s overall goal is to make MaaS a catalyst for circularity, embed sustainability in industrial approaches, enhance supply resilience, and propel Europe to the forefront of MaaS expertise.

Find more information here.
 

The overall objective of "3 InDustrial Ecosystems tAckLing supply chain dISrupTions and driving the adoption of advanced technologies" (IDEALIST) is to support SMEs in energy-intensive industries, aerospace and defence, mobility, transport & automotive industrial ecosystems in their ability to understand and adapt to changes brought about by rapid and unexpected developments in the world such as the COVID-19 crisis or the Russia-led war in Ukraine.

These three sectors are of capital importance for the European economy and despite their specificity, have common challenges that the project helps address: transition to more sustainable practices, competitiveness issues in a context of scarcer raw materials and more expensive energy, change in consumption habits and more. Being more resilient means giving SMEs the opportunity to be a player in these changes and no longer just a spectator or follower. To do this, the project evolves around three pillars: strategic foresight to establish relevant tools and behaviors to anticipate and better prepare for change in an orderly and systematic way; technology uptake to overcome obstacles related to the implementation work of Advanced Technologies and lay the foundations of alliances between tech-savvy and traditional SMEs; and supply chains to identify critical dependencies and weaknesses in order to limit the impacts of disruptions on value chains. This work will lead to the realization of Pilot Projects promoting the meeting between ecosystems, facilitated by the use of the Hack&Match method. The mobilization of the AGORA platform led by EIT Manufacturing will support this objective of matchmaking and community building. The project is carried by a relevant consortium of 14 partners from 6 European countries and Ukraine representing several thousand manufacturing companies.

Find more information here.