Sider Fra 0524F01 Fourth Empirical Approach to Value Co-Creation In
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Roskilde University Danish Case-Studies Report Case study report. Case studies WP6: Denmark. [E-bro, Mind your own Business, Grennesminde, Cycling without Age, ByBi] Fuglsang, Lars; Hansen, Anne Vorre; Scupola, Ada Published in: Empirical approach to value co-creation in public services: structural transformations Publication date: 2019 Document Version Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of record Citation for published version (APA): Fuglsang, L., Hansen, A. V., & Scupola, A. (2019). Danish Case-Studies Report: Case study report. Case studies WP6: Denmark. [E-bro, Mind your own Business, Grennesminde, Cycling without Age, ByBi]. In Empirical approach to value co-creation in public services: structural transformations: EU-H2020 Co-VAL, Deliverable 6.1 (pp. 197-285). European Commission. General rights Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. • Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research. • You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain. • You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal. Take down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact [email protected] providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim. Download date: 25. Sep. 2021 Co-VAL-770356 Public 0524F01 7 Danish Case-Studies Report Page | 197 Co-VAL-770356 Public 0524F01 H2020-SC6-CULT-COOP-2016-2017 CULT-COOP-11-2016-2017 Co-VAL [770356] “Understanding value co-creation in public services for transforming European public administrations” PSINSI Danish case studies Project Reference No Co-VAL [770356] WP6 Structural transformations: public-private innovation networks Workpackage and social innovation in public services Dissemination Level Pu = Public Date 20-06-2019 Lars Fuglsang, Roskilde University Author(s) Anne Vorre Hansen, Roskilde University Ada Scupola, Roskilde University This document includes a collection of five Danish case-studies on Document description PSINSI’s (Public Service Innovation Network for Social Innovation) Page | 198 Co-VAL-770356 Public 0524F01 Case study report Case studies WP6: Denmark Conducted by Postdoc Anne Vorre Hansen, Professor Lars Fuglsang and Associate Professor Ada Scupola, September 2018 – June 2019 Page | 199 Co-VAL-770356 Public 0524F01 Executive Summary All five cases from Denmark are examples of social innovation emerging in the interplay between the public sector and the third sector and/or civil society. Yet, the cases of social innovation are not initiated or “owned” by the public sector itself, but are highly dependent on and situated within a network of cross-sector collaboration - as such they are examples of bottom-up social innovation and not examples of specific innovation processes per se. All cases emphasize that there are certain complex/wicked social problems, which are not addressed properly by the public sector/the state, which is why they are driven by a certain inherent systems critique while at the same time collaborating closely with and being dependent on the public sector. The cases are concerned with systemic change: either through the means of physical movement (a bike ride), figuratively as getting somebody from a to b (becoming readier for the labour market), the application of honey production as both a concrete activity and a metaphor for new ways of production, the creation of new stories/understandings based on partnerships models and IT innovation as change maker. But still it seems that, the more the case organisation is dependent on collaborating with the public sector, the less transformational potential. The cases are based on ideas of the dynamics of change; that if you are able to make a change at an individual level you also set the ground for making a cultural change that can lead to societal or institutional changes at a collective level. Hence, in all cases the following aspects are in focus: reciprocity, relationalities and temporality. This implicates a processual perspective on innovation, not understood as a specific method or model for innovation, but merely as an approach to explore and develop the overall objective of change. Most cases experience challenges with financial sustainability and legitimacy regarding social impact. So, even though the cases experience a high degree of positive feedback and interest nationally as well as internationally, they are ‘caught’ in the current quantative measuring paradigm of the public sector and the strategic funds. Some case organisations feel a pressure to tap into the ‘utopean’ rhetoric of social innovation - which is not necessarily helpful to the organizations, since this may take focus away from both the changes on micro level and other kinds of potentials for change, e.g. the potential of expanding solutions to conventional business, public sector services or scaling up nationally or internationally. Page | 200 Co-VAL-770356 Public 0524F01 Table of content EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................................................................... 200 1. SETTING OF EMPIRICAL STUDIES: DENMARK ................................................................................................................ 203 2. CASE STUDY 1: CYCLING WITHOUT AGE ..................................................................................................................... 204 2.1. The case in a nutshell .............................................................................................................................. 204 2.2. Data material ......................................................................................................................................... 207 2.3. Cycling Without Age: The narrative ........................................................................................................ 207 2.4. The context ............................................................................................................................................. 212 2.5. The main objective .................................................................................................................................. 213 2.6. The five key dimensions .......................................................................................................................... 214 2.6.1. Types/Process of Innovation ............................................................................................................................... 214 2.6.2. Type of Innovation Networks .............................................................................................................................. 215 2.6.3. Drivers/Barriers .................................................................................................................................................. 215 2.6.4. Institutional factors ............................................................................................................................................ 216 2.6.5. Impacts ............................................................................................................................................................... 217 2.7. Unexpected results of the study .............................................................................................................. 218 2.8. Discussion ............................................................................................................................................... 219 2.9. Appendixes 1-2: Document study ............................................................................................................ 220 3. CASE STUDY 2: GRENNESSMINDE ................................................................................................................................... 223 3.1. The case in a nutshell .............................................................................................................................. 223 3.2. Data material ......................................................................................................................................... 224 3.3. Grennessminde: the narrative ................................................................................................................. 225 3.4. The main objective .................................................................................................................................. 228 3.5. The context ............................................................................................................................................. 229 3.6. The five key dimensions .......................................................................................................................... 230 3.6.1. Types/Process of Innovation ............................................................................................................................... 230 3.6.2. Type of Innovation Networks .............................................................................................................................. 230 3.6.3. Drivers/Barriers .................................................................................................................................................