We have now assessed the applications

Why Vinnova Framtidsprototyper finances for sustainability

With the furious speed of development taking place today, in technology, societal structures and behaviors, it is increasingly important to think proactively about the future. For the future, nothing just happens to us, we are involved in shaping it. And this is exactly what forward-thinking and strategic foresight gives us the tools to do - to think more strategically and long-term about what futures we want to start shaping today.

In the initiative Future Prototypes, we use the speculative design method. It is a method that evokes feelings about the future. By building prototypes; things that are visiting from the future, that can be experienced in contemporary environments, stimulate and even provoke emotions. Experiencing a glimpse of possible futures today can create positive or frightening feelings - feelings about can make the recipient act - by creating new, preferably radical, innovations - that contribute to a sustainable future.

The process of selecting prototypes that receive funding

The assessment process looked like this:

• From the original 99 sketches, we received 73 applications for support.
• We had a total of 130 external assessments + 162 internal ones. At least 4-5 readings / proposal. Evaluator had expert competencies from societal issues to cutting-edge expertise in foresight and speculative design.
• A list of the 20 highest-ranked applications was produced.
• Themes were compared to create a portfolio with varying issues.

Here are some reflections on content and quality.

At the innovation authority, we often finance project that aim to develop a specific solution - and put that solution into use - what we call an innovation. It can be technical solutions, methods or services. The common denominator for such innovation projects is that there is a pronounced problem (need) and someone calling for a solution (a need owner). In some sense, it is easy to evaluate such a proposal - one examines whether the description of the need is credible, whether a solution can have positive consequences, whether a solution can scale and spread. Innovation is to some extent the unknown, so there are always uncertainties and risks even if a description is clear and based on facts.

There are some differences in this effort on future prototypes. The investment in this step is not about solving future challenges - without at all better understanding and capturing the possible futures we face. It is a way to methodically create insights about how we can act and influence what is unknown. Evaluating applications for future prototypes is therefore different.

Here are some observations.

• The specific trumps the general. By that we mean that it is perceived as more engaging if you have a clear question in front of you, compared to an open and broad question.
• Election situations that are in conflict with each other often become more meaningful. When project proposals only have positive elements, there are no uncertainties or even risks - it is mostly a matter of realizing this dream.
• The surprising and unthought-out visions of the future trump the family images of the future, even if the latter might feel more realistic.

In the call for Future Prototypes, there were an incredible number of applications that would have deserved funding for the implementation - but which fell out of the competition in this call. We hope that they will be realized regardless of our decision to support more constructive dialogues about our future.