Technological Forecasting最新文献

Patterns, indicators, and forecasts of international environments and behavior are of interest to policymakers as they try to link national goals and policy alternatives and to scholars as they try to develop a “meteorology” of international relations. A problem exists, however, in delineating trend patterns so that precise and reliable forecasts can be made. This is a methodological problem arising from the nature of our data on nations and the many variables that need be analyzed.

Research is proposed on three-mode factor analysis as a possible solution to this problem. Suggested is 1) an analysis of 1962–1968 dyadic conflict (U.S.S.R. -U.S., China—U.S.S.R., etc.) by month and comparison with alternative methods, 2) an analysis of 1962–1965 dyadic conflict behavior and a test of our ability to forecast to 1968 conflict by month from the results, and 3) a series of artificial experiments on contrived data with known patterns and trends. This research should better enable us to judge how well three-mode factor analysis contributes to clarifying patterns, indicators, and forecasts of international environments and behavior.

Comparison of the still evolving approaches to “exploratory” and “normative” technological forecasting yields marked contrasts. In particular the simple schemes used by those trying to predict the technology of the future look pallid when matched against the intricate techniques designed by those who are allocating the resources that will create the future. Exploratory technological forecasts are largely based either on aggregates of “genius” forecasts (e.g., the Delphi technique) or on the use of leading indicators and other simple trend-line approaches. The practitioners of economic forecasting, in contrast, long ago recognized the need for multivariate systems analysis and cause-effect models to develop reliable predictions.

So-called “normative” forecasting is at the opposite extreme on the sophistication scale, fully utilizing Bayesian statistics, linear and dynamic programming, and other operations research tools. Here, despite the uniqueness, uncertainty, and lack of uniformity of research and development activities, the typical designer of a normative technique has proposed a single-format wholly quantitative method for resource allocation. Along the dimensions of unjustified standardization and needless complexity, for example, the proposed R & D allocation methods far exceed the general cost-effectiveness approach used by the Department of Defense in its program and system reviews.

For both exploratory and normative purposes, dynamic models of broad technological areas seem worthy of further pursuit. In attempting to develop “pure predictions” the explicit recognition of causal mechanisms offered by this modeling approach seems highly desirable. This feature also has normative utility, provided that the dynamic models are limited in their application to the level of aggregate technological resource allocation and are not carried down to the level of detailed R & D project funding.

During 1968 the Navy prepared and published its first technological forecast. The Navy effort involved sixteen major Laboratory/Centers and eight Systems Commands. The forecasts range from functional technologies to systems options and the overall effort is comprised of approximately five hundred individual forecasts. It was implemented, prepared, and published in seven months and it is estimated the overall forecasting task cost approximately $1.9 million. The implementation of such a task, requiring the efforts of a large number of activities in a relatively new field over a short period of time represented a challenge to all involved. We would like to share with you the experiences gained in this task—producing the first Navy Technological Forecast (NTF).

We should start by acknowledging the assistance gained from those who formally prepared forecasts some time ago, notably the Air Force and Army. Although the Navy waited until 1968 to prepare a Navy-wide forecast, several years were spent studying other forecasts for the considerations of methodology, structures, and overall approaches. The end result of this study is contained in A Proposal for a Navy Technological Forecast, Part II—Backup Report¹ which has, and still does, serve as the bible for the NTF as well as a good introduction to the subject of technological forecasting.