A1 Vertaisarvioitu alkuperäisartikkeli tieteellisessä lehdessä
From technocracy to participation? Positivist, realist and pragmatist paradigms applied to traffic and environmental policy futures research in Finland
Tekijät: Tapio Petri
Kustantaja: Elsevier (Commercial Publisher)
Julkaisuvuosi: 1996
Journal: Futures
Tietokannassa oleva lehden nimi: FUTURES
Lehden akronyymi: FUTURES
Vuosikerta: 28
Numero: 5
Aloitussivu: 453
Lopetussivu: 470
Sivujen määrä: 18
ISSN: 0016-3287
eISSN: 1873-6378
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0016-3287(96)00019-5
Tiivistelmä
This article continues the discussion of futures research categories. Nine questions are addressed concerning futures research methods, the use of the methods and the role of futures research in planning and decision-making processes from an environmental policy point of view. On the basis of the nine questions, three paradigms are outlined-positivism, realism and pragmatism. They form a gradient from technocracy to citizen participation. Three traffic futures research cases in Finland are analysed. The cases represent mostly the positivist paradigm although the method in case two has traces of realism and even pragmatism. Environmental problems are considered matters of uncertainty, not substantial arguments. It is concluded that the choice of a futures research method is less important than the use of the method. But of most crucial relevance is the role of futures research in the whole planning and decision-making process. Copyright (C) 1996 Elsevier Science Ltd
This article continues the discussion of futures research categories. Nine questions are addressed concerning futures research methods, the use of the methods and the role of futures research in planning and decision-making processes from an environmental policy point of view. On the basis of the nine questions, three paradigms are outlined-positivism, realism and pragmatism. They form a gradient from technocracy to citizen participation. Three traffic futures research cases in Finland are analysed. The cases represent mostly the positivist paradigm although the method in case two has traces of realism and even pragmatism. Environmental problems are considered matters of uncertainty, not substantial arguments. It is concluded that the choice of a futures research method is less important than the use of the method. But of most crucial relevance is the role of futures research in the whole planning and decision-making process. Copyright (C) 1996 Elsevier Science Ltd
Turun yliopiston Tutkimustietojärjestelmän portaali