How Good Can It Get? FTA, Governance and Stakeholder Image Construction Stefanie Jenssen Centre for Technology, Innovation and Culture (TIK), University of Oslo, Norway Third International Seville Conference on Future-Oriented Technology Analysis (FTA): Impacts and implications for policy and decision-making 16th- 17th October 2008

How Good Can It Get? FTA Credibility Dependent on extending participation to social stakeholders ‘Inclusive Foresight’ (Loveridge and Street, 2005) How are these inclusion processes legitimised? Governance Administrative and process-oriented elements of governing Communicative Municipal Planning with social stakeholders Municipal Visioning ‘Vague in Practise’ (Shipley, 2004) Stakeholder Image Construction Stakeholders can be affected by and/or affect an organisation/process Image: seemingly inherent characteristics such as socio-economic or cognitive Construction: Create an image of stakeholders to legitimise choices How did the image construction of young people as stakeholders influence the results of the vision project?

FTA, Governance and Stakeholder Image Construction Lundal Possibility space Future picture Mayor: ”Our young people are the future, therefore they should be listened to.” Shared picture of the possible and desired future of Lundal in 2020 Vision to be embedded in long-term social plan Invited 20 secondary schools and colleges to contribute with basic ideas Illustration used by vision project leader to define the desired result of vision project, presentation March 2006 Young People as Stakeholders and Participants

FTA, Governance and Stakeholder Image Construction Why the young people? Socio-economic stakeholder construction Illustration by German cartoonist Rainer Ehrt used by the vision project leader to underline the lack of capitalist interests in young people’s ideas about the future. Power point presentation, March 2006 Lack of capitalist/spatial interests Lack intensity and aggression associated with the strongest driving forces in future decision making Precondition: No ideas about “physical projects”

FTA, Governance and Stakeholder Image Construction How should young people participate? Collection of ideas Writing four future pictures Discussion of pictures with other stakeholders Creating vision from future pictures to inform social long-term plan until 2020 Selection of pictures in political bodies Illustration used by project leader to explain process and legitimise participation of young people, Presentation, March 2006 Project leader: Ideas would be non-reflexive, essentially ”mirroring” their hopes and desires Future ideas needed to be structured and formed into narratives Needed further participation of other actors Everything too fantastic would be erased!

[FTA, Governance and Stakeholder Image Construction How was an image of young people constructed? AreasPre-definitions as stakeholders Pre-conditions for being participants IndividualYoung people are the future Imagine yourselves as grown-ups in 2020! SocialLiving their future lives in Lundal Concentrate on issues of well-being in society! EconomicNo capitalist interests No ideas about physical projects! PoliticalTheir future ideas are basically unstructured and non-reflexive Need narrative structure and other actors’ input – too fantastic ideas will be erased!

FTA, Governance and Stakeholder Image Construction Result and Outcome of Vision project Nine out of 20 secondary schools and colleges participated Reported outcome of about 300 ideas Several topics were repeated, such as improved health care, child welfare, care for the elderly Future pictures presented as if entirely created by the young people Politicians refused to discuss future pictures close to communal elections Vision was not included in the long-term plan Leadership suggested young people should use vision for their own work in Young People’s Community Council (YPCC) Less political impact than a vision for the whole municipality

How Good Can It Get? Implications for Foresight and Governance Case of Lundal Young people as stakeholders and participants in visioning project Not only a constructed image about how young people are, but also how their ideas are supposed to be and not to be Questions about authenticity and reflexivity A mirroring of existing political party programs or genuine contributions? What makes contributions authentic? But how can this be different? Visioning: a shared picture of the desired future – if it is too far away from the municipality’s idea of the future, they cannot share it. Does this problem apply to other FTA contexts? Stakeholder Image Construction in FTA: practical reality or political strategy? Thank you!