Rechercher
Bibliographie complète 1 183 ressources
-
Over the past few decades, Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) has been perceived as an antecedent of competitive advantage. It was, moreover, placed at the top of the business agenda and recognized as a key driver of performance. Under this context, the present study sets to investigate how strategic CSR (SCSR) affects organizational performance and whether firms operating in “controversial” sectors should adopt SCSR activities. To this aim, this study reviews the body of knowledge on the topic, through a systematic review of the literature. After searching for academic publications in the Scopus database and selecting publications based on their relevance, 32 studies have been included in the review. Their analysis sheds light on common findings and contradicting arguments. Results show the main attributes of strategic, as opposed to non-strategic CSR activities. The importance of effective communication of SCSR activities is highlighted. SCSR is linked to “shared value”, as well as to competitive advantage, social innovation and good reputation. Voices of criticism focus on using SCSR as an empty promise that is used to counteract unethical behavior. Finally, more research is needed on the implementation of SCSR activities during recessionary periods.
-
Elle est partout, mais reste souvent invisible. Il est temps de regarder la peur en face, de comprendre l’emprise qu’elle a sur nous, et de trouver le moyen de la transformer afin qu’elle alimente un engagement plus profond. In this paper, Lisa Attygalle explores the role of fear in community innovation, and provides practical strategies for how to transform and overcome it.
-
Elle est partout, mais reste souvent invisible. Il est temps de regarder la peur en face, de comprendre l’emprise qu’elle a sur nous, et de trouver le moyen de la transformer afin qu’elle alimente un engagement plus profond. In this paper, Lisa Attygalle explores the role of fear in community innovation, and provides practical strategies for how to transform and overcome it.
-
People Centered Social Innovation: Global perspectives on an Emerging Paradigm attempts to revisit and extend the existing understanding of Social Innovation in practice by focusing upon the lived realities of marginalized groups and communities. The emerging field of people-centered development is placed in dialogue with theory and concepts from the more established field of social innovation to create a new approach; one that adopts a global perspective, engaging with very different experiences of marginality across the global north and south. Theoretically, ‘People Centered Social Innovation: Global Perspectives on an Emerging Paradigm’ draws upon ‘northern’ understandings of change and improvement as well as ‘southern’ theory concerns for epistemological diversity and meaning making. The result is an experiment aimed at reimagining research and practice that seriously needs to center the actor in processes of social transformation.
-
People Centered Social Innovation: Global perspectives on an Emerging Paradigm attempts to revisit and extend the existing understanding of Social Innovation in practice by focusing upon the lived realities of marginalized groups and communities. The emerging field of people-centered development is placed in dialogue with theory and concepts from the more established field of social innovation to create a new approach; one that adopts a global perspective, engaging with very different experiences of marginality across the global north and south. Theoretically, ‘People Centered Social Innovation: Global Perspectives on an Emerging Paradigm’ draws upon ‘northern’ understandings of change and improvement as well as ‘southern’ theory concerns for epistemological diversity and meaning making. The result is an experiment aimed at reimagining research and practice that seriously needs to center the actor in processes of social transformation.
-
Widening income and knowledge inequalities have led to growing expectations for universities to integrate social innovation in their core missions as a response to societal problems. This systematic review of literature provides an overview of the state-of-the-art of knowledge on the role of the university in enabling social innovation through its missions of teaching, research and third mission. It also identifies knowledge gaps in the field. A bibliometric approach wasused to identify and analyze books, journal articles and reports examining factors driving social innovation activities at universities, organizational and insitutional change to accommodate such activities as well as their impact. The review reveals that the literature on university engagement in socially-oriented activities as part of the third mission of the university is conceptually well developed and a growing field of inquiry. It also points to gaps in the knowledge base; relatively few studies address issues related to institutional change and incentive structures that influences the ability of universities to engage in social innovation. Likewise, impact studies on social innovation activities at universities are scarce. Further research that builds an impact measurement framework would support the process of integrating social innovation activities in the three missions of the university.
-
Widening income and knowledge inequalities have led to growing expectations for universities to integrate social innovation in their core missions as a response to societal problems. This systematic review of literature provides an overview of the state-of-the-art of knowledge on the role of the university in enabling social innovation through its missions of teaching, research and third mission. It also identifies knowledge gaps in the field. A bibliometric approach wasused to identify and analyze books, journal articles and reports examining factors driving social innovation activities at universities, organizational and insitutional change to accommodate such activities as well as their impact. The review reveals that the literature on university engagement in socially-oriented activities as part of the third mission of the university is conceptually well developed and a growing field of inquiry. It also points to gaps in the knowledge base; relatively few studies address issues related to institutional change and incentive structures that influences the ability of universities to engage in social innovation. Likewise, impact studies on social innovation activities at universities are scarce. Further research that builds an impact measurement framework would support the process of integrating social innovation activities in the three missions of the university.
-
This chapter considers the role of universities in stimulating social innovation, and in particular the issue that despite possessing substantive knowledge that might be useful for stimulating social innovation, universities to date have not been widely engaged in social innovation activities in the context of Quadruple Helix developmental models. We explain this in terms of the institutional logics of engaged universities, in which entrepreneurial logics have emerged in recent decades, that frame the desirable forms of university-society engagement in terms of the economic benefits they bring. We ask whether institutional logics could explain this resistance of universities to social innovation. Drawing on two case studies of universities sincerely committed to supporting social innovation, we chart the effects of institutional logics on university-supported social innovation. We observe that there is a “missing middle” between enthusiastic managers and engaged professors, in which four factors serve to undermine social innovation activities becoming strategically important to HEIs. We conclude by noting that this missing middle also serves to segment the operation of Quadruple Helix relationships, thereby undermining university contributions to societal development more generally.
-
This chapter considers the role of universities in stimulating social innovation, and in particular the issue that despite possessing substantive knowledge that might be useful for stimulating social innovation, universities to date have not been widely engaged in social innovation activities in the context of Quadruple Helix developmental models. We explain this in terms of the institutional logics of engaged universities, in which entrepreneurial logics have emerged in recent decades, that frame the desirable forms of university-society engagement in terms of the economic benefits they bring. We ask whether institutional logics could explain this resistance of universities to social innovation. Drawing on two case studies of universities sincerely committed to supporting social innovation, we chart the effects of institutional logics on university-supported social innovation. We observe that there is a “missing middle” between enthusiastic managers and engaged professors, in which four factors serve to undermine social innovation activities becoming strategically important to HEIs. We conclude by noting that this missing middle also serves to segment the operation of Quadruple Helix relationships, thereby undermining university contributions to societal development more generally.
-
Multiplex social network relationships are quite strong in most occurrences, especially within a strong peer network (a cluster of near engaging friends). Moreover, hate speech is found on most online social media platforms. Hence, this study aims to identify hate speech discussions among peer networks. This paper discusses a novel model to recommend a peer under the context of multiplex social networks to minimize the hate speech engagements; Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube social media networks (SMN) were used in this experiment. Collaborative filtering defines an interest-based recommendation model. Under the context of user engagements, some topics become of more user interest. Hence, some social media posts drastically spread over multiplex layers rapidly, initiating a high social impact on a specific topic. The research gap is identifying the peer network that reduces hate speech in multiplex social networks. Hence, this study provides a social innovation platform for peer recommendations to avoid social splits. First, this research contributes by proposing a novel methodology for identifying user engagements on online social networks by mining interactive social network graphs. Secondly, it provides an algorithm for recommending a multi-dimensional recommendation model by using collaborative filtering. Upon the proposed algorithm, a system that recommends engagements in any given online social network to minimize hate speech was implemented. Accordingly, the novel algorithm evaluates by using recommendation precision. The results show that the novel algorithm is highly applicable for peer recommendation in multiplex social networks to avoid hate speech discussions.
-
Multiplex social network relationships are quite strong in most occurrences, especially within a strong peer network (a cluster of near engaging friends). Moreover, hate speech is found on most online social media platforms. Hence, this study aims to identify hate speech discussions among peer networks. This paper discusses a novel model to recommend a peer under the context of multiplex social networks to minimize the hate speech engagements; Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube social media networks (SMN) were used in this experiment. Collaborative filtering defines an interest-based recommendation model. Under the context of user engagements, some topics become of more user interest. Hence, some social media posts drastically spread over multiplex layers rapidly, initiating a high social impact on a specific topic. The research gap is identifying the peer network that reduces hate speech in multiplex social networks. Hence, this study provides a social innovation platform for peer recommendations to avoid social splits. First, this research contributes by proposing a novel methodology for identifying user engagements on online social networks by mining interactive social network graphs. Secondly, it provides an algorithm for recommending a multi-dimensional recommendation model by using collaborative filtering. Upon the proposed algorithm, a system that recommends engagements in any given online social network to minimize hate speech was implemented. Accordingly, the novel algorithm evaluates by using recommendation precision. The results show that the novel algorithm is highly applicable for peer recommendation in multiplex social networks to avoid hate speech discussions.
-
Purpose: By taking a micro-level perspective, this paper aims to examine the influence of the ongoing paradigm shift from technological to social innovation on principal investigators (PIs) and thereby links the two emerging research fields of entrepreneurial ecosystems and social innovation. The purpose of this paper is to build the basis for future empirical analyses. Design/methodology/approach: The paper is a conceptual paper and therefore focuses on theoretical considerations. Taking a quadruple helix approach, PIs are outlined as central actors of entrepreneurial ecosystems and transformative agents of the innovation process. Findings: PIs can proactively shape the innovation process and thus the shift from technological to social innovation, through various channels. They can affect all other actors of the quadruple helix, e.g. by exerting influence on the process of scientific change, on the public opinion and/or on the industry partners. Further, the paradigm shift might change the universities' role in the quadruple helix, substantiating their importance in the process of social change. Practical implications: As PIs are influencing all other actors of the quadruple helix, they are central actors of entrepreneurial ecosystems and thus crucial players in the innovation process. Hence, they need to be supported in fulfilling their role of transformative agents, accelerating and shaping the paradigm shift from technological to social innovation. Universities should therefore reconsider their missions and vision as well as their role within the society. Originality/value: This paper considers the influence of an ongoing paradigm shift from technological to social innovation on entrepreneurial ecosystems. This work focuses especially on the PIs' role as transformative agents. Therefore, it builds a bridge from entrepreneurial ecosystems to social innovation and thus contributes to both research fields. Moreover, the paper shows the great potential of PIs to influence and shape social innovation.
-
Purpose: By taking a micro-level perspective, this paper aims to examine the influence of the ongoing paradigm shift from technological to social innovation on principal investigators (PIs) and thereby links the two emerging research fields of entrepreneurial ecosystems and social innovation. The purpose of this paper is to build the basis for future empirical analyses. Design/methodology/approach: The paper is a conceptual paper and therefore focuses on theoretical considerations. Taking a quadruple helix approach, PIs are outlined as central actors of entrepreneurial ecosystems and transformative agents of the innovation process. Findings: PIs can proactively shape the innovation process and thus the shift from technological to social innovation, through various channels. They can affect all other actors of the quadruple helix, e.g. by exerting influence on the process of scientific change, on the public opinion and/or on the industry partners. Further, the paradigm shift might change the universities' role in the quadruple helix, substantiating their importance in the process of social change. Practical implications: As PIs are influencing all other actors of the quadruple helix, they are central actors of entrepreneurial ecosystems and thus crucial players in the innovation process. Hence, they need to be supported in fulfilling their role of transformative agents, accelerating and shaping the paradigm shift from technological to social innovation. Universities should therefore reconsider their missions and vision as well as their role within the society. Originality/value: This paper considers the influence of an ongoing paradigm shift from technological to social innovation on entrepreneurial ecosystems. This work focuses especially on the PIs' role as transformative agents. Therefore, it builds a bridge from entrepreneurial ecosystems to social innovation and thus contributes to both research fields. Moreover, the paper shows the great potential of PIs to influence and shape social innovation.
-
Background: Identifying social innovation in health initiatives, promoting quality of life through them, and transforming current health conditions demand the knowledge, comprehension and appropriation of the theoretical and methodological developments of this concept. Academic developments in social innovation have mainly occurred in and been documented for English-speaking countries, although...
-
Background: Identifying social innovation in health initiatives, promoting quality of life through them, and transforming current health conditions demand the knowledge, comprehension and appropriation of the theoretical and methodological developments of this concept. Academic developments in social innovation have mainly occurred in and been documented for English-speaking countries, although...
-
Huit principes sont proposés dans le présent rapport pour contribuer à l’inclusion véritable et équitable de voix diverses lors de la planification et de la mise en œuvre d’initiatives de mobilisation qui éclaireront les processus de prise de décisions. Les idées présentées ici ont été élaborées dans le cadre de recherches et consultations participatives menées par le Centre Morris J. Wosk pour le dialogue de l’Université Simon Fraser entre mai 2019 et janvier 2020, avec entre autres sept groupes de discussion avec des membres de la communauté et des représentants des gouvernements et de la société civile, l’examen de plus de 40 ressources pertinentes et des entrevues avec 13 mobilisateurs communautaires.
-
L'UNESCO a récemment lancé des consultations internationales visant à élaborer une recommandation sur la science ouverte qui sera adoptée par les États membres en 2021. Cette recommandation comprendra une définition commune, un ensemble de valeurs partagées et des propositions d'action. À l'invitation de la Commission canadienne pour l'UNESCO, ce document vise à contribuer au processus de consultation en répondant aux questions suivantes : • Pourquoi et comment la science devrait-elle être « ouverte » ? Pour qui et avec qui ? • S'agit-il simplement de mettre les articles et les données scientifiques à la disposition des chercheurs et chercheuses du monde entier au moment de leur publication, afin qu'ils et elles ne passent pas à côté de résultats importants qui pourraient contribuer à leurs travaux ou les accélérer ? • Cette ouverture pourrait-elle également permettre aux citoyennes et citoyens du monde entier de contribuer à la science avec leurs capacités et expertises, par exemple par le biais de la science citoyenne ou de projets de recherche-action participative ? • Une science véritablement ouverte inclut-elle une pluralité de modes de connaissance, y compris ceux propres aux cultures autochtones, aux cultures des pays du Sud et à d'autres groupes exclus et marginalisés dans le Nord global ? Le document comporte quatre sections : « La science ouverte et la pandémie » présente et explore différentes formes d'ouverture qui sont apparues dans le cadre d’une crise où la science semble soudainement essentielle au bien-être de tous. Les trois sections suivantes expliquent les principales dimensions de trois formes d'ouverture scientifique : l'ouverture aux publications et aux données, 2 l'ouverture à la société, et l'ouverture aux savoirs2 et épistémologies3 exclus. Nous concluons par des considérations. Points saillants • Même si de nombreux pays et universitaires considèrent que la « science ouverte » désigne la même chose que le « libre accès » aux publications et aux données, nous soutenons qu'elle peut et doit aller plus loin. • En analysant toutes les possibilités d’« ouverture » de la science pendant la pandémie COVID-19, nous montrons que, pour être plus pertinente, la science pourrait également s'ouvrir à la société, en particulier aux organisations de la société civile et aux mouvements sociaux. • Nous suggérons aussi une plus grande ouverture aux savoirs et aux systèmes de pensée qui proviennent des peuples autochtones, des minorités et des cultures des pays du Sud. Ces savoirs sont souvent ignorés ou exclus de la science eurocentrique, alors qu'ils pourraient enrichir les conversations scientifiques. • Enfin, nous proposons des considérations pour chacune de ces formes d'ouverture afin de parvenir à une science ouverte équitable et décolonisée, pour et avec les communautés, au-delà du libre accès.
-
Participatory social innovation projects often involve the coming together of design researchers, community development groups, and community members to develop (often technological) solutions to social problems or challenges. “Intermediaries” are specific individuals and organisations who contribute to these projects by translating intentions, values and experiences between design researchers and communities. Previous research has not yet critically examined the role of intermediaries in such projects. This paper does so in a project carried out in rural areas of Europe, which sought to test and develop a technology to support the creation of FM community radio stations in isolated areas. We present the project as a biography of infrastructures to provide an account of intermediaries’ interactions during the project's unfolding. We find that how intermediaries shape the social base and ends of the project, and the interpretation of the technology involved, is influenced by their position, goals, and relationships in the process.
-
Participatory social innovation projects often involve the coming together of design researchers, community development groups, and community members to develop (often technological) solutions to social problems or challenges. “Intermediaries” are specific individuals and organisations who contribute to these projects by translating intentions, values and experiences between design researchers and communities. Previous research has not yet critically examined the role of intermediaries in such projects. This paper does so in a project carried out in rural areas of Europe, which sought to test and develop a technology to support the creation of FM community radio stations in isolated areas. We present the project as a biography of infrastructures to provide an account of intermediaries’ interactions during the project's unfolding. We find that how intermediaries shape the social base and ends of the project, and the interpretation of the technology involved, is influenced by their position, goals, and relationships in the process.
Explorer
Sujet
- Accès gratuit sur inscription (7)
- Action collaborative (3)
- Afrique (2)
- Agriculture (2)
- Amérique centrale/sud (14)
- Amérique latine (33)
- Analyse quantitative (2)
- Animation (2)
- Apprentissage (2)
- Appropriation technologique (1)
- Asie (19)
- Associations (2)
- Australie (8)
- Autochtone (2)
- Base de données (1)
- Bases de données terminologiques (16)
- Big Data (4)
- Biodiversité (1)
- Bioéconomie (2)
- Biotechnologie (3)
- Bourses d'études (8)
- Bourses de stages (4)
- Brésil (4)
- Budget (3)
- Canada (83)
- Canevas (3)
- Centre de recherche universitaire (7)
- Changement (1)
- Changement social (8)
- Changement systémique (3)
- Changements climatiques (4)
- Chine (2)
- Co-construction (15)
- Co-création (50)
- Co-design (4)
- Co-innovation (1)
- Co-production (8)
- Co-promotion (1)
- Coconcevoir (2)
- Collaboration (20)
- Collaboration interorganisationnelle (1)
- Collaboration ouverte (2)
- Collaboration transformatrice (2)
- Colombie (4)
- Commerce (1)
- Commerce équitable (2)
- Communautaire (8)
- Communauté d'innovation (8)
- Communautés (1)
- Communautés de pratique (2)
- Compétences (1)
- Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW) (4)
- Concepts (3)
- Concertation (4)
- Conférence (2)
- Coopération (6)
- Coopératives (3)
- Coopétition (2)
- COVID-19 (2)
- Créativité collective (2)
- Criminologie (4)
- Culture (2)
- Data (2)
- Data collaboratives (4)
- Data collection (4)
- Décentralisation économique (2)
- Définition (11)
- Délibération (2)
- Déploiement, valorisation, adhésion (1)
- Développement durable (9)
- Développement Durable-Responsabilité Sociale (DD-RS) (8)
- Développement inclusif (2)
- Développement rural (2)
- Développement social (4)
- Développement technologique (2)
- Dialogue (1)
- Digital (9)
- Données massives (2)
- Données ouvertes (8)
- Droit (1)
- Durabilité (11)
- Éco-développement (2)
- Écologie (2)
- Économie (5)
- Économie circulaire (2)
- Économie collaborative (2)
- Économie sociale (16)
- Économie solidaire (9)
- EDI (5)
- Éducation (2)
- Empathie (2)
- Empowerment (2)
- Engagement (2)
- Engagement collectif (4)
- Engagement communautaire (3)
- Enseignement (2)
- Entrepreneurial (6)
- Entrepreneuriat (13)
- Entrepreneuriat social (12)
- Entreprise (14)
- Entreprise sociale (7)
- Équité (2)
- État (2)
- États-Unis (40)
- Ethical, social and environmental accounting (ESEA) (2)
- Éthique (8)
- Éthique de l’IA (2)
- Étude de cas (7)
- Europe (90)
- Évaluation évolutive (2)
- Expérimentation (4)
- Facilitation (1)
- Finance sociale (2)
- Financement (6)
- Focus group (1)
- Fondation (2)
- Fôrets (2)
- Formation (1)
- France (22)
- Francophonie (2)
- Gestion axée sur les résultats (6)
- Gouvernance (4)
- Gouvernement du Canada (14)
- Gouvernement du Québec (6)
- Hackathon (1)
- Healthcare (1)
- Healthy cities (1)
- Histoire (12)
- Human–computer interaction (HCI) (2)
- Idéation, dialogue et maillage (28)
- Impact (9)
- Impact environnemental (2)
- Impact social (5)
- Inclusion (3)
- Indicateur (1)
- Inégalités (4)
- Informatique (4)
- Innovation (36)
- Innovation agile (4)
- Innovation collaborative (15)
- Innovation durable (4)
- Innovation financière (2)
- Innovation frugale (3)
- Innovation inclusive (12)
- Innovation logistique (4)
- Innovation ouverte (10)
- Innovation pédagogique (2)
- Innovation publique (2)
- Innovation responsable (4)
- Innovation sociale (120)
- Innovation sociale durable (2)
- Innovation sociale systémique (2)
- Innovation sociale transformatrice (4)
- Innovation sociétale (1)
- Innovation technique (4)
- Innovation technologique (6)
- Intelligence artificielle (16)
- Intelligence collective (12)
- Intelligence de données (2)
- Intelligence incorporée (2)
- Interentreprises (2)
- International (6)
- Internet (8)
- Internet des objets (6)
- Invention (4)
- Investissement (8)
- Isomorphisme (2)
- Japon (2)
- Justice (2)
- Justice cognitive (1)
- Justice épistémique (1)
- Laboratoire d'innovation sociale (2)
- Laboratoire vivant (22)
- Laboratoires d'innovation (1)
- leader humility (1)
- Leadership (1)
- Libre accès (193)
- Licences d'exploitation (1)
- litterature (2)
- Living Labs (12)
- Living labs (1)
- local ecosystem (2)
- logement (2)
- Magazine (4)
- management scholarship (2)
- marginalization (1)
- McConnell Foundation (2)
- Médialab (1)
- Médias sociaux (4)
- Meilleures pratiques (2)
- Mesure d'impact (35)
- Mesure de la perception (6)
- Mesures (2)
- Méthodes (13)
- Mise en valeur (9)
- Mobilisation (2)
- Mobilisation des connaissances (1)
- Mobilisation et tranfert (1)
- Mobilité (2)
- Modèle (8)
- Modèle d'encadrement (1)
- Modèle de réglementation (2)
- Modèle participatif (2)
- Mondialisation (2)
- Montréal (17)
- MOOC (2)
- Mouvement social (2)
- Municipalités (4)
- Nanoscience (2)
- Négociation (1)
- Nord / Sud (1)
- Normes éthiques (1)
- Nouvelles technologies (6)
- numérique (11)
- Numérique (4)
- Objectifs de développement durable (9)
- OBNL (17)
- OCDE (2)
- ONU (4)
- Open source (1)
- Optimisation (2)
- Organisation apprenante (1)
- Organisme de soutien (96)
- Outdoor free-play (1)
- Outil (1)
- Outil numérique (1)
- Outils (18)
- Ouvrages de référence (14)
- Partage (2)
- Partenariat (22)
- Partenariat avec le patient (2)
- Participation (13)
- Participation citoyenne (4)
- Participation publique (1)
- Participatory Design (2)
- Participatory planning (1)
- Participatory research methods (1)
- Participatory Rural Innovation (2)
- Parties prenantes (2)
- Patient partenaire (1)
- Performances (2)
- Personnes en situation de handicap (2)
- Philanthropie (4)
- Planification (11)
- Pluriversalisme (1)
- Pôle d'innovation (2)
- Politiques (12)
- Politiques publiques (8)
- Pratique (2)
- Premiers peuples (1)
- Problem-oriented innovation systems (1)
- Processus d'innovation (4)
- Processus de création (2)
- Projets participatifs (4)
- Propriété intellectuelle (2)
- Prototypage (2)
- Publication gouvernementale (6)
- Publication UdeM (17)
- Quadruple helix approach (8)
- Québec (118)
- Réalité virtuelle (2)
- Recherche (22)
- Recherche-action (2)
- Recherche-action participative (1)
- Recherche collaborative (1)
- Recherche partenariale (1)
- Recommandations (5)
- Relations industrielles (6)
- Réseau (4)
- Réservé UdeM (312)
- Résilience (2)
- Resource-Based View theory (RBV) (2)
- Responsabilité sociale (4)
- Responsabilité sociétale des entreprises (6)
- Responsible research and innovation (4)
- Revue de littérature (1)
- Risques (2)
- Rôle des universités (69)
- Royaume-Uni (2)
- Santé (25)
- Santé publique (6)
- Scaling-up (2)
- science (1)
- Science industrielle (2)
- Science ouverte (3)
- Science politique (8)
- Sciences de l'éducation (3)
- Sciences économiques (8)
- Sciences sociales (5)
- Scientométrie (2)
- Secteur public (4)
- Service design (2)
- social (6)
- social business (3)
- Social business model (5)
- Social entrepreneur (2)
- Social entrepreneurship (9)
- Social finance (2)
- Social Initiative (1)
- Social intrapreneur (1)
- Social movement organisations (2)
- Social technology (3)
- Sociologie (2)
- Solidarités (2)
- Soutien (4)
- Soutien social (2)
- Start-ups (2)
- Startup ecosystem (6)
- Statistiques (5)
- Subventions (3)
- Subventions - Réglementation (2)
- Suisse (2)
- Sustainability (2)
- systematic review (2)
- Système d'innovation (4)
- Systemic social innovation (2)
- Teams (1)
- Techno-sciences (2)
- Technologie (14)
- Technologie sociale (5)
- Technologies (4)
- Technologies intelligentes (2)
- technosciences (4)
- Territoire (2)
- Théorie (1)
- Théorie de Résolution des Problèmes Inventifs (TRIZ) (2)
- Théorie du changement (4)
- Théorie Néo-Institutionnelle (4)
- Thésaurus de base de données (10)
- Thésaurus de bibliothèque (12)
- Transfert (2)
- Transformation sociale (1)
- Transformations (9)
- Transformations sociales (4)
- Transition (2)
- Transition numérique (2)
- Transport (2)
- Travail social (4)
- Triple Helix (2)
- Triple layered business model canvas (1)
- UK (13)
- Université (58)
- Urbanisme (6)
- Utopie (2)
- Valorisation (2)
- Version libre-accès Academia.edu (1)
- Version libre-accès Open Repository (2)
- Version libre-accès ResearchGate (4)
- Villes (2)
- Villes intelligentes (2)
- Vision collective (2)
- VR (2)
- vulgarisation (1)
- Webinaire (2)
Type de ressource
- Article d'encyclopédie (18)
- Article de colloque (53)
- Article de magazine (4)
- Article de revue (331)
- Billet de blog (51)
- Chapitre de livre (45)
- Document (18)
- Enregistrement vidéo (13)
- Entrée de dictionnaire (13)
- Livre (88)
- Page Web (496)
- Présentation (1)
- Rapport (48)
- Thèse (4)
1. Idéation, dialogue et maillages
- 1.1 Diagnostic (2)
- 1.2 Idéation et animation (13)
- 1.3 Dialogue (22)
- 1.4 Maillage (9)
- -Les incontournables (5)
2. Planification
3. Recherche et développement
4. Déploiement, valorisation, pérennisation
5. Évaluation, retombées et impacts
- 5.1 Théories (9)
- 5.2 Méthodes (9)
- 5.3 Indicateurs (6)
- 5.4 Changements systémiques (5)
- - Les incontournables (5)
Approches thématiques et disciplinaires
Définitions
- Définitions de l'innovation sociale (15)
- - Les incontournables (3)
- Termes liés (15)
- Théories (21)
Organismes de soutien
- 01. Stratégies et politiques (11)
- Amérique centrale/sud (12)
- Canada (20)
- États-Unis (11)
- Europe (22)
- Québec (39)