CC BY
24/ Cpi6raK Нат^я Микола1вна; Одеська державна академш будiвництва та архггектури. - О., 2009. -23 с.
9. Тимошенко С.П. Теория упругости. -М.:ОНТИ, 1934. - 451с.
10. Яременко О.Ф. Несуча здатнють та дефор-матившсть з^зобетонних стержневих елементiв в складному напруженому станi / О.Ф.Яременко, Ю.О. Школа. - Одеса: ОДАБА, 2010. - 136с.
FORESIGHT METHODS IN THE NATIONAL PROJECTS
Bigazina A.
ABSTRACT
Foresight is a methodology for creating medium and long-term visions of the technological, economic and social development of a country. Foresight of the future includes many methods by which it can be implemented. Foresight projects use combinations of methods to achieve the greatest success. The presented methods and their interaction with each other within the framework of foresight projects of the state level confirm the above statement. This article will discuss the national foresight projects and the methods by which they were carried out.
Keywords: Foresight, Delphi Method, Scenarios, Method of critical technologies, Expert Panels.
Introduction
Foresight literally translates as "foreseeing the future." The original foresight was used by RAND Corporation in the 1950s. Foresight was carried out using the Delphi method to predict possible technological development. With the development of Foresight, it has become necessary for the state, for the regions / regions, for various industries and for large corporations. This article will discuss the national foresight projects and the methods by which they were carried out. The basis of this article was the work of A.V. Sokolov "Foresight: Look into the future. " According to this article: "the use of only one method during the work cannot give the most reliable result". The table in the "Results" section shows the methods used in national foresight projects. The data presented in the table were collected analytically, based on other scientific works. During the study of this topic, the collection and analysis of information, as well as in the process of writing this work, I would like to note that the author agrees with the conclusion of A.V. Sokolov.
Table 1 presents the classification of the foresight methods [2] :
Foresight methods
One of the most cited definitions of foresight is the definition of Ben Martin in 1995:
Foresight is a "process involving a systematic desire to look into the long-term future of science, technology, economics and society in order to identify areas of strategic research and new generic technologies that can bring the greatest economic and social benefits" [1].
Foresight can be implemented by different methods: qualitative, quantitative or mixed.
Qualitative - methods that allow to conceptualize and evaluate events from the point of view of subjective perception;
Quantitative - methods, allowing to measure variables and apply statistical analysis;
Mixed - methods that allow the use of quantitative measurements of subjective opinions, logical constructions and points of view of experts and commentators [2]:
Table 1
Classification of methods
Qualitative Quantitative Mixed
Brainstorm Civil panels Conferences / seminars Expert panels Forecast genius Interview Literature analysis Target trees / logic circuits Simulation games Scenarios / Scenario Seminars Science fiction Surveys Weak signals / jokers SWOT analysis Benchmarking Bibliometry Indicators / time series analysis Modeling Patent analysis Extrapolation of trends / impact analysis Cross Link Analysis / Structural Analysis Delphi Critical Technologies Multi-criteria analysis Poll / vote Quantitative Scenarios Road maps Stakeholder Analysis
Factors such as time and resource constraints, access to information resources, availability / unavailability of certain experts affect the choice of methods.
However, the most significant success factor is the human factor, that is, the effective work of the involved experts. Successful foresight projects are based on integrated approaches.
The basic principle of the formation of an integrated approach is reflected in the foresight diamond (see Fig. 1). At the tops are the key factors that ensure the success of working with experts: creativity, extraction of expert knowledge, interaction and evidence. The arrangement of the foresight methods inside the rhombus corresponds to their attraction to a particular corner, that is, it carries elements of one of the four aspects of expert methods. An important principle of choosing a method for a particular Foresight project is the presence of all of these aspects in a single project, while the sequence of using methods may be different [3].
The use of certain methods has its strengths and weaknesses. Brainstorming promotes creativity, but does not mean effective interaction. Expert seminars provide expert interaction, but do not lead to the identification of important aspects that reflect the prospects for the development of technological areas. The idea of a Foresight diamond is to ensure the interaction of combinations of methods, which will lead to the successful implementation of the four vertices of the rhombus [4].
Fig 1. Foresight Diamond
Regarding the scope of the foresight, it is worth noting that the foresight projects are implemented on a supranational (several countries involved), national, industry (science, technology, education, politics, etc.), regional and corporate levels. The topic of Foresight projects may also vary: from the initially considered scientific and technological to the sectoral one: educational, social, environmental, etc.
Results and discussion.
Questions to be discussed below:
1. What are national foresight projects and their distinctive features? The main goal of national projects, customers, time horizon, the result.
2. What methods were used as a basis for projects? Enumeration of methods, their brief description, differences, in which projects were applied.
3. Interaction of methods. The answer to this question will be presented in the form of table 2. The table is the final result of the conducted analytical work.
As mentioned above, the project is implemented successfully if it includes several different methods. The main task set in this paper is to determine whether A.V.Sokolov is right in his statement or not. For this,
data were taken from various sources, processed and the results are presented in this article.
Question №1.
National Foresight projects are projects carried out at the state level, the main purpose of which is to determine the most likely socio-economic and technological development trends of the state for the next 5-30 years. In addition, the result of the project is an agreement reached between the state, business and societies on the strategic directions of development of the state [4]. If we talk about national projects, all of them pursue one goal: the determination of priorities and development opportunities for the whole country. With regard to the customer and the time horizon of projects, it is also possible to note the relative uniformity.
Question №2.
The term "critical technologies" was first used in the USA in the 20th century and was originally called critical materials. Critical materials were a five-year supply of strategically important materials necessary for the armed forces, i.e. were a safety net in the event of a military conflict. Critical technologies are a methodology for identifying the priorities of a country / region / industry in the medium term from 3 to 10 years [11]. The result of this methodology is the lists of technologies or areas of research and development that require priority attention. The lists are based on the knowledge of experts with the highest qualifications in relevant areas. Compared to the Delphi method, critical technologies are distinguished by a particular selectivity of experts. Critical technologies are closely related to Foresight's methods such as expert surveys and expert panels. Attention should be paid to the "benchmarking", which is necessary to determine the overall level of technology development in relation to what has been achieved by a country. The essence of benchmarking is the process of defining the highest standards of excellence for products/services/processes, and then making the improvements necessary to achieve these standards. In case of foresight projects it helps to develop strategies to overcome the technological gap and identify technology areas with great innovative potential that are appropriate to further development in a given country (region).
The difference between the other methods listed in the table is the long-term perspective of the Foresight projects. The Delphi method is based on a survey of a large number (several thousand) of experts. The result of projects based on Delphi is feedback from experts, that is, suggestions and recommendations for the development of education, science, technology, politics, etc. In Japan, "Technological Foresight" is systematic and is held every 5 years [4]. Basically, the Delphi method interacts with expert panels, but other methods are used as auxiliary, for example: scenarios, needs analysis.
Expert panels are a method of collective expertise obtained through regular discussion of problems within the framework of a permanently working group of high-level specialists (12-20) people [3]. Expert groups can both be given the freedom to choose the methods with which to interact, and the list of methods can be lowered from the top (e.g. ministry of education). Ex-
pert groups can interact with various methods [10]. Expert panels were used in the Swedish Foresight, as well as in the third British Foresight. In these foresight expert panels acted as the main method and, accordingly, all the activity was built around them.
Scenarios are based on future analysis of opportunities and alternative development paths [3].
The first national project using scenarios is called Futur, Germany. It is a response to criticism, claiming that German foresight projects are guided only by the opinion of the "experts" and do not take into account the opinion of the public and interested persons. It was the first foresight in Germany, which considered socio-
political problems and the field of education (besides technological issues) [8]. The scenarios were also used as the basis for the second British foresight. Scenarios can interact with many methods. Often, a SWOT analysis can be used with scenarios to identify strengths and weaknesses [12].
Question №3.
Table 2 presents the most frequently used methods for foresight projects at the national level, lists the countries and projects in which they were used, which methods were used in addition to the main one, and the results [3,4,10, 11, 12].
Table 2.
Interaction of foresight methods in national project
Method Information Countries, Project, Year Customer and time horizon What methods does it interact with? Results
Critical Technologies Lists of technologies or research and development areas that require priority attention. Formed on the basis of knowledge of experts with the highest qualifications in relevant areas. USA «National Critical Technologies», 1995 Office of Science and Technology, 5-10 years Panels, focus groups, benchmarking List of critical technologies
USA "New Forces in Action", 1998 Office of Science and Technology, 5-10 years Corporate executive surveys List of critical technologies
France "Critical Technologies 2005", 2000 Ministry of Economics , 5-10 years Expert groups, Expert surveys List of critical technologies
Czech Republic "Proposals for a National Research Pro-gram",2002 Ministry of Education and Science, 10 years Panels, focus groups, benchmarking Suggestions for a national research program
Russia ,2005 Ministry of Education and Science, 10 years Expert groups, Expert surveys List of critical technologies
Delphi Based on a survey of a large number of experts Japan, "Technological Foresight", since 1971 every 5 years Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology, 30 years Expert models Reports, recommendations on the development of thematic areas and on science policy
UK, "Partnership for Progress", 1995 Office of Science and Technology, 10-20 years Recommendations on science and technology policy
South Korea, 2003 Ministry of Science and Technology, 25 years Needs analysis, scenarios, benchmarking Reports, scenarios, proposals for the scientific and technical plan
Expert Panels It is based on a regular discussion by a group of high-level specialists (12-20) Sweden, "Swedish technological foresight", 1999, 2004 The government, 10-20 years Directional reports
Great Britain, "Foresight Program", 3rd round, since 2002 Office of Science and Technology, several Ministries, 10-20 years Expert groups, scenarios, technology scanning Innovative Development Suggestions
Scenarios Based on future analysis of opportunities and alternative development paths. Germany, "Futur", 1999 Ministry of Science and Technol-og^ 20 years Workshops, online discussions, surveys, panels Strategic development directions, priorities for research programs
Great Britain, "Foresight Program", 2nd round, 19992002 Office of Science and Technology, several Ministries, 10-20 years Panels, seminars, open discussions, Internet platform Suggestions for supporting a national innovation system
Conclusion
Thus, the methods used in national Foresight projects were considered in this article. The main goal of all national foresight projects is to determine the long-term development prospects of the country. Projects have a long-term perspective. The initiators of the projects are the states themselves, and the customers for such initiatives are mostly the ministries.
To implement the project at the proper level, the interaction of various methods is necessary. An integrated approach to the choice of tools to achieve the goal is the basis of any national foresight project. Confirmation of this statement is in the last section of the article.
References
1. Martin BR (1995) Foresight in science and technology. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management
2. Beata Poteralska & Anna Sacio-Szymanska, Evaluation of technology foresight projects
3. А.В.Соколов Форсайт:Взгляд в будущее
4. А.В.Соколов Методология Форсайта и выбор приоритетов инновационного развития, стр.6781
5. T. J. Gordon, J. C. Glenn, Integration, Comparisons, and Frontier of Futures Research Methods, NEW TECHNOLOGY FORESIGHT, FORECASTING & ASSESSMENT METHODS-Seville
6. NISTEP. The 8th science and technology Foresight survey - Delphi analysis. National Institute of Science and Technology Policy/ Tokyo, 2005
7. Meissner P, Wulf T (2013) Cognitive benefits of scenario planning: Its impact on biases and decision quality. Technol Forecast Soc Chang 80:801-814.
8. Volker Gientz, Michael Hausick, Andre-Marcel Schmidt, Scenario development without probabilities -focusing on the most important scenario
9. Gordon, Theodore, and Greenspan, David, (1988);"Chaos and Fractals: New Tools For Technological and Social Forecasting," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 34, 1-25
10. Калюжнова Н.Я., СУЩНОСТЬ, СОДЕРЖАНИЕ И МЕТОДОЛОГИЯ ФОРСАЙТА
11. А.В.Соколов, Метод критических технологий
12. А.В.Соколов, О.Карасев Форсайт и технологические дорожные карты для наноиндустрии
13. R.Hackathorn, J.Karimi, A framework for comparing information engineering framework, MIS Quartely, June 1998
14. S.Drus, Siti Salbiah Mohamed Shariff, Analysis of Knowledge Audit Models via Life Cycle Approach
О НЕКОТОРЫХ ИЗМЕНЕНИЯХ ФИЛЬТРАЦИОННЫХ СОПРОТИВЛЕНИЙ ПЛАСТА ПРИ ВНУТРИПЛАСТОВОМ ГОРЕНИИ В КОМБИНАЦИИ С ПЕННЫМИ СИСТЕМАМИ
Богопольский В. О.
кандидат технических наук, доцент кафедры «Нефтегазовая инженерия», Азербайджанский Государственный университет нефти и промышленности, г.Баку, Азербайджан
ABOUT SOME CHANGES IN FILTERING RESISTANCE OF THE FORM IN INTRA PLASTIC COMBUSTION IN COMBINATION WITH FOAMY SYSTEMS
Bogopolskiy V.O.
Candidate of Engineering Sciences, Associate Professor at the Department of Oil and Gas Engineering in Azerbaijan State Oil and Industry University,
Baku, Azerbaijan
АННОТАЦИЯ
В данной статье рассмотрены вопросы эффективности вытеснения нефти при разработке месторождений высоковязкой нефти с использованием пенных систем в комбинации с внутрипластовом горением для увеличения охвата пласта.
Задача поиска методов повышения коэффициента вытеснения, изоляция каналов прорыва нагнетаемого реагента является весьма актуальной. Показано, что применение пенных систем в слоисто-неодно-
