from Forecasting to Foresight: basing the Methodology of Futures Studies on Research Onion Model

Document Type : علمی - پژوهشی

Authors

1 Ph.D. Student of Futures Studies, Faculty of Social Sciences, Imam Khomeini International University, Qazvin, Iran

2 Professor, Department of Futures Studies, Faculty of Social Sciences, Imam Khomeini International University, Qazvin, Iran

Abstract

The uniqueness of futures studies epistemology, the nascent nature of transdisciplinary disciplines and the lack of literature in the field of its methodology, has led to a lack of proper integration in this field. For this reason, futures studies methodology, like the field itself, has undergone many changes in the last two decades. Due to this serious weakness, the present study seeks to examine the methodology and construction of a desirable and efficient research design tailored to the growing needs of futures studies to prevent confusion among researchers. Major scientific studies in the field of futures studies methodology focus on distinct methods and their implementation; While methodology in futures studies is not an end in itself, it is used to guide appropriate approaches to mapping reality, that is, the future. In this article, with a focus on descriptive-analytical methodology, a systematic study for the development of research methodology based on the research onion model is conducted and the relationship and adaptation of this model for future research are examined. The present article outlines and explains nine stages of methodological development and construction of a research design for future studies, which begins with the definition of a philosophical position and gradually leads to the construction of a research design.

Keywords

References

1. بل، وندل (1395)، مبانی آینده‌پژوهی: تاریخچه، اهداف و دانش: علم انسانی برای عصر جدید، ترجمه مصطفی تقوی و محسن محقق، تهران: مؤسسه آموزشی و تحقیقاتی صنایع دفاعی، مرکز آینده‌پژوهی علوم و فناوری‌های دفاعی.
2. پایا، علی و علیرضا همتی (1396)، «ارزیابی نقّادانه روش‌شناسی‌های آینده‌نگاری و آینده‌پژوهی»، مطالعات راهبردی سیاستگذاری عمومی، س7، ش22، ص157−184.
3. دانایی فرد، حسن؛ مهدی الوانی و عادل آذر (1393)، روش‌شناسی پژوهش کمّی در مدیریت: رویکردی جامع، چ9، تهران: صفار.
4. دانایی فرد، حسن؛ محمدمهدی ذوالفقارزاده، مصطفی تقوی، مهدی محمدی و پیمان محمدی (1397)، «بررسی دلالت‌های واقع‌گرایی انتقادی در تدوین دستور کار خط‌مشی‌‌گذاری علم، فناوری و نوآوری»، موردکاوی اسناد افق 2020 و اقتصاد زیستی 2030 اروپا، روش‌شناسی علوم انسانی، 24(95)، ص21-50.
5. شیروانی ناغانی، مسلم؛ عین‌الله کشاورز ترک و اشکان یوسفی (1399)، «نقد مبانی فلسفی میان رشتۀ آینده‌نگاری راهبردی به مثابه یک علم انسانی و اجتماعی نوین»، پژوهش‌های عقلی نوین، س5، ش9، ص83−104.
6. عرب‌بافرانی، محمدرضا (1396)، طراحی چارچوب اثربخش روش‌شناسی در آینده‌پژوهی، رساله دکتری در رشته آینده‌پژوهی، قزوین: دانشگاه بین‌المللی امام خمینیe.
7. عرب‌بافرانی، محمدرضا و محمدرحیم عیوضی (1400)، «مطالعه تطبیقی گونه‌شناسی‌های روش در ‌آینده‌پژوهی»، آینده‌پژوهی انقلاب اسلامی، س2، ش1، ص7−36.
8. عرب‌بافرانی، محمدرضا و محمدرحیم عیوضی (1398)، «مطالعه شاخص‌های ارزیابی و انتخاب روش در پژوهش‌های آینده‌پژوهی»، آینده‌پژوهی مدیریت، س30، ش3، ص23−38.
9. کمیجانی، علی و محمدرحیم عیوضی (1399)، «سیمای پارادایمی آینده‎پژوهی: از بازخوانی تا بازنمایی آینده‎های یکپارچه»، حوزه و دانشگاه روش‌شناسی علوم انسانی، س26، ش105، ص1−17.
10. معبودی، محمدتقی (۱۳۹۹)، «تبارشناسی مفهوم و مبانی پارادایمی آینده‌پ‍‍ژوهی»، فصلنامه چشم‌انداز شهرهای آینده، س۱، ش۴، ص41−۶۵.
11. منطقی، محسن؛ محسن الویری و جعفر رحمانی و رضا ابروش (1397)، «ارائه مدل مفهومی روش‌شناسی آینده‌پژوهی اسلامی»، مجله علمی مدیریت فرهنگ سازمانی، س16، ش4، ص951−972.
12. Aligica, P. D. & Herritt, R. (2009), Epistemology, social technology and expert judgement: Olaf Helmer's contribution to futures research, Futures, 41(5), 253−259.
13. Aligica, P. D. (2003), Prediction, explanation and the epistemology of future studies, Futures, 35(10), 1027−1040.
14. Amara, R. (1991), Views on futures research methodology, Futures, 23(6), 645−649.
15. Aspinwall, L. G. (2005), The psychology of future-oriented thinking: From achievement to proactive coping, adaptation, and aging. Motivation and emotion, 29(4), 203-235.
16. Bell, W. (2003), Foundations of Futures studies: History, Purposes and Knowledge (1st ed), Routledge.
17. Boonmavichit, T., & Boossabong, P. (2022), Approaching foresight through critical realism: lessons drawn from Thailand. Journal of Futures Studies, 26(4), 41-54.
18. Breiner, S., Cuhls, K., & Grupp, H. (1994), Technology foresight using a Delphi approach: a Japanese‐German co‐operation. R & D Management, 24(2), 141-153.
19. Bürgel, H. D., Reger, G. & Ackel−Zakour, R. (2005), Technologie−Früherkennung in multinationalen Unternehmen: Ergebnisse einer empirischen Untersuchung. In Technologie−Roadmapping (pp. 27−53), Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.
20. Chiffi, D., Pietarinen, A. V. & Proover, M. (2020), Anticipation, abduction and the economy of research: the normative stance, Futures, 115, 102471.
21. Coates, J. F., Mahaffie, J. B. & Hines, A. (1994), Technological forecasting: 1970–1993, Technological Forecasting and social change, 47(1), 23−33.
22. Cuhls, K. (2003), From forecasting to foresight processes–new participative foresight activities in Germany. Journal of forecasting, 22(2‐3), 93-111.
23. De Toni, A. F., Siagri, R. & Battistella, C. (2020), Corporate foresight. In Corporate Foresight (pp. 73−85). Routledge.
24. Delaney, K. (2002), Futures: In Search of Strategy, Journal of Futures Studies, 6(4), 65−86.
25. Esbjorn−Hargens, S. (2009), An Overview of Integral Theory: All−Inclusive Framework for the 21st Century, Integral Institute, Resource Paper No. 1, 1−24.
26. Floyd, J. (2008), Towards an integral renewal of systems methodology for futures studies. Futures, 40(2), 138-149.
27. Floyd, J. (2012), Action research and integral futures studies: A path to embodied foresight. Futures, 44(10), 870-882.
28. Fuller, T. & Loogma, K. (2009), Constructing futures: A social constructionist perspective on foresight methodology, Futures, 41(2), 71−79.
29. Giaoutzi, M., & Sapio, B. (Eds.). (2013), Recent developments in foresight methodologies.
30. Glenn, J. C., & Gordon, T. J. (Eds.). (2009), Futures research methodology-version 3-0. Editorial desconocida.
31. Hideg, E. (2002), Implications of two new paradigms for futures studies. Futures, 34(3−4), 283−294.
32. Hideg, É. (2013), Integral futures based on the paradigm approach, Futures, 45, S6−S15.
33. Hideg, É. (2015), Paradigms in futures field.
34. Inayatullah, S. (2013), Futures Studies: theories and methods, There’s a Future: Visions for a better world, Madrid, 36−66.
35. Karlsen, J. E. & Karlsen, H. (2013), Classification of tools and approaches applicable in foresight studies, In Recent developments in foresight methodologies,  Springer, Boston, MA, pp.27-52.
36. Karlsen, J. E. (2014), Design and application for a replicable foresight methodology bridging quantitative and qualitative expert data, European Journal of Futures Research, 2(1), 1−12.
37. Klusacek, K. (2004), Technology foresight in the Czech Republic, International Journal of Foresight and Innovation Policy, 1(1−2), 89−105.
38. Kosow, H. & Gaßner, R. (2008), Methods of Future and Scenario Analysis: Overview, assessment, and selection criteria, Studies/Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik, Germany, Bonn.
39. Kunseler, E. M., Tuinstra, W., Vasileiadou, E. & Petersen, A. C. (2015), The reflective futures practitioner: Balancing salience, credibility and legitimacy in generating foresight knowledge with stakeholders, Futures, 66, 1−12.
40. Kuosa, T. (2011), Evolution of futures studies. Futures, 43(3), 327-336.
41. Kuosa, T. (2012), The Evolution of Strategic Foresight: Navigating Public Policy.
42. List, D. (2005), Scenario Network Mapping: The Development of a Methodology for Social Inquiry, Doctoral dissertation: Division of Business and Enterprise University of South Australia.
43. Mannermaa, M. (1991), In search of an evolutionary paradigm for futures research. Futures, 23(4), 349−372.
44. May, R. C., Stewart Jr, W. H., & Sweo, R. (2000), Environmental scanning behavior in a transitional economy: evidence from Russia. Academy of Management Journal, 43(3), 403-427.
45. Melnikovas, A. (2018), Towards an explicit research methodology: Adapting research onion model for futures studies. Journal of Futures Studies, 23(2), 29-44.
46. Miller, R. (2017), Transforming the future: Anticipation in the 21st century (p. 300). Taylor & Francis.
47. Miller, R., Poli, R. & Rossel, P. (2013), The discipline of anticipation: Exploring key issues, IN: fumee. org.
48. Muranganwa, R. (2016), Design and implementation of a multi−agent opportunistic grid computing platform, Doctoral dissertation, University of Fort Hare.
49. Myers, M. D. (2008), Qualitative Research in Business & Management, London: SAGE Publications.
50. Patomäki, H. (2006), Realist ontology for futures studies. Journal of Critical Realism, 5(1), 1-31.
51. Phillips, D. C. (1973), Futurology: Difficulties and doubts. Politics, 8(2), 346-355.
52. Poli, R. (2011), Steps toward an explicit ontology of the future. Journal of Futures Studies, 16(1), 67-78.
53. Poli, R. (2017), Introduction to anticipation studies (Vol. 1), Springer.
54. Poli, R. (Ed). (2019), Handbook of anticipation: Theoretical and applied aspects of the use of future in decision making, New York: Springer.
55. Puglisi, M. (2001), The study of the futures: an overview of futures studies methodologies. Interdependency between agriculture and urbanization: conflicts on sustainable use of soil water. Bari: CIHEAM. Options Méditerranéennes, Série A. Séminaires Méditerranéens, (44), 439-463.
56. Rader, M. & Porter, A. L. (2008), Fitting future−oriented technology analysis methods to study types, In future−oriented technology analysis, Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg,  pp.25−40.
57. Ramos, J. M. (2002), Action research as foresight methodology, Journal of futures studies, 7(1), 1−24.
58. Sardar, Z. & Sweeney, J. A. (2016), The three tomorrows of postnormal times, Futures, 75, 1−13.
59. Sardar, Z. (1993), Colonizing the future: the other’dimension of futures studies, Futures, 25(2), 179−187.
60. Saunders, M., Lewis, P. & Thornhill, A. (2019), Research Methods for Business Students. (8 ed.) Pearson.
61. Shala, E. (2018), Foresight and Social Epistemology, An inquiry into the epistemic versatility of futures research and the potential of a socio−epistemic approach, Karlsruhe.
62. Sjöholm, R. (2021), Maintaining competence in the changing world: How to improve foresight capabilities in the case company.
63. Slaughter, R. A. (2001), Knowledge creation, futures methodologies and the integral agenda. Foresight, 3(5), 407-418.
64. Slaughter, R. A. (2003). Futures Beyond Dystopia. Routledge Falmer, London.
65. Slaughter, R. A. (2008), What difference does ‘integral’ make? Futures, 40(2), 120-137.
66. Son, H. (2015), The history of Western futures studies: An exploration of the intellectual traditions and three−phase periodization, Futures, 66, 120−137.
67. Tuomi, I. (2013, August). Next-generation foresight in anticipatory organizations. In Background Study for the European Forum on Forward-Looking Activities (EFFLA), European Commission.
68. Van der Duin Patrick (2016), Foresight in organizations: methods and tools. Routledge.
69. Vincent, S. & O'Mahoney, J. (2018), Critical realism and qualitative research: An introductory overview, The sage handbook of qualitative business and management research methods.
70. Voros, J. (2007), “On the Philosophical Foundations of Futures Research”, In: Knowing Tomorrow: How Science Deals with the Future, Edited by Patrick van der Duin, Delft: Eburon Academic Publishers, pp. 69−90.
71. Voros, J. (2008), Integral Futures: An approach to futures inquiry. Futures, 40(2), 190-201
72. Voros, J. (2017), Big History and Anticipation. Handbook of anticipation. Theoretical and applied aspects of the use of future in decision making.

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics