Rechercher

Des aides financières encouragent l’innovation scientifique en Suisse. Le domaine social est désormais aussi concerné. Comment présenter sa requête pour améliorer ses chances de décrocher un financement fédéral ? Repères et conseils

Social innovation and high-quality agricultural systems are important for rural development. However, there is little information on methods for measuring the process and outcome of social innovation, particularly at the regional level. This study aimed to answer the research question: Which social innovation metrics can be applied to analyze rural development at the regional level? We carried out a systematic review of the literature on factors and indicators of social innovation, assessed the characteristics of social innovation in value-added agricultural production systems in developed countries, and proposed social innovation indicators for evaluating value-added agricultural systems in developing countries. Key elements of the process and outcome dimensions of social innovation were identified and used to generate factors, subfactors, indicators, and subindicators. The literature review showed that more research is needed on the outcomes of social innovation. Future studies should investigate the social transformations promoted by rural tourism and biodiversity valorization.

Social innovation and high-quality agricultural systems are important for rural development. However, there is little information on methods for measuring the process and outcome of social innovation, particularly at the regional level. This study aimed to answer the research question: Which social innovation metrics can be applied to analyze rural development at the regional level? We carried out a systematic review of the literature on factors and indicators of social innovation, assessed the characteristics of social innovation in value-added agricultural production systems in developed countries, and proposed social innovation indicators for evaluating value-added agricultural systems in developing countries. Key elements of the process and outcome dimensions of social innovation were identified and used to generate factors, subfactors, indicators, and subindicators. The literature review showed that more research is needed on the outcomes of social innovation. Future studies should investigate the social transformations promoted by rural tourism and biodiversity valorization.

Digital innovation is ever more present and increasingly integrated into citizen science research. However, smartphones and other connected devices come with specific features and characteristics and, in consequence, raise particular ethical issues. This article addresses this important intersection of citizen science and the Internet of Things by focusing on how such ethical issues are communicated in scholarly literature. To answer this research question, this article presents a scoping review of published scientific studies or case studies of scientific studies that utilize both citizen scientists and Internet of Things devices. Specifically, this scoping review protocol retrieved studies where the authors had included at least a short discussion of the ethical issues encountered during the research process. A full text analysis of relevant articles conducted inductively and deductively identified three main categories of ethical issues being communicated: autonomy and data privacy, data quality, and intellectual property. Based on these categories, this review offers an overview of the legal and social innovation implications raised. This review also provides recommendations for researchers who wish to innovatively integrate citizen scientists and Internet of Things devices into their research based on the strategies researchers took to resolve these ethical issues.

Quelles sont les conditions de la maximisation de l’impact, et notamment sa pérennisation, du mécénat de compétence tech au profit des organisations dont la mission relève directement et prioritairement de la gestion du bien commun au service de l’intérêt général ? Telle est la question de recherche que la Fondation Devoteam a posée à l’ESSEC au moment de la mise en place de son programme #TechFor-People, afin de s’assurer de la pertinence de ce programme pour répondre aux besoins sur le long terme des structures de l’ESS (Économie Sociale et Solidaire) en transformation digitale. Afin de répondre à cette problématique l’ESSEC a réalisé une évaluation d’impact social fondée sur les cadres théoriques de la théorie du changement et de la théorie des parties prenantes, avec l’analyse de besoin, une collecte de données qualitatives ex-ante ainsi qu’une collecte de données quantitative ex-ante et ex-post. L’analyse de ces collectes révèle une dichotomie spécifique aux structures de l’ESS utilisant le programme que nous avons catégorisées en Tech Driven d’une part, ou Tech Powered d’autre part, avec des besoins et des conditions de pérennisation spécifiques en fonction de la catégorie qui leur correspond.

We sought to co-develop an assessment questionnaire that will allow AI developers, government, and tech-enabled civil society organizations (CSOs) to gauge the level of civic empowerment in their AI system(s) (see Section 4). We categorized the contributions from attendees in terms of existential, epistemic, process-based and a few ready-to-go assessment questions. Our hope was that this set of questions could eventually augment AI certification, audit, and risk assessment tools. At this stage, instead of generating a simple list of best practices, our assessment questionnaire serves to “open Pandora’s box,” explicating the diversity of positions, confronting the challenge in synthesis and implementation, and moving towards meaningful and not merely performative empowerment.

In the past twenty years, innovation has slowly, but steadily, become an important presence in development cooperation discourse and practice. The ambitious UN 2030 Sustainable Development Agenda has accelerated this trend, providing a strong framework for the main argument in favour of an innovation agenda for international development: without new ideas and innovative solutions, solving the current global development challenges will not be possible. Although this innovation-push is in line with a wider predominant view of innovation as an inherently positive force of progress, that alone does not explain when, how, and why innovation becomes a key topic in the field. This paper seeks to fill this gap in the literature, providing an initial overview of innovation in development cooperation in the post-2000s. It argues, firstly, that innovation has always been part of international development policy and practice. Secondly, it links the recent strengthening of the innovation discourse to three trends in the systemic transformation of the field: the triumph of metrics-based agendas, the ICTs and digitalization revolutions, and the role of private sector actors. It concludes by critically assessing the implications of this narrative in changing the politics of innovation towards more inclusive sustainable development policies and practices.

In the past twenty years, innovation has slowly, but steadily, become an important presence in development cooperation discourse and practice. The ambitious UN 2030 Sustainable Development Agenda has accelerated this trend, providing a strong framework for the main argument in favour of an innovation agenda for international development: without new ideas and innovative solutions, solving the current global development challenges will not be possible. Although this innovation-push is in line with a wider predominant view of innovation as an inherently positive force of progress, that alone does not explain when, how, and why innovation becomes a key topic in the field. This paper seeks to fill this gap in the literature, providing an initial overview of innovation in development cooperation in the post-2000s. It argues, firstly, that innovation has always been part of international development policy and practice. Secondly, it links the recent strengthening of the innovation discourse to three trends in the systemic transformation of the field: the triumph of metrics-based agendas, the ICTs and digitalization revolutions, and the role of private sector actors. It concludes by critically assessing the implications of this narrative in changing the politics of innovation towards more inclusive sustainable development policies and practices.

Social businesses, despite having a huge potential to generate substantial and sustainable value, are often structurally and financially fragile. Technological interventions, such as social media analytics, big data, Internet of Things, and blockchain can help social businesses by leveraging the practices towards financial and operational sustainability. This study is the first of its kind in that it analyses existing scholarly works on social businesses using bibliometric analysis. In so doing, this paper presents an in-depth statistical analysis of the literature on technological interventions in sustainable social business, showcasing the development of the scholarship, major themes, and possible future research trajectories. The SCOPUS database is used to identify a large section of articles. The study shows that most of the work in social business has been done by scholars based in developed countries, with limited contributions emanating from developing countries. The study proposes a framework for the use of technology in sustainable social businesses with focus areas of research such as social innovation, digital technology, information systems, and decision making for sustainability. The results show that digital technologies are increasingly being accepted as tools for the sustainability and scalability of social businesses. The paper offers useful recommendations for future research in relevant fields.

Social entrepreneurship is today an imperative across the world. The scarcity of resources, the needs of the growing population, and the growing burden on the environment have made people realize a need for organizations that can be profitable while bringing positive change in society and the environment. Sustainable, out-of-the-box solutions are required for solving social challenges. The onus of providing these solutions are often taken by aspiring entrepreneurs, who see opportunity in the challenges and are willing to take risks to create innovative and effective solutions for society’s benefit. The chapter elucidates the meaning of social entrepreneurship, the difference between commercial and social entrepreneurship, the models of social enterprises in practice, and the recommended methodology to evaluate social impact. The chapter features international case studies (through secondary research) and cases about social entrepreneurs who have dramatically improved the lives of people while being financially sustainable – an organization like SELCO Solar Lights Private Ltd, ARMAAN, Yellow Leaf and Arvind Eye Hospital, and many others have provided solutions for the economically weaker section of society. Many of these new-age social entrepreneurs use Big Data and artificial intelligence to ensure that their initiatives create greater social change. Some of these initiatives are highlighted in the chapter.

Social entrepreneurship is today an imperative across the world. The scarcity of resources, the needs of the growing population, and the growing burden on the environment have made people realize a need for organizations that can be profitable while bringing positive change in society and the environment. Sustainable, out-of-the-box solutions are required for solving social challenges. The onus of providing these solutions are often taken by aspiring entrepreneurs, who see opportunity in the challenges and are willing to take risks to create innovative and effective solutions for society’s benefit. The chapter elucidates the meaning of social entrepreneurship, the difference between commercial and social entrepreneurship, the models of social enterprises in practice, and the recommended methodology to evaluate social impact. The chapter features international case studies (through secondary research) and cases about social entrepreneurs who have dramatically improved the lives of people while being financially sustainable – an organization like SELCO Solar Lights Private Ltd, ARMAAN, Yellow Leaf and Arvind Eye Hospital, and many others have provided solutions for the economically weaker section of society. Many of these new-age social entrepreneurs use Big Data and artificial intelligence to ensure that their initiatives create greater social change. Some of these initiatives are highlighted in the chapter.

Pourquoi utiliser cet outil d’autodiagnostic ? Afin de vous aider à comprendre la manière de tirer le meilleur parti de vos données, Synapse C met à votre disposition un outil d’autodiagnostic en matière de données existantes et de leur utilisation dans le secteur des arts et de la culture. L’outil d’autodiagnostic permet à votre organisme d’évaluer sa capacité à utiliser les données et les outils numériques avec confiance et efficacité.

Pourquoi utiliser cet outil d’autodiagnostic ? Afin de vous aider à comprendre la manière de tirer le meilleur parti de vos données, Synapse C met à votre disposition un outil d’autodiagnostic en matière de données existantes et de leur utilisation dans le secteur des arts et de la culture. L’outil d’autodiagnostic permet à votre organisme d’évaluer sa capacité à utiliser les données et les outils numériques avec confiance et efficacité.

Stories of community resilience and rapid innovation have emerged during the global pandemic caused by COVID-19. As communities, organizations, and individuals have had to shift modalities during the pandemic, they have identified ways to sustain community well-being. Prior to COVID-19, colleges and universities were hailed as anchors of economic and social resilience and well-being for communities of place. In this light, this commentary highlights stories of rapid community innovation occurring at Hobart & William Smith Colleges in the Finger Lakes region of New York. A series of vignettes are presented showcasing lessons and on-going questions regarding rapid pivots, community values, and diversity and inclusion during (and after) the pandemic. Overall, these insights can inform future local collaborative development efforts post-COVID-19 between colleges/universities and their local community.

The term ‘social innovation’ has come to gather all manner of meanings from policymakers and politicians across the political spectrum. But while actors may unproblematically unite around a broad perspective of social innovation as bringing about (positive) social change, we rarely see evidence of a shared vision for the kind of social change that social innovation ought to bring about. Taking inspiration from methods that recognise the utopian thinking inherent in the social innovation concept, we draw upon Erik Olin Wright’s concept of ‘real utopias’ to investigate the moral underpinnings inherent in the public statements of Ashoka, one of the most prominent social innovation actors operating in the world today. We seek to animate discussion on the moral principles that guide social innovation discourse through examining the problems that Ashoka is trying to solve through social innovation, the world they are striving to create, and the strategies they propose to realise their vision.

Ce document est une traduction de l’outil Organizational Learning Self-Assessment Tool – 18 questions to self-assess your organization’s learning culture and identify steps for action publié en 2019 par Taylor Newberry Consulting. Il a été traduit par Territoires innovants en économie sociale et solidaire (TIESS) avec La permission des auteurs. L’apprentissage organisationnel mène à l’innovation, à une meilleure planification et à une performance organisationnelle améliorée. Il prépare également le terrain pour une meilleure évaluation. Cependant, définir une culture d’apprentissage n’est pas toujours facile. Cet outil d’autoévaluation vise à aider les organisations à identifier et à évaluer l’état de l’apprentissage dans leur organisation.

Ce document est une traduction de l’outil Organizational Learning Self-Assessment Tool – 18 questions to self-assess your organization’s learning culture and identify steps for action publié en 2019 par Taylor Newberry Consulting. Il a été traduit par Territoires innovants en économie sociale et solidaire (TIESS) avec La permission des auteurs. L’apprentissage organisationnel mène à l’innovation, à une meilleure planification et à une performance organisationnelle améliorée. Il prépare également le terrain pour une meilleure évaluation. Cependant, définir une culture d’apprentissage n’est pas toujours facile. Cet outil d’autoévaluation vise à aider les organisations à identifier et à évaluer l’état de l’apprentissage dans leur organisation.

Qu'est-ce que l'innovation sociale? Comment l'économie sociale est-elle un vecteur d'innovation sociale? Sur le terrain, localement, comment met-on en application l'innovation sociale par l'économie sociale? Visionnez le webinaire pour le découvrir! 00:00 Introduction 02:00 Annie Camus 20:39 Martin Frappier 34:58 Marykim D'Amours Bryson 49:20 Questions et conclusion

Qu'est-ce que l'innovation sociale? Comment l'économie sociale est-elle un vecteur d'innovation sociale? Sur le terrain, localement, comment met-on en application l'innovation sociale par l'économie sociale? Visionnez le webinaire pour le découvrir! 00:00 Introduction 02:00 Annie Camus 20:39 Martin Frappier 34:58 Marykim D'Amours Bryson 49:20 Questions et conclusion

Recent years have seen a surge of interest in prefigurative politics, which refers to the political strategies that model a future society on a micro level and aim to instantiate radical social change in and through practice. While most previous studies have focused on defining the concept and categorizing various types of prefiguration, this paper contributes by investigating under what circumstances prefiguration leads to revolutionary social change. The paper takes an original approach to these issues by turning to transition studies and the socio-technical change literature. This field focuses on the technical equivalence of prefiguration: namely, the relationship between small-scale niche innovations and large-scale technological transitions. Through theoretical discussions and empirical illustrations, this paper presents a typology of five transition pathways through which prefigurative strategies may result in a range of social change outcomes from reformative to revolutionary transformation.