@article{MTMT:32901556, title = {A comprehensive review of Hungarian futures studies in light of international journal articles}, url = {https://m2.mtmt.hu/api/publication/32901556}, author = {Nováky, Erzsébet and Kristóf, Tamás}, doi = {10.1186/s40309-022-00201-x}, journal-iso = {EUR J FUTURES RES}, journal = {EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF FUTURES RESEARCH}, volume = {10}, unique-id = {32901556}, issn = {2195-4194}, year = {2022}, eissn = {2195-2248}, orcid-numbers = {Nováky, Erzsébet/0000-0002-7023-5441; Kristóf, Tamás/0000-0003-2805-4900} } @article{MTMT:30557467, title = {Generativity and social value orientation between rural and urban societies in a developing country}, url = {https://m2.mtmt.hu/api/publication/30557467}, author = {Timilsina, Raja R. and Kotani, Koji and Kamijo, Yoshio}, doi = {10.1016/j.futures.2018.09.003}, journal-iso = {FUTURES}, journal = {FUTURES}, volume = {105}, unique-id = {30557467}, issn = {0016-3287}, abstract = {Generativity, concern and commitment for the next generation, is an important factor in the sustainable development of a society, as intergenerational sustainability is claimed to have been compromised over the last decades. Generativity emerges through both prosocial and proself behaviors characterized by social preferences and is now hypothesized to have decreased in some urban societies; this is referred to as the "generativity crisis." However, little is known about how ongoing urbanization of competitive societies, i.e., capitalism, and social preferences are related to generativity. To this end, we conduct field experiments on social value orientation and administer a generative behavior checklist in two strata of Nepalese society: (1) the urban and (2) the rural. The analysis finds that prosociality and the rural-specific effect are the two major factors that increase people's generativity, while a larger proportion of prosocial people are found in rural areas than in urban areas. Overall, these results suggest that generativity will decrease with further urbanization, changing the economic culture and orientation of the populace so that there is less concern for future generations.}, keywords = {Prosocial; Social value orientation; Proself; Generativity}, year = {2019}, eissn = {1873-6378}, pages = {124-132}, orcid-numbers = {Kotani, Koji/0000-0003-0667-1895} } @article{MTMT:31294027, title = {Philosophical, institutional, and decision making frameworks for meeting obligations to future generations}, url = {https://m2.mtmt.hu/api/publication/31294027}, author = {Tonn, B.E.}, doi = {10.1016/j.futures.2017.10.001}, journal-iso = {FUTURES}, journal = {FUTURES}, volume = {95}, unique-id = {31294027}, issn = {0016-3287}, abstract = {Humanity needs to become more futures-oriented to address global catastrophic and existential risks, create sustainable societies and economies, and achieve its most laudable and worthy goals. Seminal work by Bell and Slaughter is cited to answer the question about why current generations should care about future generations. A new set of twelve obligations that current generations have to future generations is presented that reflects contemporary threats and issues. For example, this set explicitly communicates that current generations have an obligation to reduce threats of human extinction from a combination of risks such as climate change, pandemics, and nuclear war. It is also argued that current generations have an obligation to be stewards of what is means to be human and what the very nature of nature is against advances and unwitting implementations of emerging technologies. It is argued that current generations also have obligations to protect human knowledge from being lost over time and generating new knowledge to support survival into the distant future. A new institution, the Intergenerational Panel on Obligations (IGPO), is proposed to measure how well the obligations are being met. A second new institution, World Court of Generations (WCG), is proposed to judge whether current generations are meeting their obligations to future generations and if not, what level of actions are needed to rectify matters. The Obligations to Future Generations Protocol (OFGP) would be negotiated amongst the countries of the world and other public and even private sector stakeholders to assign responsibilities for action. Leadership from the futures community and others is needed to overcome the many socio-cultural barriers to implement these frameworks and establish these proposed institutions. © 2017 Elsevier Ltd}, keywords = {risk factor; decision making; Philosophy; leadership; institutional framework; stakeholder; international organization}, year = {2018}, eissn = {1873-6378}, pages = {44-57} } @article{MTMT:2988789, title = {Interpretation of ‘time’ and ‘future’ in strategy research}, url = {https://m2.mtmt.hu/api/publication/2988789}, author = {Gáspár, Judit}, doi = {10.1556/204.2015.37.4.5}, journal-iso = {SOC ECON}, journal = {SOCIETY AND ECONOMY}, volume = {37}, unique-id = {2988789}, issn = {1588-9726}, abstract = {Time is in constant motion: the present, the future and the past, although they are not concepts having a fixed meaning, they are present in everyday life both at the conscious and the unconscious levels. The author’s intention in this paper is to grasp the relationship of companies to time and to the future in the mature and nascent states of their life cycles. As discussed in this paper, this relationship may appear with little reflection in the form of assumptions in the eyes of strategy researchers and practitioners. At first the interrelatedness of theory and practice is discussed in order to focus on the role of scholars and practitioners in creating theory and putting it to practice or vice versa. This general introduction will lay the ground for the study of interpretations of the future and time from the perspective of strategy research and strategy practice, respectively.}, year = {2015}, eissn = {1588-970X}, pages = {493-511}, orcid-numbers = {Gáspár, Judit/0000-0003-1908-1616} }