Ready.

[static.git] / content / texts / outro / methodology.html

---
title: "How to think about distant future or how we wrote the scenarios"
author: "Tomasz Kasprzak, Martyna Woropińska"
order: 2
---

{% block lead %}
In our research project we used some elements of the “foresight”
methodology because of its social, creative, process-oriented and
multidimensional nature
{% endblock %}

{% block text %}

The goal placed in front of the research team was to
show potential legislative solutions and business models related to the functioning of copyright in the broader context of culture, society, education, public policy, and economy 25 years from now. The effect of this
work is meant to initiate discussions on the future of
the creation, use and sharing of cultural works. This task
- as well as any other attempt to influence the scope
and level of public debate - is an ambitious challenge.
In addition, reflecting on the future so distant is burdened with high risk, because the current trends can
change direction; one must also allow for events that
would completely change the situation. That is why we
decided to use a research method called “foresight”.

Foresight methodology allows us to get closer to the
situation that will take place 20-30 years from now by
describing it in several scenarios showing possible developments<a id="t01" href="#f01"><sup>1</sup></a>. The same method combines analysis and
research (including analysis of available research on
interesting topics, i.e. desk-research, as well as quantitative research, and statistical analysis) with an approach based on methods to stimulate creative thinking
(creative workshops).

Foresight is a participatory method - its purpose is to
formulate possible visions of the future on the basis of
the debate reconciling different points of view. It often
uses a scenario approach - basing on trends and uncertainties descriptions of potential future are formulated.

This methodology has been developed for 80 years
now and one of its precursors is considered to be an
American sociologist William F. Ogburn<a id="t02" href="#f02"><sup>2</sup></a>, a representative of technological determinism and the author
of the concept of “cultural lag” (determining primacy
of technology). It flourished in the second half of the
twentieth century, when companies such as RAND and
Shell began to use it in a strategic attempt to prepare
for the future. The foresight method is used primarily
in strategic planning related to the development of
science and the institutions that use it, and also to create scenarios for the future well-defined sectors of the
economy, businesses or even countries.

Foresight may be also applied to social themes through techniques that maintain social, creative, process-oriented and multi-dimensional approach both to the
survey and the analysis of its results.

The social nature of foresight involves engaging in various stages of both experts closely related to its topic,
as well as those representing some more remote areas.
Persons invited to the project should have conditions
for discussion, reconciliation of positions and verification of their own views to ensure that knowledge arising during the project is social in nature.

During the workshop various techniques are used to
increase creativity, encourage thinking outside the box
and design new solutions.

The process approach based on categories of the future is crucial for foresight projects because of the need
to check theses and ideas several times. The process
is also the time needed for analysis and creating scenarios. Multidimensionality in foresight is expressed
through the willingness to take multiple perspectives
and contexts into account.

At the organizational level of foresight project the above features manifest themselves in the selection of
techniques and methods of work (space, workshops
methods, networking), willingness to experiment and
verify, and openness to risk-taking.

For the purpose of this study a process consisting of
three stages was designed:

* three expert panels (held form November 2013 to
  February 2014) conducted using creative workshops
  methods, to which representatives of various scientific disciplines and sectors of the economy were
  invited (the [list of all people involved]({{ content_url('/bios') }}) can be found
  on a separate page of this report)

as well as:

* an online survey completed by the persons involved
  in the project helping to organize the knowledge
  gathered in one of the workshops,
* desk-research dedicated to global trends affecting
  the functioning of copyright law.

The key role in the whole process was played by experts’
workshops, the aim being to develop four scenarios for
the future. At the same time the workshops implemented the participatory demand - participants in the meetings were representatives of authors, intermediaries
and users of cultural goods, i.e. all parties involved in
the creation and exploitation of copyright. The meetings
had a workshops character, using creative techniques
and creativity training.

The purpose of the first workshops was to define the
object of the project - to answer the question what
today’s copyright is (context, scope, methods of use,
actors) - and to define trends that may affect it in the
future (e.g. based on the results of desk-research).
Among these trends were social, economic, technological and cultural changes.

The discussion about trends was the starting point for
the selection of “uncertainty factors” (i.e. phenomena
whose direction and strength of development we are
not able to predict) crucial for our further development of future scenarios. Pivots created by intersecting
“uncertainty factors” define fields for building various
scenarios. We have assumed that for the purposes of
this project two key uncertainty factors for the future
of the creation, use and sharing of culture will be selected, which will determine four scenarios.

Between workshops, the experts, using the survey on-line, formed a hierarchy of trends in terms of their
validity and likelihood (from a list of previously proposed about 60 items, using the 10-point scale they pointed to the ones that would have in their opinion the
greatest impact on the future of creating, sharing and
the use of cultural property in the context of European
copyright law in 25 years). As a result 17 trends were
selected providing a benchmark for the scenario building – they are described in the chapter [“What awaits
us?”]({{ content_url('/what-awaits-us') }}) of this report.

The second workshops started with the process of formulating and developing future scenarios in the perspective of 2040. The starting point was to select two
key “uncertainties” (pivots), for which the following
were adopted:

* convergence of services versus divergence of services provided by intermediaries in the circulation
 of cultural works;

* pro-market versus pro-community approach
  expressed in public policies (state and international organizations such as the European Union).

From the intersection of these two, four possible scenarios came into being.

<img src="{{ media_url('images/roza.png') }}" style="width: 100%;">

Further work of experts consisted of filling scenarios
with content and continuous checking of assumptions
taken for selected trends, interest groups (authors,
agents, representatives of the system of law and users).
By creating scenarios they attempted to answer the
questions associated with each of them, including the
following:

* What does civil society look like?
* What is the commonly accepted pattern of successful life?
* What does the system of education look like?
* What does the economic system look like?
* How does the creative section function?
* What is the situation of creators of high art and critical art?
* What is the model of participation in culture?
* How does technology influence the consumption of culture?
* How does the law treat authors and users of culture and how it regulates relationships between them?

The third and last workshops were devoted to clarifying
and deepening each scenario and taking a look at the
situation of different actors in each of them. It is worth
noticing that all workshops were held in an extremely
dynamic manner with a strong involvement of people
taking part in them.

Basing on a detailed analysis of these four scenarios
Miłada Jędrysik, a journalist who participated in all meetings of experts, prepared a narrative description of the
possible “worlds”, constituting the main part of this report.

The scenarios developed may be a starting point for broadening the scope of public debate, and the next step to
reconcile approaches to copyright by a wider than the
current group of authors, intermediaries and users of
cultural works. The authors of the project “Scenarios for
the future of libraries” stress that “Foresight is primarily
a way to become familiar with the thinking of the future and to adopt pro-active approach to the changes.”<a id="t03" href="#f03"><sup>3</sup></a>.
Moreover, through the inclusion of different perspectives and actors, it creates the possibility of verbalizing
positions of individuals and groups excluded from the
dominant discourse. In the text “Prospektywa, czyli zarządzanie przyszłością” [Prospective, or management of
the future] Edwin Bendyk<a id="t04" href="#f04"><sup>4</sup></a> gives the affirmative answer
to the question whether the method of foresight can
help in coping with real challenges. Such a real challenge for people interested in shaping social relations,
education, creative industries, culture and technology
in Europe in the perspective of 25 years is, in our opinion, the shape of copyright.


We asked three experts about their views on the future of standards and practices related to copyright.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

### Justyna Hofmokl, internet researcher and campaigner for free culture:

“We are not able to inhibit the appetite of users for movies, music, texts or images, which has been awakened
by the development of the Internet. The availability of
any of the goods at your doorstep means that we expect
novelties at good resolution and in any language immediately. I believe that the policies of cultural content
providers will be aimed more towards satisfying the
desires of consumers than penalizing activities aimed
at obtaining access to content. Commercial offer based
on the subscription system will probably grow and the
authors will agree to it, even against their own interest.
It would be naive to believe that the major players in the
media market will give way to networks of distributed
groups of enthusiasts who share among themselves
their selected sources. In this sense, the fundamental
thesis of the revolution and transfer of all power over
the flow of cultural goods to internet users was far too
optimistic. I personally enjoy the fact that the internet
provides easy access to niches and those seeking diversity certainly can get to them.

The copyright is not adapted to the reality in which every minute gigabytes of new content appear, and users
expect to be able not only to be aware of them, but
also to forward or redo them. Therefore, in its present
form it is a burden rather than improving the circulation of culture. But we cannot expect a rapid onset of
revolution in the legislation. I hope for a change, which
will be caused by slow transformation not so much in
the media market, but in the scientific and educational
activities. It is in these areas that free licenses allowing
sharing and transformation of educational content are
adapted the fastest. The next generation brought up
on such shared content will expect similar freedom in
the field of culture. They may carry out a reform of copyright law to measure the new century.”



### Marcin Beme, founder of audiobooks service Audioteka.pl:

“The most important in the course of cultural content
on the Web is to caress the consumers: to offer them a
complete, stable and easy-to-use service. Mobile technologies in the pocket of every potential user is a great opportunity to spread access to cultural content. But
you have to remember that competition - in the sense
of other content and entertainment - is only “one app
away”. The period during which a person focuses on one
object before deciding to move elsewhere (the so-called
attention span) is very short, and cultural content have
different characteristics than celebrity gossip or other
entertainment websites. If we do not provide users with
absolutely unique experience with our service, it is just
as easily as we have gained them, we may lose them.

“Pirate” in my opinion is a person who did not get a satisfactory offer from authorized sources. Most people
do not know that they use the services that break the
law, especially that they often pay for their use. If you
wonder whether it is easier to find and punish the illegal
sharing of movies or music or make clients of such services respect the copyright, the second solution seems
easier. However, it seems even easier - from the point
of view of the entrepreneur selling audio books - first
to reach those who have not yet consumed culture on
the Web, but are participants in the mobile community
- using smartphones and tablets - and they have the
financial capacity to pay for a well-prepared service.”


### Bartek Chaciński, journalist and editor of the culture column in “Polityka” magazine:

“Streaming services giving access to as many resources on the Web for the price of one subscription are
definitely the future. After years of trial and error, finally, it turned out which model works. Examples from
Scandinavia, which has become a training ground for
such solutions, show that they minimize illegal trade
files and replace it. Streaming services will serve to familiarize viewers with commercial products of culture
- the real enthusiasts will go on buying the LP or participating in concerts of their favorite artists.

Perhaps the profit from these new distribution models
will not be what the authors would have expected, but
at least their work would be sold, and not taken for free.
Anyway, let us give this market a chance to develop, the
real benefits are yet to come.

At the same time you can see that the movement under
the aegis of Creative Commons, of which I am a strong
supporter, seems to be slowing down. Maybe with the
changes streaming services will bring, the status quo
when it comes to copyright law will strengthen, because if it turns out that you can make money on the old
terms, why change them.”


---

<div class="przypisy">{%- filter markdown -%}


<a id="f01" href="#t01">1: </a>See Kuciński J., Podręcznik metodyki foresight dla ekspertów projektu Foresight regionalny dla szkół wyższych Warszawy i Mazowsza “Akademickie Mazowsze 2030”, Warsaw 2010

<a id="f02" href="#t02">2: </a>See: Bell W., Foundations of Futures Studies, Volume 1: Human Science
for a New Era, New Jersey 2003

<a id="f03" href="#t03">3: </a>Tarkowski A., Bendyk E., Scenariusze przyszłości bibliotek, Warsaw 2011

<a id="f04" href="#t04">4: </a>Bendyk E., Prospektywa, czyli zarządzanie przyszłością, [in:] Scenariusze
rozwoju lokalnych polityk kultury, Warsaw 2012

If you want to share your opinions concerning the results of our research,
write to the following address: 
<a href="mailto:fundacja@nowoczesnapolska.org.pl">fundacja@nowoczesnapolska.org.pl</a>.

{%- endfilter -%}
</div>

{% endblock %}