61st IFLA General Conference - Conference Proceedings - August 20-25, 1995
Futures Research Methodologies:
Linking Today’s Decisions With Tomorrow’s Possibilities
Darlene E. Weingand
Professor and Director, Continuing Education Services
School of Library and Information Studies
University of Wisconsin-Madison
Madison, Wisconsin, USA
The intent of this paper is to suggest that the use of futures research
methodologies can inform today’s decision-making. While not claiming
to be predictive, futures research can develop intelligent forecasts
concerning what is possible while indicating strategies for working
toward desired goals. In a time of accelerating change, these
methodologies can help library managers to cope successfully with
uncertainty and move confidently into tomorrow.
The future is an abstract concept through which human beings bring symbolic
order to the present and meaning to past endeavors. Speculative pondering
of what “might be” appears to be a key attribute of what it means to be human.
Human coping strategies are often centered on the organization of present
activities in the context of both past experiences and future goals. Yet, it
is not until the last part of the twentieth century that research in the academic
sense has been formalized, moving this intense interest in the future beyond the
role of the Delphic oracle or the religious prophet.
Today’s speculations on
the future have moved from the realm of fantasy or literary allusion into the
pragmatic world of societal and institutional need to explore tomorrow in order
to more fully understand the demands of today and the critical decisions that
must be made. It is no longer enough to wonder what the future might bring; it
is necessary to critically assess potential future scenarios and incorporate
well-considered forecasts into today’s planning.
The intent of this paper is to examine the evolution of futures research over time,
with special attention to its emergence as a serious research approach. Specific
methodologies are targeted which, while not an inclusive list of techniques, do
represent a variety of approaches. Finally, the benefits of incorporating futures
research into library long-range planning are explored in an attempt to provide an
additional managerial tool that will enabling libraries to more effectively serve
The path between the past and the future has historically been perceived as a linear
progression; in many cultures, the possibility of human intervention was not
acknowledged and the path was viewed as cyclical, recurrent, and pre-destined.
For example, the Greek and Middle Eastern prophetic traditions set the stage for
a vision of an unfolding future in which human actions became a significant factor
in social improvement. Individual ethical responsibility displaced magic as
dominant in the dynamic of change. 
Two key historical periods proved to be pivotal in the development of Western
futures tradition: the Renaissance and the Reformation. The Renaissance produced
the idea of scientific control over the environment through logic derived from
observation and measurement of natural processes [e.g., experimental evidence].
In the Reformation, the idea of redemptive moral and social progress was organized
in terms of materially evident grace and the deferment of more immediate
gratifications for long-term future gains. These shifts were most clearly
observable during the Enlightenment when rational speculation upon the future of
the human condition became the prime vocation of the eighteenth-century philosophers.
Utopian writers such as Mercier, Condorcet, Turgot, and others mark th e beginning
of “futures research.” 
The growth of industrial society produced a new generation of “futures”
prophets--such as Saint Simon, Fourier, Comte and Marx  --who
commented on both
social disruption and its potential for reordering society. However, although
the nineteen century can be described by a sense of material optimism regarding
the future, it also became the beginning of a process of disenchantment -- a
perception that society might be approaching the boundaries of human capacity
for change. The late nineteenth century and early twentieth century also heralded
the emergence of the utopian novel, notably in the work of Jules Verne and
H. G. Wells. 
An example of large-scale direct linkage of futures thinking to long-range planning
can be found in the Soviet Five and Ten Year Plans of the 1920s and 1930s. In
addition, between the world wars, several new names [e.g. Arthur C. Clarke,
Buckminster Fuller, et al] took center stage. Additional impetus occurred through
social shocks such as Auschwitz and Hiroshima. Concern with the future turned
quickly into an attitude of social imperative. The launching of Sputnik in 1957
sent futures thinking beyond the scope of this planet and a new reality was born.
The roots of the modern “futures movement” can be traced to Europe in the 1950s
where Bertrand de Jouvenel and Dennis Gabor emerged as early futurists.
De Jouvenel was a well-known writer in the fields of economics and political
science; his 1967 book The Art of Conjecture 
is regarded as a classic
in the field. In the 1960s, de Jouvenel gathered together an informal group of
scholars, known as “Futuribles,” which met occasionally and published
numerous articles on future political, social and economic developments.
Gabor received the Nobel prize for his invention of holography and first
examined the subject of the future in his 1963 book, Inventing the Future.
Some of Gabor’s early writings were intended as warning of possible catastrophes
that might occur unless timely intervention occurred. In the early 1970s, the
Club of Rome published Limits to Growth , which followed in this
line of reasoning.
What Is Futures Research? Who Does It?
The simplistic answer to this question might be: Research done by futures
researchers. However, such researchers do not fall into neat categories and,
indeed, the question is further complicated by the following five statements:
- There are no specific qualifications to be a futures researcher; a futurist is
simply a person who either identifies as a futurist or is so identified by others.
- Futures research is not limited by the use of certain methods.
- Although many people are concerned with, think about or write about the future,
only a portion of them call themselves futurists.
- Futures research is generally not regarded as a field because its practitioners
do not share a common academic background; indeed, it might be termed a
- Futures research is highly fragmented; it can, however, assist in dispersing
intellectual fragmentation across other fields by focusing on broad,
integrative work. 
Therefore, if futures research is difficult to label with a definition, perhaps a
taxonomy of types of futurists can shed some light upon this complex question.
Marien divides futurists into two main categories: Mainstream Futurists
and Marginal Futurists, with a third category of Non-Futurist Futurists
that encompasses pseudo-futurists and mythical futurists (confusing the public
understanding of futures research).  For the
purposes of this paper, only brief descriptions are reported.
The Mainstream Futurist typically tends to be a generalist and is
identified as a futures researcher or professional futurist, attends futures
conferences, and/or contributes to futures journals. Six types can be listed:
- The Synoptic Generalist...An Ideal, encompassing the ability to have a sense of the key elements of society, a grasp of trends and discontinuities, a willingness to forecast, a sense of pl
ausible alternatives, comfort in dealing with complexity, a sense of values held by self and others, imagination, a theory of social change, direct or indirect optimism, and a sense of history.
- The General Forecaster...One who forecasts [not predicts] changes in operating conditions; broad in space and long in time.
- The Normative Generalist...One who makes no attempt to forecast the probably future, but rather focuses on “alternative futures”.
- The Pop Futurist...the “popularizer” who writes for a broad audience, introduces people to futures thinking, and attracts people to utilizing futures research or becoming futures research
- The Multi-Identify Futurist...similar to the Pop Futurist; is well-known and influential, but is also known by other labels and the futurist role may be secondary.
- The Specialized Futurist...a specialist in a single problem area, perhaps borrowing a few general ideas.
The Marginal Futurist has three sub-sets:
- The Futurized Specialist...only secondarily a futurist; someone who is
interested in futures- relevant questions, attends futures conferences and
contributes to the literature, but identifies
primarily with another field such as medicine, law, physics, etc.
- The Closet Futurist...one who seriously thinks and writes about the
future, but is in no way associated with futures research or the “futures
- The Future Futurist... one who will become a futurist at a later time;
- The Forgotten Futurist...a writer or thinker from the past who dealt
with futures themes but was not regarded as a futurist.
Two categories of Non-Futurist Futurists can be listed:
- The Pseudo-Futurist...one who employs the language of the future, but
offers no useful insight as to what might happen or what desirable futures
- The Straw-Man Futurist...a non-entity that is never defined; a conceptual
and rhetorical target.
It is easy to appreciate the confusion that surrounds futures research and
researchers. Yet, in a world trying to maintain balance in a time of out-of-control
change, the importance of creating order in the midst of definitional chaos is
critical. Through sifting and winnowing, much of the chaff can be eliminated.
What remains is the core kernel of need--and a mandate to develop useful strategies
that will inform today’s decision-making.
Futures Research As a Strategy for Understanding Change
On a global scale, there appears to be a shared agreement that society is
experiencing a period of unprecedented change. Both the substance and pace of
change are fundamentally different from what has occurred in past decades and
centuries. No longer are sequences of events occurring in relative isolation,
occurring over longer spans of time. No longer are discrete groups of people
affected by each change; rather, there is greater simultaneity of occurrence,
swifter interpenetration, and increased feedback of one set of changes upon
Although the origins of many changes have roots in the past, there are two
critical aspects that have become dramatically visible within this century:
- The explosive growth in actual and potential capacities to intervene in the
larger processes which govern collective survival. Global in scale, capable of
affecting the physical balance of planetary life and reaching into individual human
lives and societal institutions, today’s change patterns now constitute a social
and ecological transformation of unprecedented magnitude.
- The severe lag in the conceptual grasp of this transformation, and in the
cognitive and affective understanding of the processes through which change
may be managed more humanely and effectively.
What are some characteristics of change? Joseph argues that change:
- Alters something over time
- Has a direction, rate of alteration, curvilinear trajectory
- Is caused by something
- Can cause displacements
- Can result in developing something new
- Can have short-term positive and/or negative impacts
- Aspects of rate, magnitude, direction, timing are forecastable
- Can have long-term consequences
- Often is irreversible
- Poses problems, threats and/or opportunities
- Is usually progressive
- Amount accelerates as society’s knowledge base advances
- Has a trend path precursor and a path into a future
- Can be identified, researched, forecasted 
The conceptual scope of change is difficult to grasp. While these characteristics
seem to define what change is and what it can affect, the reality is that the change
facing society today is beyond the set of skills most people have learned to use.
The rate of change, formerly slow and sporadic, has never been so constant and
overwhelming. Reactive coping can no longer suffice; anticipating change has
become critical to human survival. This is true not only for individuals, but also
for institutions. Traditions, standard operating procedures, and goals and
objectives of every institution have been subjected to great stress as the result
of accelerated and uncertain change. Modern managers must prepare their
organizations for the trauma of unprecedented change; libraries are no exception.
In order to effectively anticipate what is to come, we need to develop knowledge
of futures research. By adopting a futurist perspective, library managers can,
at best, be prepared for a variety of alternative futures and be better able to
adapt to rapid and unpredictable changes in their environments, markets, and
What is a futurist perspective? Brodzinski identifies five principles, within the
caveats that futures research techniques are no better than the data they use and
that the futurist perspective must not be constrained by institutional traditions,
values and taboos. 
- The future is determined by a combination of factors, not the least of which
is human choice. What we decide today will have a significant effect tomorrow.
- There are alternative futures. There is always a range of decision and
planning choices. We must seek out and determine these choices and select the
best possible alternative.
- We operate within an interdependent, interrelated system. Any major decision,
development, or force that affects any part of the system is likely to affect
the entire system. We must be aware of changes not only in our own areas but in
other areas within the system.
- Tomorrow’s problems are developing today. Minor problems ignored today may
have catastrophic consequences five years from now. Gradual changes or distinct
trends and developments cannot be ignored. We cannot allow ourselves to become
preoccupied with immediate concerns. The near future must be an integral part of
current decision making.
- We should regularly develop possible responses to potential changes. We should
monitor trends and developments and not hesitate to use the collective creativity
and judgment of our staffs to develop forecasts, projections, and predictions.
However, forecasts of possible futures are not always correct. Futurist John B.
Mahaffie explains that forecasts fail when they overestimate the speed at which a
development will become important to [and therefore accepted by] society, and when
they underestimate the wider implications and secondary effects of a technological
innovation. He suggests that the basic structure of any forecast should include:
clear statements of the forecast’s purpose, of the technological and social
assumptions on which it is based, the time horizon in which the events should
happen, and examinations of the possibilities of environmental, social or
technological surprises that could speed up, slow down, or derail the
With this caution in mind, it is still essential to face change with a futures
orientation. Once a futurist perspective, or mindset, is adopted, then futures
research can be employed in order to gather necessary data.
The Case for Using Futures Methodologies
The way people think about the future has changed dramatically in recent years.
A new attitude has emerged in public and private planning agencies as well as in
the research community. The effect has been to extend former planning horizons
into a more distant future and to replace haphazard intuitive gambles, as a basis
for planning, by systematic analysis of the opportunities the future has to offer.
Societies and journals that focus on the future have emerged worldwide, as well as
conferences that are attended by thousands of people. 
This change in attitude toward the future is becoming evident in three
- Philosophically...There is a new understanding of what it means
to talk about the future. There is a growing awareness that much can be said about
future trends in terms of probability and, through proper planning, considerable
influence can be exerted over these probabilities. Moreover, it is recognized that
there are many possible futures, with associated probabilities that can be
estimated and manipulated.
- Pragmatically...There is a growing recognition that it is
important to do something about the future. This new attitude derives from the
perception that not only are technology, society and the environment undergoing
change, but that the rate of change is accelerating. Therefore, it has become
necessary to strive to anticipate change proactively--rather than belatedly react
to change that is already occurring.
- Methodologically...There are new and more effective ways to do
something about the future. Futures research--which seeks to explore the
potentialities of interactive intervention in future developments--is emerging
as a highly multidisciplinary branch of operations research.
Futures research can be viewed as a family of analytic methods largely devoted to
forecasting or projecting what the future might be, including implications of
potential policies and actions. The strengths and weaknesses of each method
must be assessed and skill in application learned if the outcome is to be
successful. In addition, the techniques must be appropriate to the situation or
problem involved and also be meaningful and intellectually acceptable to those
individuals who will ultimately have to make policy decisions. 
However, some caveats about forecasting should be
- The future is probabilistic--it is not deterministic
- Methods are highly judgmental and rely greatly on assumption--not on
empirical or scientific fact
- Important events always will be omitted
- Accuracy measurements are paradoxical as forecasts often lead to policies
intended to change the forecasts--i.e., inhibit undesirable consequences
- Value judgments, leading to policies, are based upon present value
standards--and values change
Applying assumptions to libraries, Shuman proposes the following condensed
list : 
- The study of the future is a meaningful exercise which may profit
the student, the practitioner, and society in general.
- Both society and libraries have a future (they shall not perish from the earth). Otherwise, why bother?
- The future will not be all that radically different from today, despite the
onrushing march of technology. It will just be different, mostly a case of old
wine in new bottles.
- We are not utterly powerless in the face of an uncertain and unknowable
future, despite the fact that a high degree of precision in futuring or
forecasting is impossible. And even if we fail to predcict some future event,
we have at least given it some thought, which puts us in a better position than
our colleagues who reason that the future will take care of itself.
- Techniques and procedures evolved in other subject disciplines have
relevance for libraries and the information profession.
- What happens today affects (or at least may influence) what will happen
tomorrow in any and all subject fields.
- It is both useful and important to construct utopian (best-case),
dystopian (worst-case) and most likely (middle-case) scenarios of the future of
any subject or discipline.
With full knowledge of both the potential and limitations of futures research,
the next step is to consider some of the many methods that have been developed
to connect with the future. Only a few can be summarized in this paper.
An Overview of Specific Methodologies
Trend Extrapolation. The analysis of trends is based on empirical
examination of a phenomenon with repeated measurements taken across time.
 One of
the simplest, most popular, methods of exploratory forecasting, trend
extrapolation has as its underlying assumption that the present conditions
will not change substantially and that it is reasonable to project the behavior
of the recent past into the near future. However, this basic model makes
no provisions for changes or reversals in the trend or for major shifts in the
environment affecting the trend.
There are variations of trend extrapolation, such as the S-curve [to represent
future developments] or the envelope curve [to extrapolate broad tren ds from
smaller, contributory trends].  Both of these variations have the advantage of
acknowledging other factors such as leveling-off periods, limits, and periods of
rapid growth. Strengths of both the basic and varietal models include low cost,
ease of interpretation, simplicity of construction, and a high level of
reliability.  The major limitation is that cited above, where changes in the
trend and/or the effects of other trends are not recognized.
Cross-Impact Analysis. More sophisticated than trend extrapolation, this
method attempts to analyze one trend or event in the light of the occurrence or
nonoccurrence of a series of related events. A matrix is often used to facilitate
this comparison.  Cross-impact analysis enables the researcher to systematically
examine the interactions among events, to organize the data descriptively, to use
only a small number of input events, and to test the outcomes against a variety of
occurrences.  In terms of limitations, the cross-impact model is able to consider
only pairs of events, does not consider the effects of non-occurrence within the
model, lacks specific definitions of the cros s-impact factors, and cannot directly
assess the likelihood of specific events. 
However, when cross-impact analysis is
used in conjunction with another methodology [such as the Delphi Method], the power
of the forecast is considerably enhanced.
Delphi Method. Developed at the RAND Corporation by Olaf Helmer and Norman
Dalkey, the Delphi Method is based on an anonymous series of iterations and
feedback which solicit and report expert opinion until general consensus
is reached. In brief, the following steps are followed:
- The problem is identified and objectives determined.
- An expert [invitational]panel is developed, usually divided into homogeneous
- Round I...A questionnaire is given to the panel [generally by mail], in which
the problem is stated and derivative open-ended questions are presented.
- Responses are synthesized into a series of statements to which panel members
will respond by indicating “Strongly agree,” “Agree,” “Undecided,”
“Disagree,” or “Strongly disagree.”
- Round II...The synthesized statements are given to the panel.
- Panel responses are tabulated; panelists having opinions falling outside
the interquartile range [for each statement] containing 50 percent of
the responses are directed to either change their response or justify their
answers. Justification comments will be circulated to the panel; opinions
may be changed at any point during the process.
- Round III...Respondents receive information on the IQR and median of Round II
and are given the option to change their opinions or provide justification
- Round IV. Respondents receive an update on the IQR and have the
opportunity to make further changes and/or comments.
The process usually results in a convergence of opinion; occasionally there is a
definite divergence that must also be reported.
Scenarios. Envisioning positive [and negative] images of the future has
long been recognized as a necessary precondition for creating desirable futures.
Wilson outlines necessary criteria for scenarios: they are hypothetical, provide
an outline of a possible future, and are multifaceted and holistic in their
approach to the future.  Neither a prediction nor a forecast, scenarios assist
the analyst to deal with events and interactions among events that might otherwise
be ignored. A well-constructed scenario may be a direct extrapolation or may
suggest events and conditions not presently being considered from the environment
that is being studied. 
Three major approaches can be used in the construction of a scenario:
- Based on consensus and using the Delphi Method to elicit expert forecasts for a specific time frame, the combination or synthesis of opinions leads to scenario development.
- Iteration-through-synopsis involves the development of different scenarios in various disciplines, which are then combined and modified in a compatible manner.
- A cross-impact technique is used to test the effect of one aspect of the scenario on all of its contributing parts.
Scenarios can highlight a range of alternatives and view possible outcomes
of events. The library manager developing one or more scenarios for the next
decade must be conscious of both plausibility and reality. A scenario needs to
be complete, internally consistent, and free of personal bias. Elements in the
scenario must not be contradictory or improbable.
Simulations and Models. Dictionary definitions of the word “model” include
three discrete forms: as a noun implying representation; as an adjective implying
a degree of idealization; and as a verb to show what something is like.
A simulation model imitates and represents the system under study in the form of
a set of mathematical variables and a number of explicit relationships between
them; the process is usually performed with the help of a computer. The
computer simulation model can be a device for prediction, a method for
deriving the future consequences of assumptions made a bout the present;
a tool for learning how a system works; and a means of improving communication.
The central utility of computer modelling is that large-scale interactions can be
simulated in small-scale analogues; processes and events which might take weeks,
months or years to occur in real time may be run through in a few hours or days.
Experimentation with various effects and hazards can take place with
no “real life” costs.
A variation of the basic simulation model, simulation gaming presents a dynamic
model that is an abstraction of complex reality. Within the context of a game,
the conceptual map serves as a mental blueprint to help convey complex systems.
Learning occurs through simulation games because they represent abstract symbolic
maps of multidimensional phenomena that serve as basic reference systems for data
that are transmitted. Simulation gaming is a mechanism for assisting with the
articulation of various possibilities before they occur. A game can provide an
overview and a level of detail within mechanisms that illustrate the major
dynamics of the linkages among system components. Since it is possible to
experiment within the safe environment of the game, the individual has the
opportunity to learn how the system responds to various stimuli. 
Environmental Scanning. Beginning with collecting information about the
external environment, scanning examines multiple areas: political, economic,
social, technological, psychographic and demographic. Data can be gathered from
both secondary and primary sources which are both external and internal to the
organization. In marketing terms, this process is known as the marketing audit.
The scan can include, at its most basic, the gathering of data; a more complex scan
will insert the retrieved data into one or more of the methods described above.
Environmental scanning is an imperative for all types of libraries, as effective
long-range and strategic planning require a knowledge of anticipated trends and
events. The following diagram illustrates the type of data that must gathered.
This diagram highlights three aspects of the total library environment (diagram unavailable;
please contact author for a copy):
the External Environment, including both the macro environment
[aspects of the outside world which influence the library, but over which the
library has no control] and the micro environment [aspects of the region
and community in which the library is situated, and where influence can be exerted];
the Information Environment , including all participants, such
as vendors, other libraries and information agencies, media organizations,
and so forth; and the Library Environment itself, an internal look
at resources and operations. Environmental scanning must examine each of these
environments both individually and collectively in order to present a complete
What is learned needs to be folded into an overall marketing plan through the
design of strategies for action. The following questions can prove helpful:
What has been and is going on out there?
What could happen to change current trends?
What future conditions could they create?
How happy would we be if they came about?
What can we do to intervene?
How effective would those actions be?
What steps should we take?
What should we monitor to see how things are doing? 
Regardless of the method(s) used, how can we recognize good information about
the future? It is information that helps us improve our current performance
so that we can achieve a better future than would otherwise occur.
Setting an Action Agenda
With a toolbox full of possible methodologies in place, it is time to take the
first step toward building a futures perspective by setting an action agenda.
What can be included that will stimulate thinking and motivate research?
Consider the following:
- Read or reread Toffler’s book, Future Shock. No longer new,
it still presents ideas that are relevant to current times.
- Develop a trend file. Collect newspaper and magazine articles that
discuss developing trends.
- Read periodicals outside the library and information studies field.
Check particularly those publications emerging from the areas of
business and computer science. Widen weekly reading to include popular
periodicals as well as professional journals.
- Subscribe to a future-oriented publication, such as the World Future
Society’s The Futurist.
- Attend conferences that have programs addressing futures topics.
- Think about the consequences of new developments--going
beyond the obvious to secondary and tertiary effects.
- Try making simple forecasts. Gather information about
an interesting subject and speculate about trends and
- In planning and decision-making, construct more than one possible course
of action; check on alternatives. Consider possible, probable, and preferable.
Work toward what is preferable.
- Continually relate present activities to the larger institutional,
regional, national and global spheres of influence; no one operates in a
In spite of the uncertainties, the lack of scientific validity and reliability,
and the relative newness of futures research, we are faced with the hard truth
that there are difficult times ahead. The magnitude of the problems, the urgency
for solutions, and the rapid rate of change have rendered traditional approaches
less than effective. There is a mandate for a large-scale, interdisciplinary and
creative effort that can take on both current situations and anticipated future
conditions. In many ways, this is a good definition of futures research--and it
is certainly a clarion call to action.
As we face uncertainty and change, a futures perspective--supported by appropriate
futures research--will enable us to make confident and visionary decisions.
We must always remember that today is the future we worried about yesterday;
today is the result of decisions that were made yesterday. Today’s decisions
will affect all our tomorrows--it is up to us to work tirelessly so that tomorrow
is the one that we preferred.
- Jib Fowles, ed. Handbook of Futures Research.
(Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 1978), 6.
- Charles Fourier, from France, was a founder of a utopian colony in the New World.
- Jib Fowles, 7.
- Jib Fowles, 8.
- Bertrand de Jouvenel. The Art of Conjecture. (New York: Basic Books, 1967).
- Dennis Gabor. Inventing the Future. (New York: Knopf, 1964).
- D. Meadows, et al. The Limits to Growth. (New York: New American Library, 1972).
- Olaf Helmer. Looking Forward: A Guide to Futures Research (London: Sage Publications, 1983), 19.
- Michael Marien, “Toward a New Futures Research: Insights from Twelve Types of Futurists,” Futures Research Quarterly 1:1(Spring 1985), 13-14.
- Marien, 15-29.
- John McHale, “Futures Critical: A Review,” in Human Futures: Needs, Societies, Technologies (Guildford, Surrey, U.K.: IPC Business Press Limited, 1974), 13.
- Earl C. Joseph, “Some Thoughts on Change,” Future Trends 25:3(May-June, 1994), 1.
- Frederick R. Brodzinski, “The Futurist Perspective and the Managerial Process,” Utilizing Futures Research (New Directions for Student Services, No. 6, 1979), 1
- Frederick R. Brodzinski, 20-21.
- Statement appeared in “EDUPAGE” [on the Internet] on 28 March 1995, citing the original source of American Demographics [March 1995], 34.
- Olaf Helmer, 17.
- Olaf Helmer, 18-19.
- Harold S. Becker, “Making Futures Research Useful: The Practitioner’s Opportunity,” Futures Research Quarterly 1:2(Summer 1985), 17.
- Harold S. Becker, 19.
- Bruce A. Shuman. The Library of the Future: Alternative Sc enarios for the Information Profession (Englewood, CO: Libraries Unlimited, Inc., 1989), 7-8.
- Kim Quaile Hill. “Trend Extrapolation,” in Fowles, Jib ed. Handbook of Futures Research (Westport, Connecticut: 1978), 249.
- Harvey Welch, Jr. and Sally E. Watson. “Techniques of Futures Research,” Utilizing Futures Research (New Directions for Student Services, No. 6, 1979), 4.
- P. Dickson. The Future File: A Guide for People with One Foot in the 21st Century (New York: Rawson Associates, 1977), 74.
- Harvey Welch, Jr. and Sally E. Watson, 7-8.
- S. Enzer. “Delphi and Cross-Impact Techniques: An Effective Combination for Systematic Futures Analysis,” Futures 3:1(1971), 48-61.
- Harvey Welch, Jr. and Sally E. Watson, 9.
- Margrit Eichler, “Science Fiction as Desirable Feminist Scenarios,” Women in Futures Research (Oxford: Pergamon Press, 1982), 51.
- Ian H. Wilson, “Scenarios,” in Fowles, Jib ed. Handbook of Futures Research (Westport, Connecticut: 1978), 225-248.
- Harvey Welch, Jr. and Sally E. Watson, 9.
- Harvey Welch, Jr. and Sally E. Watson, 9-10.
- J. Michael McLean, “Simulation Modeling,” in Fowles, Jib ed. Handbook of Futures Research (Westport, Connecticut: 1978), 329-332.
- John McHale, “Futures Critical: A Review,” in Human Futures: Needs, Societies, Technologies (Guildford, Surrey, U.K.: IPC Business Press Limited, 1974), 21.
- Richard D. Duke, “Simulation Gaming,” in Fowles, Jib ed. Handbook of Futures Research (Westport, Connecticut: 1978), 353-367.
- Harold S. Becker, 21.
- James L. Morrison, William L. Renfro, and Wayne I. Boucher. Futures Research and the Strategic Planning Process: Implications for Higher Education (ASHE-ERIC Hi
gher Education Research Report No. 9, 1984), 3.
- Adapted from Frederick R. Brodzinski, 26-28.