Ian Holmes is an enthusiastic problem solver and project manager. He served as a Marine Engineer in the Royal Navy before moving on to study Engineering & Environmental Science. He has been involved with innovation support and technology transfer for a number of years. Projects include the Resource Efficiency KTN, EC Innovation Relay Centres and provision of support, advice and evaluation of research funding applications.

He has managed and facilitated a number of collaborative partnership projects and supported a range of national and international bids. Projects have taken him around Europe and into Russia and the USA.

Ian has worked in the armed forces, the outdoor activity industry, training and team building and as technical manager in industry. These experiences have given him a varied and individual approach to leadership, management styles and problem solving.

He is a fanatical rock climber and practices Systema, a Russian Martial Art.

Ian says “I read early Sci-Fi and like the fact that so many predictions are now part of everyday life. I am able to see a host of applications for a new idea, across a range of industries; sometimes the developers can be blinkered by their own vision for their project”.

Summary
This telephone interview involved an open discussion on future studies, acknowledging Wild Cards and their associated Weak Signals as well as considering future priorities for research and development in Europe.

Can you envisage any major wild cards (positive or negative) that may occur in the next 20 years?

IH: The environmental impact for the future is an interesting topic and the current fixation with carbon and CO2 emissions could be a red herring. This in itself could be considered a Wild Card whereby governments, policy makers and investors could better prioritise their recommendations, particularly with regard to carbon capture and storage.

One interesting future scenario would be if the Far East, in particular China, made access to rare and essential earth materials limited. Such materials are crucial to renewable technology and are difficult to obtain in other geographical areas.

What are the weak signals that (if detected) could hint at a growing likelihood (or imminent realisation) of the wild cards that you mentioned?

IH: There is ongoing debate about climate change, carbon emissions and CO2 emissions. Typically, this is along the lines of climate scientists versus industry regarding the validity of CO2 emissions and the correlation to global warming. Numerous conferences have been held on the topic, and it still remains hot on the world agenda.

With regard to the Far East limiting access to rare materials that are vital to renewable technology, there are already studies saying China controls approximately 80% of these resources and as such there are concerns over future manipulation of these resources and the potential power struggle it may cause.

What are the most pressing emerging issues/problems in the EU that are insufficiently (or not at all) addressed by current research?

IH: Alternative materials with functions similar to potentially restricted materials are important for Europe, especially with a view to renewable technology. Research on self sufficient materials or recycling from waste materials (such as polygeneration) is ongoing, and it would be wise to continue in this vain as a lot of development is still required.

Perhaps not a research issue, but most definitely an important issue for Europe is the shift in cultural change on attitudes towards renewable and also on business models for European industry. For example, there is constant aggressive growth in industry that may not be for the greater good even though there is a push for this.

Are there any interesting lessons from previous studies or other unpredictable areas that the EC should look at?

IH: The DCDC Global Strategic Trends report from the Development, Concepts and Doctrine Centre (DCDC), a Directorate General within the UK’s Ministry of Defence makes for interesting reading for future scenarios.

Do you prefer other definitions of wild cards and weak signals?

IH: The definition of a Wild Card is okay as a high impact low probability event, with examples such as the Gulf Oil spill and recent Icelandic Volcanic Ash incident making it easy to understand the concept. These events are not necessarily surprising even if low probability, for example, a terrorist group developing and using a nuclear or bio weapon would have a huge impact but would not be a great surprise.

What in your opinion are the best methods to identify WI-WEs?

MH: An interesting website is www.technovelgy.com where science meets fiction. New published scientific discoveries and journal articles are related back to where they may have first appeared or been inspired by previous science fiction literature.