Votre recherche

Social Innovation is one of the key indicators within the sustainable development goals (SDGs). Currently, service Design and its design thinking processes play a significant role in Innovation for businesses; it proved its social innovation impact in many projects building sustainable solutions. This study aims to highlight the value of implementing service design through the design thinking process in finding a sustainable solution for different social issues. Researchers achieved the aim of this study using qualitative methodology, implementing case study analysis as a method, were 28 design students have been asked to redesign missing social experiences during pandemics. These case studies explain how sustainable solutions can be generated via service design through the design thinking processes. The findings of this research highlight the value of implementing service design with its design thinking process to generate sustainable solutions for different social issues, concluding that this process can be taught and applied by designers to change their mindsets from `final outcome' to the concept of `final demand', aligning then with sustainability for social Innovation.

From the perspective of sustainability, this paper analyzes how stakeholders realize sustainable social innovation through co-creation. Through literature and case analysis, based on the group classification of social networks, this paper proposes three elements of social innovation: place creation, situation creation and relationship structure, and further sorts out the co-creation of meaning co-creation, behavior co-creation and value co-creation. The research shows that co-creation is a practical activity based on cultural identity, group interaction and resource integration, and stakeholders can achieve the goal of sustainable social innovation through meaning co-creation, behavior co-creation and value co-creation.

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.

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.

The main aim of the paper is to question the viability of measuring social innovation with the current state of knowledge on the one hand, and to make suggestions for better measurement of it on the other. To reach this aim, the literature on the traditional measures of technological innovation and the previous attempts of measuring social innovation is surveyed. Despite relatively narrow scope of the literature mainly originated from the very recent and pioneer experiments, one may argue that the first findings do not present a promising picture for future studies. Therefore, existing trials to measure social innovation have to be critically screened to ascertain problematic areas, and hence, to provide plausible solutions. The problems with social innovation metrics are not only limited with obtaining concrete and trustworthy results, but also extended to statistical, methodological and even conceptual spheres.

Titre officiel : Recommandations du Groupe directeur chargé de la co-création de la stratégie d'innovation sociale et de finance sociale Le Canada est une terre d'innovateurs. Notre pays a une riche tradition d'innovation à des fins sociales et environnementales, que l'on pense aux peuples autochtones dont les sociétés ont prospéré grâce à l'interdépendance de leur culture et à leur ingéniosité, aux caisses populaires établies au tournant du 20e siècle pour assurer l'accès au crédit dans leur région ou encore aux premiers réseaux de bénévoles et de donateurs qui ont fait leur apparition pendant la Première Guerre mondiale pour recueillir les fonds à l'appui de leurs collectivités. Aujourd'hui, plus que jamais, nous devons tirer parti de cet esprit novateur. Les défis sociaux, économiques et environnementaux complexes auxquels fait face notre pays – l'itinérance, les changements climatiques, l'emploi des jeunes et la crise des opioïdes, pour ne nommer que ceux-là – exigent de la créativité et des solutions transformatrices. Si nous voulons faire mieux, il nous incombe de travailler différemment.

The purpose of this study is to develop a dual-functional university-enabled social innovation process model on the subject of low-cost houses that addresses the distinct elements of social obligation and university teaching-learning. Design/methodology/approach This study has predominantly adopted a longitudinal single case study approach, where data have been collected through interviews, survey, participant observation, direct observation and document review. The case study details on the social innovation processes, which was conducted by Universiti Teknologi MARA, Malaysia. Findings This study has demonstrated the social innovation processes toward addressing the issue of insufficient low-cost houses, concurrently benefitting the teaching-learning dimension. Three sub-innovations have been highlighted in the developed social innovation process model, which are collaboration process, teaching-learning and design-construct innovation. Originality/value The development of the social innovation process model for low-cost houses through university-enabled initiative is a novel establishment, particularly for developing nations, as limited studies have been conducted in this regard. The significant insights into how university could play a role in addressing major social issues, along with their core focus (teaching-learning and research development), is a breakthrough for further diffusions of social innovation by universities.

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.

Background Social innovations in health are inclusive solutions to address the healthcare delivery gap that meet the needs of end users through a multi-stakeholder, community-engaged process. While social innovations for health have shown promise in closing the healthcare delivery gap, more research is needed to evaluate, scale up, and sustain social innovation. Research checklists can standardize and improve reporting of research findings, promote transparency, and increase replicability of study results and findings. Methods and findings The research checklist was developed through a 3-step community-engaged process, including a global open call for ideas, a scoping review, and a 3-round modified Delphi process. The call for entries solicited checklists and related items and was open between November 27, 2019 and February 1, 2020. In addition to the open call submissions and scoping review findings, a 17-item Social Innovation For Health Research (SIFHR) Checklist was developed based on the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) Checklist. The checklist was then refined during 3 rounds of Delphi surveys conducted between May and June 2020. The resulting checklist will facilitate more complete and transparent reporting, increase end-user engagement, and help assess social innovation projects. A limitation of the open call was requiring internet access, which likely discouraged participation of some subgroups. Conclusions The SIFHR Checklist will strengthen the reporting of social innovation for health research studies. More research is needed on social innovation for health.

Two things often observed in children: (1) many do not eat a healthy diet and (2) they like playing video-games. Game-based learning has proven to be an effective method for attitude change, and thus has the potential to influence children's eating habits. This study looks at how, through a series of workshop activities, children themselves can inform the design of such games. Using a co-constructive approach, the study's format promotes creativity and control, enabling children to act as valuable informants for its design. Patterns emerging from the study show that children do indeed understand the concept of healthy eating. Future phases of this work will explore whether they understand how various foods affect their bodies. This information will then inform the design of a video-game that encourages healthy eating.

Cette recherche vise à comprendre le processus de coproduction d’innovations sociales dans le contexte des plateformes numériques. À travers l’étude de la plateforme "Solidarité Covid-19 Francophonie", nous analysons comment l’intelligence artificielle facilite la collaboration entre des acteurs de cultures différentes et/ou développant des projets dans des domaines variés. Les résultats de l’étude ethnographique, complétée par une analyse quantitative, révèlent le développement des pratiques collaboratives grâce aux différents types de connecteurs, humains ou non-humains, qui organisent les échanges et facilitent la circulation de ressources affectives et cognitives. De manière paradoxale, l’analyse montre la difficulté de la plateforme à inclure certains publics.

Higher Education Institutions, like many other organizations, are facing pressure from the development of digital technologies as a push towards the digitization of their activities and towards a type of change that some describe as disruptive and that forces them to review their processes and structures. This article describes the case of the medialab of the University of Salamanca, MEDIALAB USAL, as an experience of new learning space in higher education. Its origin is explained from the experiences of citizen technology laboratories and experimental laboratories at the point of intersection between Art, Science and Technology. Its structure and working methods are explained, and its activities are illustrated through the description of four educational innovation projects based on different digital technologies: a mathematics didactics project using AppInventor, Wikipedia as a tool for knowledge generation, Arduino for innovation in the teaching of Fine Arts and a university Hackathon as an activity to introduce students to social and entrepreneurial innovation processes.

Potential contributions of universities to social innovation are explored with special attention to Southern countries. The normative guide is the notion of Sustainable Human Development understood as stressing the agency of least-advantaged sectors. The main challenges stem from decreasing sustainability and increasing inequality. Their impacts are highly dependent on how the tension between economic growth and environmental protection is managed. Improving actual perspectives demands harnessing advanced knowledge to foster inclusive and frugal innovation. For this to occur, universities need to be main actors. The context in which they act is analyzed with reference to the National Systems of Innovation conceptualization. Possible evolutions of universities as agents of social innovation are discussed with the aid of the Multi-Level Perspective. The importance of the Southern experience of innovating in scarcity conditions is highlighted and illustrated with the specific experience of a Latin American university. The cooperation of universities with weak social actors in ways that involve advanced knowledge appears as a key theoretical issue and as a difficult practical problem for the effective engagement of universities in social innovation. The diverse issues that such engagement needs to integrate conform an ambitious research program, of which the paper aims at giving a first glimpse.

Social innovation is conceptualised as having two intimately related pillars: institutional innovation and locally embedded innovation, in the sense of social economy. Two main research questions were addressed: how political, institutional innovation is fostered and how does it influence social economy? A mixed methods research was conducted in the Mühlviertel NUTS3 region. Despite a framework of enhanced autonomy and institutional innovation for the main stakeholders, both macro and micro analysis illustrate a lack of intermediate space to: a) link the innovative agenda to high-state political agendas, and b) link institutional innovation to social economy.

The last few years witnessed theoretical and practical contributions to the field of social innovation and social enterprise. However, analysis of the interplay between these two different realms is still limited. This article aims to fill some gaps in this respect. We deal with historical reconstruction of the concept of Social Enterprise and Social Innovation, and their conceptual premises. We consider the process of creation of social innovation in social enterprises. As members’ motivations, ownership rights and governance rules in social enterprises create a new relational context and new routines, which are germane to the production of social knowledge and deliberation, social innovation can be considered one of the main outcomes of this setting. Social motivations, collective action of a cooperative kind, multistakeholder governance and socialization of resources, and their interplay are singled out as main drivers of innovation. Social innovation is seen as akin to novelty in social interaction, a non-standardized and non-standardizable outcome of the operation of this organizational form.

Design has always played a role in the process of production, transformations in society and the economy, shifts in technology and impacts on the environment. The nature of the changes created by our post-industrial era is challenging the character of design and its role in society. The post-industrial era is creating complex projects for technology, service, systems, strategy and products. Clients are even becoming undefined stakeholders, and this can be extended to the entire community and the environment. The rise of digital technology and the knowledge society are introducing a new culture, which can be open, participatory, shared and collaborative. Here the designer is acting as a researcher, always questioning the character of the project, its outcomes and process. Open access, co-design, crowdfunding, digital manufacturing, open-source, DIY, enabling systems and networking can be included in the toolbox of the designer and can create opportunities to drive the change towards sustainability, equity and democracy. Social innovation is leveraging forms of collaboration and co-production in which designers, innovators, users and communities co-create knowledge and solutions for a wide range of social needs, exploiting the networking technologies. This book explores a number of areas where design can contribute to face the contemporary transformations in our society with real-life collaborative research and innovation projects. Through a number of Canadian social innovation case studies collected in social, environmental and technological fields, we recognize how the role of the designer cannot be limited to the production of finished objects; rather, designers can create tools and platforms to help users and citizens participate in projects, even allowing forms of personalization

Offender mental health is a major societal challenge. Improved collaboration between mental health and criminal justice services is required to address this challenge. This article explores social innovation as a conceptual framework with which to view these collaborations and develop theoretically informed strategies to optimize interorganizational working. Two key innovation frameworks are applied to the offender mental health field and practice illustrations provided of where new innovations in collaboration, and specifically co-creation between the mental health system and criminal justice system, take place. The article recommends the development of a competency framework for leaders and front line staff in the mental health system and criminal justice systems to raise awareness and skills in the innovation process, especially through co-creation across organizational boundaries.

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

In social sciences, similarly to other fields, there is exponential growth of literature and textual data that people are no more able to cope with in a systematic manner. In many areas there is a need to catalogue knowledge and phenomena in a certain area. However, social science concepts and phenomena are complex and in many cases there is a dispute in the field between conflicting definitions. In this paper we present a method that catalogues a complex and disputed concept of social innovation by applying text mining and machine learning techniques. Recognition of social innovations is performed by decomposing a definitions into several more specific criteria (social objectives, social actor interactions, outputs and innovativeness). For each of these criteria, a machine learning-based classifier is created that checks whether certain text satisfies given criteria. The criteria can be successfully classified with an F1-score of 0.83–0.86. The presented method is flexible, since it allows combining criteria in a later stage in order to build and analyse the definition of choice.