Transitional foresight: MLP as the theoretical underpinning of CLA: the case of the water sector of Iran

Abstract

Purpose The paper aims to complement the six pillars analysis with the multi-level perspective to make it more systematic and policy relevant. Design/methodology/approach Take the innovation system foresight as the exemplar; the paper asks if the other systemic approaches to innovation can function as the middle range theory and underpin critical future studies. To answer, the paper combines the six-pillar approach (SPA) with the multilevel perspective (MLP) and builds “transitional foresight”. Then it takes the fourth pillar; transitional causal layered analysis and applies it to a case study: water stress in Iran. The paper concludes noting that in transitional foresight, the borderlines, the players and the orientations of the foresight are clearer than the six-pillar analysis. Findings The SPA and MLP-integrated framework make a powerful research instrument for transitional foresight. Research limitations/implications The paper applied the integrated framework to a case “water system in Iran”. But the framework should be applied in different cases in different countries to test its applicability. Practical implications The suggested framework can be used as a heuristics for the students and researchers who want to engage with the emancipatory perspective of the six-pillar approach and need to have an academic methodology with rigor and granularity. Originality/value The six-pillar approach of Sohail Inayatullah and the multilevel perspective of Geels can combine to make a powerful heuristic for transitional foresight.