The 4th International Seville Conference on
Future-Oriented Technology Analysis (FTA):
12 & 13 May 2011
FTA and Grand Societal Challenges:
Shaping and Driving Structural and Systemic Transformations
<Applying FTA for Nation Building in Post-War Sri Lanka >
Authors:
Type:
Geographic
Coverage:
Scope:
Applied Methods:
Evaluation:
Impacts:
Organiser:
Duration:
Keywords:
<Chaminda Hettiarachchi>
email address dilhanake@yahoo.com, ad@rcss.org
<national FTA exercise in a developing country context>
<Sri Lanka, South Asia >
<National Development in General , Education, Health and Energy and Infrastructure Sectors
<Simulation Models, Multi-Stake Holder Analysis, Game Theory, Scenario Analysis, Forecasting
<Pilot Testing done successfully
<Nation Building, Evidence Based Policy Making >
<Regional Centre for Strategic Studies ( RCSS), Associate Director. email ad@rcss.org >
<N/A>
<2011> Date of Brief:
Budget: <N/A>
Time Horizon:
1st April, 11
<Sri Lanka, Post-Conflict, Nation Building, Economic Development, Power Decentralization >
Purpose
<5 lines max.>
(The focus of this study is to apply relevant FTA to analyse the future orientation of the Sri Lanka for various possible outcomes and
use the results for possible policy options.)
-
Sri Lanka recently ended its three decades
long ethnic war. It is considered to be the
“first military victory by a nation state in 21 st
century against a home grown terrorism”.
-
Sri Lanka now is in a very optimistic mood
about its future. The country is trying to plan
its economic development by managing the
post war situation.
-
Sri Lanka as “a centre of excellence in Asia”
by transforming to a dynamic global hub in
five sectors: A maritime hub, an aviation
hub, a commercial hub, an energy hub and a
knowledge hub.
<Background & Context>
(NOTE: If you might use any graphs or tables, please make
sure that they still can be formatted; no jpeg or png files
please!)
What were the most important reasons for having launched
the FTA exercise?
Page 1 of 5
<Title>:
-
However, not everybody is sharing the same
views for a bright future. The ethnic
minorities perceive that the military victory
has delayed any political solution to their
grievances. The directly affected victims feel
that the government is not protecting even
their basic rights. The opposition parties
complain that the government is dragging
the country to an authoritarian regime by
violating
the
norms
of
multi-party
democracy misusing the high popularity the
government enjoys due to war victory.
Meantime the international community is
trying to probe the possible war crimes
against the government of Sri Lanka.
<example for sub heading>
< FTA Process >
What did the exercise deal with (i.e. focus)?
What did you want to achieve (i.e. objectives)?
How were the project team and the steering committee
identified and defined?
Who were the intended users of the exercise?
Which approach was employed (e.g. bottom-up, top-down,
product or process oriented, etc)?
Who selected the participants? How were these engaged
across different phases of the exercise?
What were the main aspects of managing the exercise that
should be highlighted with regards to time, participation, and
communication within the exercise and with external
stakeholders/clients?
What were the major methodologies used and how did they fit
together? Did you rely on previous experiences?
A pilot testing was done with the active participation
of following members (30 in number).
Postgraduate Students
University Lecturers
Corporate Managers
NGO employees
Government Employees
The team was allowed to carry out detailed discussions
and interaction of above topics and they were involved
in following excursuses.
Case Studies
Role Plays
Simulation Exercises
Page 2 of 5
<Title>:
Output & Impacts
In terms of output: Was there a success indicator?
Did the output meet your expectations (or that of other
participants/organizers/clients) and/or the objectives set?
What effect or impact did the exercise have, e.g. on the
client’s policy?
Who is the main addressee for the results of your FTA? How
were final results disseminated?
Did the findings of your FTA exercise result into any (policy)
options or recommendations?
Did they have an impact on the client’s future application of
FTA as a methodology?
Did they have an impact on the client’s or other actor’s
policies?
Did they have an impact on research options/policies?
Has the monitoring system proven an appropriate alternative
to modeling?
<Outcome & Evaluation>
Was the FTA designed to create recommendations to be
implemented?
In the long run: what do you consider the intended or
unintended results? And how can they be recognized?
If results have been implemented: What do you think were the
crucial variables that made the recommendations/results
prone for implementation?
What is your perception of the FTA exercise (process,
participants, methods, output etc.) from today’s perspective?
What would you say were the main lessons learned as well as
what worked best throughout the whole exercise?
What went well and where did you encounter obstacles?
Would you do anything different?
Were you or your partners involved in any kind of
implementation process?
Is it accepted in the “community”?
How do you measure the success of your FTA exercise?
Whom are your recommendations addressed to?
Have any of the measures been applied?
< The pilot testing was successful. They have done a
successful modeling of the future oriented policy issues, the
prioritization of the issues and the alternative actions as
policy recommendations.
The exercise was also successful as it facilitated the learning
of the process dynamic of the actor interaction, they
behavioral patterns and communicational strategies.
The participants well understand the FTA tools and their
applications
Suggested proposal and recommendations are policy
oriented
The testing was scalable and duplicatable.
>
What is the benefit that the participants/experts gained from
the FTA experience?
Did you get any feedback? Did you ask for it?
Did you take any measures to support the networking effect?
Are you aware of any citations/follow-up, second-hand use of
your results, papers etc.?
<From the exercise, it is clear that FTA can be applied in
grand scale under the controlled and well designed system. It
is clear that FTA tools are useful and effective in application.
They are very powerful in interaction, communication and
also decision making. However, attention should be made in
facilitation of the interaction process, selection of appropriate
tools, involvement of all relevant players and direct them for
shared outcomes.Several trails should be carried out for
consolidation of decisions and outcomes before presenting
them for policy making. >
Page 3 of 5
<Title>:
<Other Section if helpful …>
<more stuff>
<more stuff>
Page 4 of 5
<Title>:
<Sources and References>
A.Bilsel and Ö. Oral “Role of Education, Science
and Technology in Developing Countries” Eastern
Mediterranean University Gazimagusa, North Cyprus
Turkey 1995
Hettiarachchi, Chaminda (2006) “Future- Oriented
Technology Analysis (FTA) as an Enabler of
Federalism in Sri Lanka” Second International
Seville Seminar on Future-Oriented Technology
Analysis: Impact of FTA Approaches on Policy and
Decision-Making – SEVILLE 28-29 SEPTEMBER 2006
Georghiou, L. ( 2007) “Future of Foresighting for
Economic Development”, UNIDO Expert Group
Meeting on the Future of Technology Foresight held
in Vienna on 29-30 May 2007
(Links for further information, references used, etc.)
>
<
Page 5 of 5