DOCSLIB.ORG

Exploring the Research Landscape of Social Innovation a Deliverable of the Project Social Innovation Community (SIC)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Exploring the Research Landscape of Social Innovation a Deliverable of the Project Social Innovation Community (SIC) Exploring the Research Landscape of Social Innovation A deliverable of the project Social Innovation Community (SIC) Dmitri Domanski and Christoph Kaletka (Eds.) TU Dortmund University This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 693883. Disclaimer The information, documentation and figures in this deliverable are written by the SIC project consortium under EC grant agreement 693883 and do not necessarily reflect the views of the European Commission. The European Commission is not liable for any use that may be made of the information contained herein. Suggested Citation Domanski, D. & Kaletka, C. (Eds.) (2017). Exploring the Research Landscape of So- cial Innovation – A deliverable of the project Social Innovation Community (SIC). Dortmund: Sozialforschungsstelle. Acknowledgements We would like to thank all authors of this report for their contributions. Also many thanks to reviewers from NESTA and AEIDL for their important feedback. Further- more, we thank Christopher Graetz, Sabrina Janz and Daniel Krüger for their support. Finally yet importantly we would like to express our gratitude to all experts who en- riched this report by sharing their valuable knowledge on social innovation through their participation in the SIC Research Landscape Expert Survey. Lists of experts who participated in the survey: Thomas Andersson, Russel Belk, Ronald Bieber, Ismael Blanco, Marie J. Bouchard, Irena Celino, Grazia Concilio, Elena Denaro, Christine Dussart, Penny Hagen, Giulia Galera, Hannah Green, Jürgen Howaldt, Guy Julier, Juan-Luis Klein, Klaus R. Kunz- mann, Rocio Nogales, Malin Lindberg, David Ludlow, Johanna Mair, Philip Mirvis, Thomas Osburg, Laura Piscicelli, Sabrina Schork, Anette Scoppetta, Yuliya Voytenko Palgan, Flaviano Zandonai, Marthe Zirngiebl SIC RESEARCH LANDSCAPE JUNE 2017 / 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY It was mainly through global economic and social developments since the turn of the century that the area of social innovation has established itself as a research field. On the one hand, this research field is strongly linked to practice, as far as its thematic scope is concerned. On the other hand, both social innovation research and practice themselves are still two relatively fragmented areas with insufficiently connected actors and networks. Against this background, the overarching aim of the project Social Innovation Community (SIC) is to create a ‘network of networks’ of social innovation actors by identifying, engaging and connecting re- searchers, social innovators, citizens, policy-makers, intermediaries, businesses, civil society organisa- tions, public sector employees etc. SIC aims to deepen and strengthen different thematic communities, which we call 'networks', forge new connections between them, and additionally create new links to actors and networks which hitherto have not yet been included or recognised as part of the field of so- cial innovation. Building on existing networks, SIC aims to further advance the field of social innovation as a whole in theory and practice. In this report, we focus on what we call the SIC Research Landscape, the international field of social innovation research with its actors and networks, projects and initiatives, trends and topics, and achievements. The report mirrors the thematic structure used in SIC, with its different networks, and reflects upon these separately. It provides an overview of the current research landscape in Europe and beyond and offers key information regarding those who work within different thematic areas of social innovation, their research interests and the current status of their work. The purpose of this report is to allow for insights into the complex field of social innovation research through relatively short and not entirely academic articles. These insights should help to better under- stand what social innovation research is about, how it is organised through networks and communities and how it is related to practice in order to support the emergence of an inclusive social innovation re- search community which transcends European borders and research disciplines. The findings of the report can be used by all those who work in social innovation and are looking for new opportunities to get involved with a community, which is growing in a very dynamic way. Hence, one particular feature of this report is that it not only refers to usual suspects, but also reveals that there are important parts of the research landscape which – despite their relevance – are often not recog- nised as such. The report demonstrates ongoing processes of community building in all thematic areas under review. At the same time, it makes clear that more possibilities are needed for researchers to work on social innovation. Funding provided by the European Commission has been crucial for successful develop- ment of the area of social innovation. Hence, further funding opportunities will largely determine the future of social innovation and its research. SIC RESEARCH LANDSCAPE JUNE 2017 / 3 Table of Content 1 Introduction ................................................................................................................ 6 Dmitri Domanski and Christoph Kaletka 2 Social Innovation Research on Concepts and Theories ....................................... 11 Dmitri Domanski and Christoph Kaletka 2.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................ 12 2.2 Networks and Thematic Scope .................................................................................. 13 2.3 Research Topics ........................................................................................................ 19 2.4 Methods and Role of Research .................................................................................. 23 2.5 Impact ........................................................................................................................ 24 2.6 Conclusions ............................................................................................................... 26 3 Public Sector Innovation ......................................................................................... 31 Álvaro Luna García 3.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................ 32 3.2 Networks and Thematic Scope .................................................................................. 32 3.3 Research Topics ........................................................................................................ 35 3.4 Methods and Role of Research .................................................................................. 38 3.5 Impact ........................................................................................................................ 39 3.6 Conclusions ............................................................................................................... 41 4 Digital Social Innovation ......................................................................................... 44 Ursula Holtgrewe, Sylvana Kroop and Maria Schwarz-Wölzl 4.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................ 45 4.2 Networks and Thematic Scope .................................................................................. 46 4.3 Research Topics ........................................................................................................ 50 4.4 Methods and Role of Research .................................................................................. 56 4.5 Impact ........................................................................................................................ 58 4.6 Conclusions ............................................................................................................... 60 5 Intermediaries .......................................................................................................... 65 Charlotte Heales 5.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................ 66 5.2 Networks and Thematic Scope .................................................................................. 66 5.3 Research Topics ........................................................................................................ 72 5.4 Methods and Role of Research .................................................................................. 74 5.5 Impact ........................................................................................................................ 78 5.6 Conclusions ............................................................................................................... 79 6 Cities and Regions Development............................................................................ 83 Francesca Rizzo and Alessandro Deserti 6.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................ 84 6.2 Networks and Thematic Scope .................................................................................. 86 6.3 Research Topics ........................................................................................................ 89 6.4 Methods and Role of Research .................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Resilient Streets Toolkit
    This toolkit is designed toWelcome! help you (and This toolkit is a 1.0, “beta” version. That Of course, no one can build the relation- your neighbours!) start making your means, we’re hoping that you’ll give us ships between you and your neighbours building, street or block more resilient feedback about what works and what for you – only you and your neighbours with some fun, hands-on projects. We’re doesn’t and why, and share with us what can do that. And only you and your deliberately suggesting projects that can you learn along the way so we can use neighbours can decide how you want to be done by small groups of people with your experiences and advice to help oth- go about doing that. What we’re hoping few resources, because finding creative ers. If you come across a great tool or to do is engage, inspire and assist you in ways to do lots with little is a big part of resource, send it our way so we can add any way we can. what resilience is all about! it to the kit. Every group and street is dif- ferent, but by learning together we can all become stronger – that’s a basic principle of building resilience, too! Here’s what’s included in this toolkit: • Examples of Resilient Streets projects that have been done elsewhere • How-to Guides to get started on Resilient Streets projects • Links to resources for more information and ideas We’ve organized this all into 4 categories of resilience-building activities that can work well at the street or building level.
    [Show full text]
  • Airbnb • NEIGHBORGOODS • Blablacar • Peerby • Borroclub • Krrb • Streetbank • Compare and Share • Kickstarter
    COMOODLE Website comparison List of websites • Warp-it • MyNeighbor • Uber • NEIGHBORS CAN HELP • Airbnb • NEIGHBORGOODS • Blablacar • Peerby • Borroclub • Krrb • Streetbank • Compare and share • Kickstarter List of websites • Warp-it • NEIGHBORS CAN HELP • Uber • NEIGHBORGOODS • Airbnb • Peerby • Blablacar • Krrb • Borroclub • Compare and share • Streetbank • Kickstarter What I was looking at… • Web contents • Main features • Account register • Search engines • How the websites built trust: ratings, ranking, reviews, … • Others • Mobile apps? • Email/ newsletter integration • Social media presence An example: review of Airbnb • Web contents An example: review of Airbnb • Functionality and features • Search engine (location, check-in, check-out, number of guest) • Maps with little pins An example: review of Airbnb • Functionality and features • Search bar (location, check-in, check-out, number of guest) • Maps with little pins • Offer filters to reduce search range (property type/ category…) An example: review of Airbnb • How to build trust in the community • Verified ID • Photo or official ID. • Connect another online profile • Upload profile photo and provide a phone number and email address. An example: review of Airbnb • How to build trust in the community • Verified ID • Photo or official ID. • Connect another online profile • Upload profile photo and provide a phone number and email address. Website comparison chart Warp-it Uber Airbnb Borroclub Streetbank Account register ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Account/ listing/ ✓ ✓ ✓ X X area) approval Link
    [Show full text]
  • Sofa, So Good Couchsurfing Ist Nicht Mehr Nur Etwas Für Nomaden Aus Dem Netz
    FRANKFURTER ALLGEMEINE SONNTAGSZEITUNG, 19. APRIL 2015, NR. 16 REISE V3 Sofa, so good Couchsurfing ist nicht mehr nur etwas für Nomaden aus dem Netz. Aber je größer die Gemeinschaft wird, desto schwieriger die Frage: Wem gehört sie eigentlich? Gegenstand der Diskussion: Findet auf dieser Couch kultureller Austausch statt? Oder ist sie nur ein kostenloser Schlafplatz? Fotos Göring enn es eng wird, lich gehört. Offiziell ist die Ant- der Plattform nicht: Er verglich beantwortete Fragen von Mitglie- weltweit. Andamanen, Feuerland, noch weitaus mehr Anhänger fin- sen auch, wo das Geld für ihre Ide- muss man eben zu- wort einfach: der Couchsurfing In- das junge Unternehmen mit der dern. Über 2500 Couchsurfer will Kamtschatka – es gibt tatsächlich den wird, und unterstützen andere en herkommen soll: aus der Com- sammenrücken. 50 ternational Inc. Das war aber nicht Datenkrake Facebook und nannte er in zehn Jahren in seiner Woh- kaum ein Fleckchen auf der Welt, Non-Profit-Projekte. Ein paar der munity, nicht von Investoren. „Die Menschen sitzen im immer so. Eine Firma ist die die neuen Geschäftsbedingungen nung nur wenige Kilometer von auf dem man nicht mit Couchsur- Gruppe haben schon bei Couchsur- Welt braucht dringend ein Sozia- KreuzbergerW Café „Mano“, kein Wohnbörse erst seit 2011, vorher „inakzeptabel und unzulässig“. Die der Golden Gate Bridge beher- fing Urlaub machen könnte. fing mitprogrammiert, dann beim les Netzwerk, das nicht auf Daten Platz ist mehr frei, an der Bar steht war sie sieben Jahre eine gemein- Community wehrte sich; auf Face- bergt haben – aber er hat keine Die Frage bleibt, ob viele Mit- Nachfolgeprojekt „BeWelcome“.
    [Show full text]
  • Prosocial Exchange Systems: Nonreciprocal Giving, Lending, and Skill-Sharing
    Journal Pre-proof Prosocial exchange systems: Nonreciprocal giving, lending, and skill-sharing John Harvey, Andrew Smith, David Golightly, James Goulding, Samanthika Gallage PII: S0747-5632(20)30024-8 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2020.106268 Reference: CHB 106268 To appear in: Computers in Human Behavior Received Date: 2 May 2019 Revised Date: 6 January 2020 Accepted Date: 15 January 2020 Please cite this article as: Harvey J., Smith A., Golightly D., Goulding J. & Gallage S., Prosocial exchange systems: Nonreciprocal giving, lending, and skill-sharing, Computers in Human Behavior (2020), doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2020.106268. This is a PDF file of an article that has undergone enhancements after acceptance, such as the addition of a cover page and metadata, and formatting for readability, but it is not yet the definitive version of record. This version will undergo additional copyediting, typesetting and review before it is published in its final form, but we are providing this version to give early visibility of the article. Please note that, during the production process, errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain. © 2020 Published by Elsevier Ltd. Credit Author Statement John Harvey - Conceptualization, Methodology, Software, Formal Analysis; Andrew Smith - Supervision, Writing - Original Draft; David Golightly - Supervision, Writing - Original Draft; James Goulding - Software, Formal Analysis; H.P. Samanthika Gallage - Writing - Review & Editing Prosocial Exchange Systems: Nonreciprocal giving, lending, and skill-sharing Running Title: Reciprocity in Prosocial Exchange Corresponding Author Dr John Harvey is an Assistant Professor of Marketing at the University of Nottingham and the Economic Networks lead within the Neo-demographics Lab.
    [Show full text]
  • Exploring Digital Network Models for Museum-University Partnerships
    Exploring Digital Network Models for Museum-University Partnerships Alexandra Reynolds, Sammy Field, Jane Cameron and Lindsay Moreton National Co-ordinating Centre for Public Engagement Table of Contents Executive Summary……………………………………………………………………………………………………..2 Literature Review…………………………………………………………………………………………………………3 Data Aggregation………………………………………………………………………………………………………..13 Review of Digital Network Models..………………………………………………………………………….…19 Analysis and Recommendations……………………………………………………………………………….…39 Bibliography…………………………………………………………………………………………………………….….43 Author Details and Acknowledgments………………....……………………………………………..….….51 1 Exploring Digital Network Models for Museum-University Partnerships Executive Summary This report was commissioned by the Museum University Partnership Initiative (MUPI) to give an insight into success factors related to the design and delivery of digital platforms for museum- university networks. The report explores academic literature related to digital networks and virtual communities and evaluates the contemporary landscape of data aggregation and digital network forms, analysing findings to offer a set of recommendations for future practice. An overview of the four sections of the report is below: 1) Literature Review This section of the report begins by exploring structural characteristics of networks including programming, switching and weak ties: reflecting on the way these characteristics inform networked communication online and offline. The review then goes on to explore fundamental success factors
    [Show full text]
  • Sharing Towns the Key to the Sharing Economy Puzzle
    Sharing Towns The Key to the Sharing Economy Puzzle April 2019 Sharing Cities Sweden is a national program for the sharing economy in cities. The program aims to put Sweden on the map as a country that actively and critically works with the sharing economy in cities. The objectives of the program are to develop world- leading test-beds for the sharing economy in Stockholm, Gothenburg, Malmö and Umeå, and to develop a national node in order to significantly improve national and international cooperation and promote an exchange of experience on sharing cities. Title: The Key to the Sharing Economy Puzzle Authors: Kelly Delaney, Alexandra Jonca, Samuel Kalb Sharing Cities Sweden is carried out within Viable Cities, a Swedish Innovation Programme for smart sustainable cities, jointly funded by the Swedish Innovation Agency (VINNOVA), the Swedish Energy Agency and the Swedish Research Council for Environment, Agricultural Sciences and Spatial Planning (FORMAS). 2 Executive Summary The aim of this report is to address the problem of consumption in Karlstad by providing a tool, the Key to the Sharing Economy puzzle, to help multiple actors make sense of the Sharing Economy and use it to achieve Karlstad’s goals. This tool will organise conversations and discussions by providing a systematic way of approaching the Sharing Economy, and will help ask and answer important questions to make better decisions about sharing initiatives. It was designed specifically for the Karlstad context but will also prove useful for cities with similar sizes, opportunities and challenges. We provide two types of recommendations for Karlstad in this report.
    [Show full text]
  • The Sharing Economy: Disrupting the Business and Legal Landscape
    THE SHARING ECONOMY: DISRUPTING THE BUSINESS AND LEGAL LANDSCAPE Panel 402 NAPABA Annual Conference Saturday, November 5, 2016 9:15 a.m. 1. Program Description Tech companies are revolutionizing the economy by creating marketplaces that connect individuals who “share” their services with consumers who want those services. This “sharing economy” is changing the way Americans rent housing (Airbnb), commute (Lyft, Uber), and contract for personal services (Thumbtack, Taskrabbit). For every billion-dollar unicorn, there are hundreds more startups hoping to become the “next big thing,” and APAs play a prominent role in this tech boom. As sharing economy companies disrupt traditional businesses, however, they face increasing regulatory and litigation challenges. Should on-demand workers be classified as independent contractors or employees? Should older regulations (e.g., rental laws, taxi ordinances) be applied to new technologies? What consumer and privacy protections can users expect with individuals offering their own services? Join us for a lively panel discussion with in-house counsel and law firm attorneys from the tech sector. 2. Panelists Albert Giang Shareholder, Caldwell Leslie & Proctor, PC Albert Giang is a Shareholder at the litigation boutique Caldwell Leslie & Proctor. His practice focuses on technology companies and startups, from advising clients on cutting-edge regulatory issues to defending them in class actions and complex commercial disputes. He is the rare litigator with in-house counsel experience: he has served two secondments with the in-house legal department at Lyft, the groundbreaking peer-to-peer ridesharing company, where he advised on a broad range of regulatory, compliance, and litigation issues. Albert also specializes in appellate litigation, having represented clients in numerous cases in the United States Supreme Court, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, and California appellate courts.
    [Show full text]
  • TITLE: Power to Create Speakers: Matthew Taylor
    TITLE: Power to Create Speakers: Matthew Taylor Venue: RSA, 8 John Adam Street, London WC2N 6EZ NB This is an unedited transcript of the event. Whilst every effort is made to ensure accuracy there may be phonetic or other errors depending on inevitable variations in recording quality. Please do contact us to point out any errors, which we will endeavour to correct. To reproduce any part of this transcript in any form please contact RSA Lectures Office at [email protected] or +44(0)20 7451 6868 The views expressed are not necessarily those of the RSA or its Trustees. www.theRSA.org Power to Create Page 1 Introduction The RSA has always been a progressive organisation. We have been around for 260 years and, as the world has changed many times over, so has our account of progress and the contribution that we might make to it. Tonight I am speaking to the latest account, a new worldview and mission. We call it The Power to Create. My argument is that we are at the cusp of an unprecedented opportunity: Powerful social and technological changes mean that we can now realistically commit to the aspiration that every citizen should live a creative life. But this major step in human progress will not happen unless we are able to identify and seek to remove the high barriers that currently stand in our way. The creative life So what do I mean by a creative life? Creativity is a slippery concept. The first definition offered by Google is 'the use of imagination or new ideas to create something' .
    [Show full text]
  • Hybrid Organising in the Sharing Economy: a Case Study of Couchsurfing.Com
    4th July 2021 Hybrid organising in the sharing economy: A case study of Couchsurfing.com Author: Feriel Bouricha Student number: 6668623 E-mail: [email protected] Degree: MSc Innovation Sciences Supervisor: Dr.Taneli Vaskelainen Second reader: Prof.Dr.Koen Frenken Abstract In the past few years there has been an increase in hybrid organisations. Hybrid organisations are characterised by their tendency to combine opposing organisational elements, such as corporate elements with a societal mission. Their inherent complexity results in internal conflicts between hybrid identities, and these conflicts affect the extent to which the opposing organisational goal are sustained over time. Sharing Economy (SE) organisations engage in hybrid organising as they often operate within contradicting logics. The extant literature has investigated the hybridity of SE organisations from an institutional logics perspective, yet little attention has been given on how hybridity manifests at an internal level. This thesis fills this knowledge gap by examining the impact of the identity conflicts that result from the hybridisation process of Couchsurfing (CS), a mission-oriented free accommodation sharing platform. For this, a qualitative analysis of archival data that spans the period between 2006 and 2020 and interviews with former CS volunteers are conducted to identify the identities that shaped tensions in the organisation of the platform’s hybridity. The main findings suggest that the identity at CS shifted over time from a uniform community identity, to three main identities. The identified identities: Community, Missionary and Corporate were found to conflict over time on three main dimensions these being a conflict over the source of authority of the platform, the role of growth of traffic on the platform, and the role of monetisation.
    [Show full text]
  • Comparative Study on Sharing Economy in EU and ECORL Consortium Countries
    Comparative Study on Sharing Economy in EU and ECORL Consortium Countries ECORL Economy CO-Responsibility Learning EC Project N. 2015-1-IT02-KA204-015467 www.ecorl.it/en This project has been co-funded by the Erasmus Plus Programme of the European Commission. Publication and products reflect the views only of the ECORL Consortium, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein. 1 Table of Contents 1. Introduction ............................................................................................................. 3 2. Objectives and Methodology .................................................................................. 6 3. Navigating through the multitude of concepts ........................................................ 7 4. Features of the new form of economy .................................................................. 12 5. Challenges of the sharing economy models ......................................................... 19 6. European context – the sharing economy in Europe ............................................ 22 7. ECORL consortium countries - overview of sharing economy............................ 30 8. Selected cases studies from ECORL consortium countries .................................. 36 9. Growth opportunities for developing countries .................................................... 42 10. Conclusions and recommendations ..................................................................... 43 11. Common Glossary ..............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Collaborative Economy: Products, Services, and Market Relationships Have Changed As Sharing Startups Impact Business Models
    A Market Definition Report The Collaborative Economy: Products, services, and market relationships have changed as sharing startups impact business models. To avoid disruption, companies must adopt the Collaborative Economy Value Chain. Altimeter Research Theme: Digital Economies June 4, 2013 By Jeremiah Owyang With Christine Tran and Chris Silva Includes input from 69 ecosystem contributors Executive Summary The Next Phase of Social Business Is the Collaborative Economy. Social technologies radically disrupted communications, marketing, and customer care. With these same technologies, customers now buy products once and share them with each other. Beyond business functions, the Collaborative Economy impacts core business models. Customers Are Sharing Goods and Services — Redefining the Buyer-Seller Relationship. Every car-sharing vehicle reduces car ownership by 9-13 vehicles; a revenue loss of at least $270,000 to an average auto manufacturer.1 The cascading impact to the ecosystem has far-reaching impacts to auto loans, car insurance, fuel, auto parts, and other services.2 For corporations, the direct impact is revenue loss that results from customers sharing products and services with each other. Innovative Companies Are Already Moving Into Collaborative Economy. Some companies have joined this movement. For instance, Toyota rents cars from dealership lots, and Patagonia partnered with eBay to encourage customers to buy and sell its used products. NBC has partnered with Yerdle, a startup founded by former Walmart executives to foster peer-to-peer sharing. This movement impacts every industry. Adopt the Collaborative Economy Value Chain. Companies risk becoming disintermediated by customers who connect with each other. The Collaborative Economy Value Chain illustrates how companies can rethink their business models by becoming a Company-as-a-Service, Motivating a Marketplace, or Providing a Platform.
    [Show full text]
  • The Sharing Future a Look at the Playing Field of the Swedish Sharing Economy
    The Sharing Future A look at the playing field of the Swedish sharing economy Oskar Ahlman Bachelor thesis, 15 hp International Business Programme, 240 hp Spring term 2018 This page is intentionally left blank Preface To start off I would like to express my gratitude to all the interview respondents for generously providing their time and experiences to this research. The thesis would not have been possible without you. To Erik Lindberg, Thomas Biedenbach, Per Levén, Lucas Haskell, Roger Filipsson and Philip Näslund, your input and advice has been invaluable in shaping this thesis. Finally, to friends and family who provided feedback, bounced ideas and more than once prevented me from putting my foot in my mouth. Thank you! 3 Abstract The way we share is changing. Where we used to knock on a neighbour’s door to borrow a cup of sugar, we are now using apps to share cars with strangers around the world Why do some people share, and why do others not? What is the role of the different players in the sharing economy, and how can sustainable growth be encouraged? The purpose of this research was to identify drivers and obstacles of engagement and paths to sustainable growth in the sharing economy. This thesis builds on previous research by expanding it to a Swedish context and by taking a broader look at the stakeholders. Interviews were conducted with five sharing economy experts in order to answer the research questions. The findings include the identification of drivers and obstacles of engagement in the sharing economy for the key stakeholder groups of users, firms (divided into established firms and startups) and the State.
    [Show full text]