Implications of two new paradigms for futures studies |
| |
| Authors: | Eva Hideg |
| |
| Institution: | 1. Foresighted Leadership Group, LLC, 16107 Kensington Dr. #313, Sugar Land, TX 77479, United States;2. Foresight Alliance, 1424 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20002, United States;3. North Texas Foresight Institute, 2015 Briarcliff Rd, Lewisville, TX 75067, United States;1. Tamkang University, University of the Sunshine Coast, Melbourne Business School. Metafuture.org, Futures Studies, 29 Meta Street, Mooloolaba, QLD 4557, Australia;2. Finland Futures Research Centre, Turku School of Economics, FI-20014 University of Turku, Finland;3. Associate professor, University of Novi Sad, Dr Zorana Djindjica 2, 21000 Novi Sad, Serbia;1. PeakFutures, Center for Professional Development, Virginia Beach, VA, USA;2. Friedrich-Alexander-University (FAU) Erlangen-Nuremberg, Lange Gasse 20, 90403 Nuremberg, Germany;1. The National School of Political Science and Public Administration, Romania;2. Institutul de Prospectiva, Romania;3. School of Business and Administration, University of Bucharest, Romania;4. Politehnica University, Bucharest, Romania |
| |
| Abstract: | The paper considers the emergence of two recent perspectives in futures work. One is evolutionary futures studies. The other is critical futures studies. After describing aspects of each, the paper considers them as alternative rival paradigms in relation to criteria that include: the role of the human being as subject, the role of interpretation and differences in methodological premises. It concludes that both have contributed to the development of futures methods but that a number of theoretical and methodological problems still remain unsolved. |
| |
| Keywords: | |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
