Learning ahead of time: how evaluation of foresight may add to increased trust,organizational learning and future oriented policy and strategy

Evaluation of futures research (foresight) consists of three elements: quality, success, and impact of a study. Futures research ought to be methodologically and professionally sound, should to a certain extent be accurate, and should have a degree of impact on strategic decision making and policy-making. However, in the case of futures studies, the one does not automatically lead to the other. Quality of method does not ensure success, just as quality and success do not guarantee impact. This article explores the new paths for understanding evaluating of futures studies that are provided by the various articles in this special issue and sets out an agenda for next steps with regard to evaluation of futures research. The more structural and systematic evaluation can result in an increased level of trust in futures research, which may in turn lead to more future oriented strategy, policy and decision making. Therefore, evaluation should be seen as more than a burden of accountability – albeit important as accountability is – but as an investment in the credibility and impact of the profession. It may set in motion a cycle of mutual learning that will not only improve the capacity of futures-researchers but will also enhance the capacity and likeliness of decision-makers to apply insight from futures research.     

The Heterogeneity of Self-Employment: The Example of Asians in the United States

Self-employment rates differ widely across industries and across racial and ethnic categories. The heterogeneity of self-employment is most pronounced among Asians working in the U.S. The self-employment rate of Koreans is almost eight times greater than the self-employment rate of Laotians. This paper examines the pattern of self-employment across more narrowly defined classifications of Asians and industries to illustrate the heterogeneity of self-employment, and discusses the implications of this heterogeneity.     

Forecasting Prices at the Dutch Flower Auctions

Prices at the Dutch flower auctions are extremely volatile. Price changes of +/-20 per cent one week to the next represents a normal event, and +/-50 per cent is not uncommon. Since production planning in the flower business offers a complicated variation over the Newsboy Problem, good price forecasts would improve decision making on space allocation; what species to plant; the timing of harvesting, etc. This paper analyses weekly prices for three major species, i.e., roses, chrysanthemums and carnations, 1993–1996. We find that there are strong calendar regularities particularly for roses and chrysanthemums. Establishing a model in which we combine information on seasonal regularities and autoregressive price patterns, we manage to explain a substantial part of the short-term price variability for all three species. The model is tested in an out-of-sample dynamic forecasting experiment during the first 35 weeks of 1997.     

Adapting to survive: The case of Danish employers' organisations

Scholars often characterise Danish employers' organisations (EOs) as relatively stable, with a continuing role in the coordination of industrial relations and corporatist policymaking. This article shows that, beneath surface stability, Danish EOs have significantly adapted structurally and functionally to survive environmental pressures. However, rather than converging onto a liberal market trajectory, we find that Danish EOs have layered new functions onto traditional collective functions. We also find significant variations in functional adaptation depending on the employer constituencies' exposure to international competition and position in value chains. We argue that these adaptations imply that the provision of collective goods, especially in collective bargaining, is no longer sufficient for the survival of EOs.     

Differences in technology transfer between science-based and development-based industries: Transfer mechanisms and barriers

Although several studies in the wide body of literature on technology transfer have hinted at differences across industries, this still remains an understudied issue. Our study addresses this topic and considers to what degree technology transfer processes differ across different industrial sectors. To that end, we study to what extent technology transfer processes differ along both types of transfer mechanisms and key barriers inhibiting the transfer process. Based on a survey of Dutch practitioners on both sides of the transfer process, we test a number of hypotheses that differentiates between science-based regimes and development-based regimes. While our findings confirm our hypotheses concerning differences between the regimes regarding the use of specific transfer mechanisms, we also find that both regimes share a number of mechanisms that are similar. In addition, our findings show a remarkable degree of similarity among barriers inhibiting the process. We discuss these findings within the context of the broader literature and formulate policy implications.     

Integrating futures studies with organizational development: Design options for the scenario project ‘RWS2020’

Most futures studies are not used by managers and strategists and do not influence the direction of organizational development. Although the contribution of future studies to management is in theory all but self-evident, the practice in organizations is that futures knowledge is hardly used, or at most, is used selectively and strategically (‘politically’). This article acknowledges that gap and claims that it is a fundamental divide between to very different domains. However, out of that re-conceptualization of the relation between futures studies and management, a new direction for an integrated praxis arises. In an empirical case study, we show that by means of an intelligent process-design and professional balancing of several key-dilemmas, futures studies can be connected to management processes and organizational development. The future can be brought back into the everyday practice of management. However, in order to do so, the futures field needs to set aside some of its methodological claims and move towards the field of strategic management. Not because futurists need to abandon their specific knowledge and expertise, but to make the most of it.     

Collective Bargaining Coverage under Trade Unionism: A Sociological Investigation

Does high union density lead to high collective bargaining coverage? Since collective bargaining is seen as the raison d'être of trade unions, this is often assumed to be the case; some observers think that union density is ‘a floor’ below which collective bargaining coverage is unlikely to fall. With its very high union density, Denmark is a case in point. This article investigates the collective bargaining coverage issue in the Danish case, based on an individual-level employee survey with 1720 respondents. Collective bargaining coverage is shown to be much lower than union density, and some methodological issues in this connection are considered. In order to find some possible explanations for this surprising finding, the question of variance of collective bargaining coverage between groups of employees is discussed in the light of theories of service society and recent research results and theories. The impact of central variables is investigated through multivariate analysis, and it turns out that by far the most important variable predicting an employee's collective bargaining coverage is a variable mostly neglected in comparative analyses: occupational status. Salaried employees have a much lower collective bargaining coverage than manual workers in Denmark, and some possible reasons for this are given.     

Social Risk Management: A New Conceptual Framework for Social Protection, and Beyond

This paper proposes a new definition and conceptual framework for Social Protection grounded in Social Risk Management. The concept repositions the traditional areas of Social Protection (labor market intervention, social insurance and social safety nets) in a framework that includes three strategies to deal with risk (prevention, mitigation and coping), three levels of formality of risk management (informal, market-based, public) and many actors (individuals, households, communities, NGOs, governments at various levels and international organizations) against the background of asymmetric information and different types of risk. This expanded view of Social Protection emphasizes the double role of risk management instruments—protecting basic livelihood as well as promoting risk taking. It focuses specifically on the poor since they are the most vulnerable to risk and typically lack appropriate risk management instruments, which constrains them from engaging in riskier but also higher return activities and hence gradually moving out of chronic poverty.     

Phases and dynamics in the development of EU industrial relations regulation

In this article the authors discuss whether it is possible to identify the existence of a European IR-system. They try to identify important phases and dynamics in the emergence of what is termed the European IR-model. It is argued that traditional IR-theory should be combined with theories which allow more extensive consideration of politological and institutional phenomena when analysing IR developments at pan-European level.     

Self-reinforcing Agglomerations? An Empirical Industry Study

We test for the existence of endogenous agglomeration forces, using structural econometric models. After showing generally how to establish the existence of agglomeration forces empirically, we undertake an industry study of the maritime industry in Norway. The results suggest that there are significant economies of scale in the maritime industry. These economies of scale are mainly found in sub-groups of a set of nine maritime industries. This indicates that the maritime industry consists of two self-reinforcing agglomerations, but that there are few mechanisms actually keeping the two together.
JEL classification: C 33; D 24; O 47; R 11; R 12