Home | deutsch  | Legals | Sitemap | KIT

Institute of Technology Futures

Board of directors

Prof. Dr. Dr. Mathias Gutmann (Head of Institute of Philosophy)

Prof. Dr. Marcus Popplow (Head of Institute of History)

Prof. Dr. Heike Weber (Head of Institute of History)

Managing Director

Dr. Alexandra Hausstein

Institute of Technology Futures
Douglasstraße 24, 3rd Floor
Room: 405
D-76133 Karlsruhe

Tel.: +49 721 608-42045
alexandra haussteinAdl5∂kit edu

Discussion Papers / Institute of Technology Futures

 (To read the Paper a PDF-Reader is required, for example the  Acrobat-Reader, which is freeware).

Wie argumentieren Rechtspopulisten?

David Lanius – Nr. 04 | September 2017 – KIT, Karlsruhe – ISSN: 2366-553X

Technikfolgenabschätzung von soziotechnischen Zukünften

Andreas Lösch et al. – Nr. 03 | Dezember 2016 – KIT, Karlsruhe – ISSN: 2366-553X

Link to the KIT-Library


Lösch, Andreas; Böhle, Knud; Coenen, Christopher; Dobroc, Paulina; Ferrari, Arianna; Heil, Reinhard; Hommrich, Dirk; Sand, Martin; Schneider, Christoph; Aykut, Stefan; Dickel, Sascha; Fuchs, Daniela; Gransche, Bruno; Grunwald, Armin; Hausstein, Alexandra; Kastenhofer, Karen; Konrad, Kornelia; Nordmann, Alfred; Schaper-Rinkel, Petra; Scheer, Dirk; Schulz-Schaeffer, Ingo; Torgersen, Helge; Wentland, Alexander


Visions of technology, future scenarios, guiding visions (Leitbilder) represent imaginations of future states of affairs that play a functional role in processes of technological research, development and innovation – e.g. as a means to create attention, communication, coordination or for the strategic exertion of influence. Since a couple of years there is a growing attention for such imaginations of futures in politics, the economy, research and civil society. This trend concerns Technology Assessment (TA) as an observer of these processes and a consultant on the consequences of technology and innovation. TA faces increasing demands to assess imaginations of futures that circulate in the present and to participate in shaping these through scenarios or foresight. More than ever, this raises the question, which propositions can be made based on these imaginations by TA and how this can be used in advisory practices. Imaginations of futures are relevant for TA not as predictions but in their significance and effectiveness in the present, which need to be understood and assessed. Contents: This discussion paper outlines how present significance and effects of imagined futures in technological research and innovation processes can be conceived of and analyzed. In this paper, all forms of imaginations of technology futures will be called ‘sociotechnical futures’ because technological developments and social changes are interwoven through them. In this paper we discuss (1) why TA should analyze sociotechnical futures, (2) how such analyzes can grasp the societal conditions (e.g. power structures) that are expressed in the imagined futures and how these become effective in processes of technology development, communication, decision making etc. We raise the question (3) which self-reflexive positioning or possible realignment of TA is needed because of the increased concern with assessing and even co-producing sociotechnical futures by TA. The latter is often demanded regarding the increasing attention by politics and publics to imaginations of futures with wide temporal and spatial reach. Addressee of this paper is the TA community in a broad sense. The aim is to sensitize colleagues for the topic and its challenges, to consolidate discussions and to provide theoretical and methodical suggestions for research in TA and related advisory practices with respect to sociotechnical futures. The origin of this paper has been the workshop ‘The present of technological futures – theoretical and methodical challenges for Technology Assessment’ (March 2016, Karlsruhe), in which all of the paper’s authors participated. The contents of this discussion paper are preliminary results that shall initiate and guide further discussions.

Fallacies in Scenario Reasoning

Gregor Betz – Nr. 02 | Mai 2016 KIT – ISSN: 2366-553X

Link to the KIT-Library


Policy-makers frequently face substantial uncertainties and are required to cope with alternative scenarios that depict possible future developments. This paper argues that scenario reasoning is prone to suffer from characteristic mistakes. Probabilistic fallacies quantify uncertainties in an illegitimate way. Possibilistic fallacies systematically underestimate the full range of uncertainty, neglect relevant possibilities or attempt to represent a space of possibilities in an oversimplified way. Decision-theoretic fallacies, finally, fail to take the full range of uncertainties into account when justifying decisions, or misinterpret possibility statements by assigning them a special decision-theoretic meaning.

Die Ausweitung des Innovationsdiskurses : Zur Genese, Semantik und gesellschaftlichen Funktion des Innovationsbegriffes

Alexandra Hausstein und Armin Grunwald – Nr. 01 | Dezember 2015 – KIT, Karlsruhe – ISSN: 2366-553X