Votre recherche

This paper describes how the Experimental Social Innovation and Dissemination (ESID) model was successfully used to reduce male violence against women in an intimate relationship. The women in the study who worked with advocates (the key feature of the program) were significantly less likely to be abused again compared to their counterparts in the control condition. They also reported a higher quality of life and fewer difficulties in obtaining community resources even 2 years after the short-term intervention. The advocacy provided consisted of five phases: assessment, implementation, monitoring, secondary implementation, and termination. Assessment collected important information on the client's needs and goals. This involved asking the women what they needed and by observing women's circumstances. In response to each unmet need identified, the advocate worked with the woman to access appropriate community resources. This was the implementation phase. The third phase involved monitoring the effectiveness of the intervention. The advocate and client assessed whether the resource had been obtained and whether it met the identified need. If it was not effective, advocates and clients initiated a secondary implementation to meet the client's needs more effectively. Termination of the intervention consisted of three components. First, advocates emphasized termination dates from the beginning of the intervention in order to prevent termination from surprising the client. Second, beginning about week seven of the 10-week intervention, advocates intensified their efforts to transfer the skills and knowledge the women had acquired throughout the course. Third, advocates left families with written “termination packets,” which contained lists of community resources, helpful tips for obtaining difficult-to-access resources, and useful telephone numbers. A total of 143 women participated in the experimental condition, and women in the control group were not contacted again until their next interview; they received services-as-usual. 30 references

This paper describes how the Experimental Social Innovation and Dissemination (ESID) model was successfully used to reduce male violence against women in an intimate relationship. The women in the study who worked with advocates (the key feature of the program) were significantly less likely to be abused again compared to their counterparts in the control condition. They also reported a higher quality of life and fewer difficulties in obtaining community resources even 2 years after the short-term intervention. The advocacy provided consisted of five phases: assessment, implementation, monitoring, secondary implementation, and termination. Assessment collected important information on the client's needs and goals. This involved asking the women what they needed and by observing women's circumstances. In response to each unmet need identified, the advocate worked with the woman to access appropriate community resources. This was the implementation phase. The third phase involved monitoring the effectiveness of the intervention. The advocate and client assessed whether the resource had been obtained and whether it met the identified need. If it was not effective, advocates and clients initiated a secondary implementation to meet the client's needs more effectively. Termination of the intervention consisted of three components. First, advocates emphasized termination dates from the beginning of the intervention in order to prevent termination from surprising the client. Second, beginning about week seven of the 10-week intervention, advocates intensified their efforts to transfer the skills and knowledge the women had acquired throughout the course. Third, advocates left families with written “termination packets,” which contained lists of community resources, helpful tips for obtaining difficult-to-access resources, and useful telephone numbers. A total of 143 women participated in the experimental condition, and women in the control group were not contacted again until their next interview; they received services-as-usual. 30 references

Tant que l'on ne considère pas dès l'abord, la durée comme constitutant interne de "l'objet sociologique", toute réflexion sur cet objet-phénomène est impossible. La temporalité incluse dans notre perception est une "réalité" de sens commun qui permet à l'imaginaire social de fonctionner comme générateur d'images". Le progrès technique est considéré comme une suite de possibles, de hasards associés qui créent la condition de l'existence d'un objet technique. L'innovation technologique n'est cependant facteur de changement que si une création socio-culturelle se produit autour d'elle.

Tant que l'on ne considère pas dès l'abord, la durée comme constitutant interne de "l'objet sociologique", toute réflexion sur cet objet-phénomène est impossible. La temporalité incluse dans notre perception est une "réalité" de sens commun qui permet à l'imaginaire social de fonctionner comme générateur d'images". Le progrès technique est considéré comme une suite de possibles, de hasards associés qui créent la condition de l'existence d'un objet technique. L'innovation technologique n'est cependant facteur de changement que si une création socio-culturelle se produit autour d'elle.

Abstract. Three points are discussed: first, that limits of technological fixes are revealed by current economic, social, and environmental problems; second, that these problems cannot be solved by a technological fix but require alternative forms of activity and being; third, that realizing these limits makes possible the re-emergence of the sacred. Two attitudes toward technology, nature, and the sacred are described: Technocrats desacralize nature and strive to shape it technologically for human ends alone; pernetarians resacralize nature and develop a perennial philosophy (synthesized from elements of different spiritual disciplines) allied with an enlarged, artful science, so as to design activities compatible with nature.

This paper explores the governance of social innovation throughout quadruple helix partnerships between civil society, business, government, and academic actors. Particular attention is given to the participation of universities in such partnerships as an expression of public and community engagement under broad third mission goals. Quadruple helix partnerships may favour the governance of projects aiming at social innovation, but conflicts and drawbacks can hinder the alignment of partners’ contributions. To tackle this issue, we develop a conceptual framework that points out four key phases in such governance processes: i) identification of a common nexus, ii) building of shared strategies, iii) implementation, and iv) learning feedbacks. We apply this framework to three Italian projects under the new EU Urban innovative actions’ program. Different alignment pathways and barriers in the governance process emerge and are discussed. The results show that quadruple helix partnerships for social innovation work smoothly if a solid common nexus between partners is in place. The University is used as a focal actor to understand the mechanisms underpinning each phase and the role it may play in such partnerships.

L’innovation sociale est de plus en plus reconnue comme un moteur de transformation et une solution aux problèmes complexes tels que les inégalités sociales, l’accès aux soins de santé, les besoins en pratiques de pointe psychosociales, les effets des évolutions démographiques et de l’employabilité ou encore les conséquences des changements climatiques sur les humains. Des acteurs de tous les milieux souhaitent contribuer à trouver des solutions à ces enjeux sociaux pressants grâce au processus d’innovation sociale (IS) et de transfert de connaissances scientifiques (TC). L’innovation sociale a toujours existé dans nos sociétés, mais de nouveaux paramètres et facteurs inspirent sa mise en pratique. S’il y a un certain consensus quant à la finalité de l’innovation sociale et du transfert de connaissances, soit le bien-être des collectivités, les façons d’y parvenir varient selon les contextes sociaux sous-jacents. Il existe plusieurs façons de faire émerger l’innovation et nous pensons que le transfert de connaissances scientifiques constitue à cet égard un levier de choix. Dans cet article, nous définirons d’abord ce que nous entendons par innovation sociale et transfert de connaissances. Ensuite, nous présenterons une partie des acteurs de l’écosystème québécois. Finalement, la cocréation/ coproduction sera explorée comme facteur d’influence de l’innovation sociale et du transfert de connaissances grâce aux résultats d’une revue systématique effectuée sur le sujet.

Reputation systems are a popular feature of web-based platforms for ensuring that their users abide by platform rules and regulations and are incentivized to demonstrate honest, trustworthy conduct. Accrual of "reputation" in these platforms, most prominently those in the e-commerce domain, is motivated by self-interested goals such as acquiring an advantage over competing platform users. Therefore, in community-oriented platforms, where the goals are to foster collaboration and cooperation among community members, such reputation systems are inappropriate and indeed contrary to the intended ethos of the community and actions of its members. In this article, we argue for a new form of reputation system that encourages cooperation rather than competition, derived from conceptualizing platform communities as a networked assemblage of users and their created content. In doing so, we use techniques from social network analysis to conceive a form of reputation that represents members' community involvement over a period of time rather than a sum of direct ratings from other members. We describe the design and implementation of our reputation system prototype called "commonshare" and preliminary results of its use within a Digital Social Innovation platform. Further, we discuss its potential to generate insight into other networked communities for their administrators and encourage cooperation between their users.

This paper reports on a long-term collaboration with a self-organised social clinic, within solidarity movements in Greece. The collaboration focused on the co-creation of an oral history group within the social clinic, aiming to record and make sense of a collection of digital oral histories from its volunteers and volunteers-doctors. The process aimed to support reflection and shape the future of the clinic's ongoing social innovation and to transform institutional public health services. Positioning the work of solidarity movement as designing social innovation, the work contributes to CSCW and 'infrastructuring' in Participatory Design aspiring to support social activism and social transformation processes. More specifically, through our empirical insights on the process of infrastructuring an oral history group within a social movement; and related insights about their ongoing participatory health service provision-we provide implications for CSCW concerned with its role in institutional healthcare service transformation.