Boden M, Johnston R, Scapolo F (2012) The role of FTA in responding to grand challenges: a new approach for STI policy? Sci Public Policy 39:135–139. doi:10.1093/scipol/scs026
Article
Google Scholar
Owen R, Macnaghten P, Stilgoe J (2012) Responsible research and innovation: from science in society to science for society, with society. Sci Public Policy 39:751–760. doi:10.1093/scipol/scs093
Article
Google Scholar
von Schomberg R (ed) (2011) Towards responsible research and innovation in the information and communication technologies and security technologies fields. Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg. http://ec.europa.eu/research/science-society/document_library/pdf_06/mep-rapport-2011_en.pdf. Accessed 23 Nov 2011
von Schomberg R (2013) A vision of responsible research and innovation. In: Owen R, Bessant J, Heintz M (eds) Responsible innovation: managing the responsible emergence of science and innovation in society. John Wiley & Sons Ltd, Chichester, pp 51–73. doi:10.1002/9781118551424.ch3
Chapter
Google Scholar
Stahl BC (2014) Responsible research and innovation: the role of privacy in an emerging framework. Sci Public Policy 40:708–716. doi:10.1093/scipol/sct067
Article
Google Scholar
RRI-Tools (2016) RRI Toolkit - Built with and for the Community of Practice http://www.rri-tools.eu/search-engine#keywords=foresight@filterOption=@order=@page=. Accessed 29 June 2016
Lindner R, Kuhlmann S, Randles S, Bedsted B, Gorgoni G, Griessler E, Loconto A, Mejlgaard N (2016) Navigating towards shared responsibility in research and innovation- approach, process and results of the RES-AGorA project. Fraunhofer ISI, Karlsruhe, http://publica.fraunhofer.de/dokumente/N-382937.html
Google Scholar
Weber KM, Harper JC, Könnöla T, Barcelo V (2012) Coping with a fast-changing world: towards new systems of future-oriented technology analysis. Sci Public Policy 39:153–165. doi:10.1093/scipol/scs012
Article
Google Scholar
Haegeman K, Weber M, Könnölä T (2012) Preparing for grand challenges: the role of future-oriented technology analysis in anticipating and shaping structural and systemic changes. Tech Anal Strat Manag 24:729–734. doi:10.1080/09537325.2012.715475
Article
Google Scholar
Cagnin C, Amanatidou E, Keenan M (2012) Orienting European innovation systems towards grand challenges and the roles that FTA can play. Sci Public Policy 39:140–152
Article
Google Scholar
Georghiou L, Harper JC (2011) From priority-setting to articulation of demand: foresight for research and innovation policy and strategy. Futures 43:243–251
Article
Google Scholar
Cagnin C, Johnston R, Giesecke S (2015) Foresight contribution to grand challenges and participative governance in different cultural settings. Technol Forecast Soc Chang 101:182–184
Article
Google Scholar
Grunwald A (2011) Responsible innovation: bringing together technology assessment, applied ethics, and STS research. Enterprise and Work Innovation Studies 7: 9–31
Könnölä T, Scapolo F, Desruelle P, Mu R (2011) Foresight tackling societal challenges: impacts and implications on policy-making. Futures 43:252–264
Article
Google Scholar
Alkemade F, Suurs RAA (2012) Patterns of expectations for emerging sustainable technologies. Technol Forecast Soc Chang 79:448–456. doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2011.08.014
Article
Google Scholar
Geels FW, Kern F, Fuchs G, Hinderer N, Kungl G, Mylan J, Neukirch M, Wassermann S (2016) The enactment of socio-technical transition pathways: a reformulated typology and a comparative multi-level analysis of the German and UK low-carbon electricity transitions (1990–2014). Res Policy 45:896–913. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2016.01.015
Article
Google Scholar
Borup M, Brown N, Konrad K, Van Lente H (2006) The sociology of expectations in science and technology. Tech Anal Strat Manag 18:285–298
Article
Google Scholar
Verbong G, Geels F, Raven R (2008) Multi-niche analysis of dynamics and policies in Dutch renewable energy innovation journeys (1970–2006). Tech Anal Strat Manag 20:555–573
Article
Google Scholar
van Lente H, Spitters C, Peine A (2013) Comparing technological hype cycles: towards a theory. Technol Forecast Soc Chang 80:1615–1628. doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2012.12.004
Article
Google Scholar
Könnöla T, Salo A, Cagnin C, Carabias V, Vilkkumaa E (2012) Facing the future: scanning, synthesizing and sense-making in horizon scanning. Sci Public Policy 39:222–231. doi:10.1093/scipol/scs021
Article
Google Scholar
Boden M, Cagnin C, Carabias V, Haegeman K, Könnöla T (2010) ‘Facing the future: time for the EU to meet global challenges’, 24364 EN, 6/2010. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Commission
Jasanoff S, Kim S (2009) Containing the atom: sociotechnical imaginaries and nuclear power in the United States and South Korea. Minerva 47:119–146
Article
Google Scholar
CIMULACT (2016) Citizen and Multi-Actor Consultation on Horizon 2020. http://www.cimulact.eu/. Accessed 30 June 2016
Nowotny H (2003) Dilemma of expertise. Democratising expertise and socially robust knowledge. Sci Public Policy 30:151–156
Article
Google Scholar
Scapolo F, Miles I (2006) Eliciting experts’ knowledge: a comparison of two methods. Technol Forecast Soc Chang 73:679–704. doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2006.03.001
Article
Google Scholar
Nennen HU, Garbe D (1996) Das Expertendilemma: Zur Rolle wissenschaftlicher Gutachter in der öffentlichen Meinungsbildung. Springer, Berlin
Google Scholar
Grunwald A (2003) ‘Experts’ dilemma’. Technology assessment at the German Bundestag: ‘expertising’ democracy for ‘democratising’ expertise. Sci Public Policy 30:193–198
Grunwald A (2014) Modes of orientation provided by futures studies: making sense of diversity and divergence. Eur J Futures Res 15:30. doi:10.1007/s40309-013-0030-5
Article
Google Scholar
Fye SR, Charbonneau M, Hay J, Mullins C (2013) An examination of factors affecting accuracy in technology forecasts. Technol Forecast Soc Chang 80:1222–1231
Article
Google Scholar
Goldstein D, Gigerenzer G (2009) Fast and frugal forecasting. Int J Forecast 25:760–772
Article
Google Scholar
Makridakis S, Taleb N (2009) Decision making and planning under low levels of predictability. Int J Forecast 25:716–733
Article
Google Scholar
Tuominen A, Wessberg N, Leinonen A (2015) Participatory and prospective value network analysis: supporting transition towards biofuels in Finnish road transport. Eur J Futures Res 3:6. doi:10.1007/s40309-015-0064-y
Article
Google Scholar
Nordmann A (2014) Responsible innovation, the art and craft of anticipation. J Responsible Innov 1:87–98. doi:10.1080/23299460.2014.882064
Article
Google Scholar
Nowotny H, Scott P, Gibbons M (2001) ReThinking science. Knowledge and the public in an age of uncertainty. Polity Press, Cambridge
Google Scholar
Taebi B, Correljé A, Cuppen E, Dignuma M, Pesch U (2014) Responsible innovation as an endorsement of public values: the need for interdisciplinary research. J Responsible Innov 1:118–124. doi:10.1080/23299460.2014.882072
Article
Google Scholar
Dignum M, Correljé A, Cuppen E, Pesch U, Taebi B (2015) Contested technologies and design for values: the case of shale gas. Sci Eng Ethics 1–21. doi:10.1007/s11948-015-9685-6
Polk M (2015) Transdisciplinary co-production: designing and testing a transdisciplinary research framework for societal problem solving. Futures 65:110–122
Article
Google Scholar
Nikolova B (2014) The rise and promise of participatory foresight. Eur J Futures Res 15:33. doi:10.1007/s40309-013-0033-2
Article
Google Scholar
Popp R (2013) Participatory futures research. Research or practice consulting? Eur J Futures Res 1:16. DOI 10.1007/s40309-013-0016-3
List D (2006) Action research cycles for multiple futures perspectives. Futures 38:673–684
Article
Google Scholar
Irwin A (2001) Constructing the scientific citizen: science and democracy in the biosciences. Public Underst Sci 10:1–18
Article
Google Scholar
Eames M, Egmose J (2011) Community foresight for urban sustainability: insights from the citizens science for sustainability (SuScit) project. Technol Forecast Soc Chang 78:769–784
Article
Google Scholar
Gudowsky N, Peissl W, Sotoudeh M, Bechtold U (2012) Forward-looking activities: incorporating citizens´ visions. Poiesis Prax 9:101–123. doi:10.1007/s10202-012-0121-6
Article
Google Scholar
Guillo M (2013) Futures, communication and social innovation: using participatory foresight and social media platforms as tools for evaluating images of the future among young people. Eur J Futures Res 1:17
Article
Google Scholar
Cabrera Trujillo YL (2014) Visioneering and the role of active engagement and assessment. NanoEthics 8(2):201–206. doi:10.1007/s11569-014-0199-5
Article
Google Scholar
Heidingsfelder M, Kimpel K, Best K, Schraudner M (2015) Shaping future — adapting design know-how to reorient innovation towards public preferences. Technol Forecast Soc Chang 101:291–298. doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2015.03.009
Article
Google Scholar
Levitas R (2013) Utopia as method: the imaginary reconstitution of society. Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke
Book
Google Scholar
Nicolescu B (2014) Methodology of transdisciplinarity. World Futures 70:186–199. doi:10.1080/02604027.2014.934631
Article
Google Scholar
Funtowicz SO, Ravetz JR (1993) Science for the post-normal age. Futures 25:739–755
Article
Google Scholar
Gibbons M, Limoges C, Nowotny H, Schwartzman S, Scott P, Trow M (1994) The new production of knowledge: the dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies. Sage, London
Google Scholar
McGregor SLT, Donnelly G (2014) Transleadership for transdisciplinary initiatives. World Futures 70:164–185. doi:10.1080/02604027.2014.934625
Article
Google Scholar
Fiorino DJ (1990) Citizen participation and environmental risk: a survey of institutional mechanisms. Sci Technol Hum Values 15:226–243
Article
Google Scholar
Rowe G, Frewer LJ (2005) A typology of public engagement mechanisms. Sci Technol Hum Values 30:251–290
Article
Google Scholar
Abels G (2007) Citizen involvement in public policy-making: does it improve democratic legitimacy and accountability? The case of PTA. Interdiscip Inf Sci 13:103–116
Google Scholar
Bobbio L (2010) Types of deliberation. J Public Deliberation 6:1, http://services.bepress.com/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1117&context=jpd
Google Scholar
Monaghan E (2012) Assessing participation and democracy in the EU: the case of the European citizens’ initiative. Perspect Eur Politics Soc 13:285–298
Article
Google Scholar
Boussaguet L (2016) Participatory mechanisms as symbolic policy instruments? Comp Eur Polit 1:107–124
Article
Google Scholar
Wiek A, Iwaniec D (2013) Quality criteria for visions and visioning in sustainability science. Sustain Sci 9:497–512
Article
Google Scholar
Saurugger S (2010) The social construction of the participatory turn: the emergence of a norm in the European Union. Eur J Polit Res 49:471–495
Article
Google Scholar
Rask M (2013) The tragedy of citizen deliberation – two cases of participatory technology assessment. Tech Anal Strat Manag 25:39–55. doi:10.1080/09537325.2012.751012
Article
Google Scholar
Lawrence RJ (2015) Advances in transdisciplinarity: epistemologies, methodologies and processes. Futures 65:1–9
Article
Google Scholar
Lang DJ, Wiek A, Bergmann M, Stauffacher M, Martens P, Moll P, Swilling M, Thomas CJ (2012) Transdisciplinary research in sustainability science: practice, principles, and challenges. Sustain Sci 7(Supplement 1):25–43. doi:10.1007/s11625-011-0149-x
Article
Google Scholar
Brandt P, Ernst A, Gralla F, Luederitz C, Lang DJ, Newig DJ, Reinert F, Abson DJ, von Wehrden H (2013) A review of transdisciplinary research in sustainability science. Ecol Econ 92:1–15. doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2013.04.008
Article
Google Scholar
Jasanoff S (2003) Technologies of humility: citizens participation in governing science. Minerva 41:223–244
Article
Google Scholar
Hennen L (2002) Impacts of participatory technology assessment on its social environment. In: Joss S, Bellucci S (eds) Participatory technology assessment—European perspectives. University of Westminster Press, London, pp 257–275
Google Scholar
Decker M, Ladikas M (2004) Bridges between science, society and policy. Technology assessment – methods and impacts. Springer, Berlin
Book
Google Scholar
Goodin R (2008) Innovating democracy. Democratic theory and practice after the deliberative turn. Oxford University Press, New York
Book
Google Scholar
Stilgoe LSJ, Wilsdon J (2014) Why should we promote public engagement with science? Public Underst Sci 23:4–15
Article
Google Scholar
Burgess MM (2014) From ‘trust us’ to participatory governance: deliberative publics and science policy. Public Underst Sci 23:48–52
Article
Google Scholar
Pausch M (2014) Democratization and elitism in the EU: two opposing trends (Guest-Editor’s introduction to the topical collection on “The Future of Europe”). Eur J Futures Res 2:56. doi:10.1007/s40309-014-0056-3
Article
Google Scholar
Grunwald A (2004) Participation as a means of enhancing the legitimacy of decisions on technology? A sceptical analysis. Poiesis Prax 3:106–122
Article
Google Scholar
Wynne B (2007) Public participation in science and technology: performing and obscuring a political–conceptual category mistake. East Asian Sci Technol Soc 1:99–110
Google Scholar
Irwin A, Jensen TE, Jones KE (2013) The good, the bad and the perfect: criticizing engagement practice. Soc Stud Sci 43:118–135
Article
Google Scholar
Bora A, Hausendorf H (2006) Participatory science governance revisited: normative expectations versus empirical evidence. Sci Public Policy 33:478–488. doi:10.3152/147154306781778740
Article
Google Scholar
Goodin RE, Dryzek JS (2006) Deliberative impacts: the macro-political uptake of mini-publics. Pol Soc 34:219–244. doi:10.1177/0032329206288152
Article
Google Scholar
Lengwiler M (2008) Participatory approaches in science and technology: historical origins and current practices in critical perspective. Sci Technol Hum Values 33:186–200. doi:10.1177/0162243907311262
Article
Google Scholar
Bogner A (2012) The paradox of participation experiments. Sci Technol Hum Values 37:506–527
Article
Google Scholar
Bagg S (2015) Can deliberation neutralise power? Eur J Polit Theor 1–23. doi:10.1177/1474885115610542
Krabbenborg L, Mulder HAJ (2015) Upstream public engagement in nanotechnology: constraints and opportunities. Sci Commun 37:452–484. doi:10.1177/1075547015588601
Article
Google Scholar
Wang X (2016) Revisiting upstream public engagement from a habermasian perspective. NanoEthics 10:63–74. doi:10.1007/s11569-015-0239-9
Article
Google Scholar
Chilvers J (2008) Deliberating competence-theoretical and practitioner perspectives on effective participatory appraisal practice. Sci Technol Hum Values 33:155–185. doi:10.1177/0162243907307594
Article
Google Scholar
Delgado A, Lein Kjølberg K, Wickson F (2010) Public engagement coming of age: from theory to practice in STS encounters with nanotechnology. Public Underst Sci 20:826–845
Article
Google Scholar
Bora A, Hausendorf H (2010) Democratic Transgressions of Law: Governing Technology Through Public Participation. Leiden & Boston: Brill 2010, ISBN 978–9004180437.
Hagendijk R, Irwin A (2006) Public deliberation and governance: engaging with science and technology in contemporary Europe. Minerva 44:167–184. doi:10.1007/s11024-006-0012-x
Article
Google Scholar
Wilsdon J, Willis R (2004) See-through science: why public engagement needs to move upstream. Demos, London
Google Scholar
Pidgeon N, Rogers-Hayden T (2007) Opening up nanotechnology dialogue with the publics: risk communication or “upstream engagement”? Health Risk Soc 9:191–210
Article
Google Scholar
Escobar O (2014) Upstream public engagement, downstream policy-making? The Brain Imaging Dialogue as a community of inquiry. Sci Public Policy 41:480–492
Article
Google Scholar
Collingridge D (1980) The social control of technology. London
Engage 2020 Consortium (2015) Engage2020 – tools and instruments for a better societal engagement in “Horizon 2020”, Engaging Society in Horizon 2020. D3.2 Public Engagement Methods and Tools. http://engage2020.eu/media/D3-2-Public-Engagement-Methods-and-Tools-3.pdf. Accessed 10 Sept 2016
Könnöllä T, Haegeman K (2012) Embedding foresight in transnational research programming. Sci Public Policy 39:191–207. doi:10.1093/scipol/scs020
Article
Google Scholar
Haegeman K, Spiesberger M, Veselitskaya N, Sokolov A, Weiss G (2015) FTA supporting effective priority setting in multi-lateral research programme cooperation: The case of EU–Russia S&T cooperation. Technol Forecast Soc Chang 101:200–215
Article
Google Scholar
Levitas R (2007) Looking for the blue: the necessity of utopia. J Political Ideologies 12:289–306. doi:10.1080/13569310701622184
Article
Google Scholar
Eerola A, Miles I (2011) Methods and tools contributing to FTA: a knowledge-based perspective. Futures 43:265–278
Article
Google Scholar
CIVISTI (2008) Project website. www.civisti.org. Accessed 9 June 2016
Gudowsky N, Bechtold U, Capari L, Sotoudeh M (2015b) Participatory foresight. Experiences with a qualitative demand-side approach. In: Scherz C, Michalek T, Hennen L, Hebáková L, Hahn J (eds) The next horizon of technology assessment. Proceedings from the PACITA 2015 Conference in Berlin. Technology Centre ASCR, Prague, pp 139–143, p. 426 (Ref.)
Gudowsky N, Sotoudeh M (2015) Citizens’ Visions on Active Assisted Living. In: Hayn D, Schreier G, Ammenwerth E, Hörbst A (eds) eHealth2015 – Health Informatics Meets eHealth. Studies in Health Technology and Informatics 212, Amsterdam: IOS, pp 43 – 49. doi 10.3233/978-1-61499-524-1-43Gudowsky N, Sotoudeh M (2016) Transdisciplinary Foresight – Co-Creating Research Agendas Using Multi-Actor Engagement. European Foresight Platform (ed) EFP Brief No. 262. http://www.foresight-platform.eu/brief/efp-brief-no-262-transdisciplinary-foresight-co-creating-research-agendas-using-multi-actor-engagement/
CASI (2016) CASI – Public Participation in Developing a Common Framework for Assessment and Management of Sustainable Innovation. www.casi2020.eu. Accessed 30 June 2016
Jørgensen ML, Schøning S (2016) CIMULACT Deliverable 1.3 – Vision Catalogue- Encompassing the visions from all 30 countries. http://www.cimulact.eu/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/D1.3final.pdf. Accessed 18 Oct 2016
CIMULACT (2016b) Poster of the 29 extracted European citizens’ needs. http://www.cimulact.eu/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Cimulact_ALL_POSTER_SOCIAL_NEEDS_reduced.pdf. Accessed 30 June 2016
European Commission (2016) ICT innovation in horizon 2020 https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/ict-innovation-horizon-2020
CIMULACT (2016c) National reports on citizens vision workshops. http://www.cimulact.eu/national-reports-on-the-citizen-vision-workshops/. Accessed 30 June 2016
Emery SB, Mulder HAJ, Frewer LJ (2015) Maximizing the policy impacts of public engagement: a European study. Sci Technol Hum Values 40:421–444. doi:10.1177/0162243914550319
Article
Google Scholar