Is diversity in Delphi panelist groups useful? Evidence from a French forecasting exercise on the future of nuclear energy

Innovations and trends in meat consumption: An application of the Delphi method in Spain

“…Despite its age, it is still a valid technique for the social sciences (Landeta, 2006), as reflected in a special issue of the journal Technological Forecasting and Social Change in 2011 (Rowe & Wright, 2011). In recent years, it has been applied to forecasting future scenarios in several sectors, including logistics (von der Gracht & Darkow, 2010), transport (Linz, 2012;Mason & Alamdari, 2007) and energy (Celiktas & Kocar, 2010;Czaplicka-Kolarz, Stańczyk, & Kapusta, 2009;Hussler, Muller, & Rondé, 2011;Makkonen, 2012;Rikkonen & Tapio, 2009). It has also been used to evaluate policies and strategies in the food industry (Frewer et al, 2011;Ilbery, Maye, Kneafsey, Jenkins, & Walkley, 2004;Kretzschmar & Schmid, 2011;Wentholt, Fischer, Rowe, Marvin, & Frewer, 2010;Wentholt, Rowe, König, Marvin, & Frewer, 2009), including, as in the present case, making forecasts of the evolution of meat consumption (Vinnari, 2008;Vinnari & Tapio, 2009).…”

Priority technologies and innovations in the fishing agribusiness by the year 2032. Foresight study through the Delphi method

“…As for the importance of conducting a post-poll questioning whether the panelists took into account the responses of others and how many of them contributed comments, Kauko and Palmroos (2014) draw attention to using panels of panelists or interest groups -stakeholders (Hussler et al, 2011, quoted by Kauko & Palmroos, 2014). Another type of gap is related to the number of panelists; Rowe and Wright (2001) mention that a range between 5 and 20 people is sufficient.…”

The Delphi method as an alternative to standard committee meetings to identify ecological issues for forest ecosystem-based management: A case study

“…Because the questions addressed were highly specific and complex, we decided to include experts only (Okoli and Pawlowski 2004), who we defined as researchers or professionals who possess essential knowledge of the ecology and/or management of eastern boreal forest of Quebec. The use of a broader definition of experts (e.g., non-professional participants) is an increasing phenomenon in Delphi studies (Hussler et al 2011, Mukherjee et al 2015. While we do not subscribe to this broader definition, and thus did not include non-professional participants, we did make a point of involving experts from different affiliations (university, governments and non-governmental organizations) and with different backgrounds.…”