Votre recherche

Le guide pratique sur la cocréation dans son ensemble est disponible gratuitement en téléchargement afin de le rendre accessible à tous.

Le CIRADD est un centre de recherche en innovation sociale spécialisé en développement durable. Il offre des services de recherche et d’analyse ainsi que du soutien, de l’accompagnement et de la formation aux organisations qui souhaitent trouver des solutions innovantes et durables. Affilié au Cégep de la Gaspésie et des Îles, le centre fait partie du réseau Synchronex, qui regroupe 59 centres collégiaux d’innovation au Québec, et de Tech-Accès Canada, un réseau pancanadien de 60 centres d’accès à la technologie.

This open access book summarizes research being pursued within the SISCODE (Society in Innovation and Science through CO-DEsign) project, funded by the EU under the H2020 programme, the goal of which is to set up an analytical, reflective and learning framework to explore the transformations in initiatives and policies emerging from the interaction between citizens and stakeholders. The book provides a critical analysis of the co-design processes activated in 10 co-creation labs addressing societal challenges across Europe. Each lab as a case study of real-life experimentation is described through its journey, starting from the purpose on the ground of the experimentation and the challenge addressed. Specific attention is then drawn on the role of policies and policy maker engagement. Finally, the experimentation is enquired in terms of its output, transformations triggered within the organization and the overall ecosystem, and its outcomes, opening the reasoning towards the lessons learnt and reflections that the entire co-creation journey brought.

This open access book summarizes research being pursued within the SISCODE (Society in Innovation and Science through CO-DEsign) project, funded by the EU under the H2020 programme, the goal of which is to set up an analytical, reflective and learning framework to explore the transformations in initiatives and policies emerging from the interaction between citizens and stakeholders. The book provides a critical analysis of the co-design processes activated in 10 co-creation labs addressing societal challenges across Europe. Each lab as a case study of real-life experimentation is described through its journey, starting from the purpose on the ground of the experimentation and the challenge addressed. Specific attention is then drawn on the role of policies and policy maker engagement. Finally, the experimentation is enquired in terms of its output, transformations triggered within the organization and the overall ecosystem, and its outcomes, opening the reasoning towards the lessons learnt and reflections that the entire co-creation journey brought.

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.

With the advent of smart cities (SCs), governance has been placed at the core of the debate on how to create public value and achieve a high quality of life in urban environments. In particular, given that public value is rooted in democratic theory and new technologies that promote networking spaces have emerged, citizen participation represents one of the principal instruments to make government open and close to the citizenry needs. Participation in urban governance has undergone a great development: from the first postmodernist ideals of countering expert dominance to today’s focus on learning and social innovation, where citizen participation is conceptualized as co-creation and co-production. Despite this development, there is a lack of research to know how this new governance context is taking place in the SC arena. Addressing this situation, in this article, we present an exhaustive survey of the research literature and a deep study of the experience in participative initiatives followed by SCs in Europe. Through an analysis of 149 SC initiatives from 76 European cities, we provide interesting insights about how participatory models have been introduced in the different areas and dimensions of the cities, how citizen engagement is promoted in SC initiatives, and whether the so-called creative SCs are those with a higher number of projects governed in a participatory way.

With the advent of smart cities (SCs), governance has been placed at the core of the debate on how to create public value and achieve a high quality of life in urban environments. In particular, given that public value is rooted in democratic theory and new technologies that promote networking spaces have emerged, citizen participation represents one of the principal instruments to make government open and close to the citizenry needs. Participation in urban governance has undergone a great development: from the first postmodernist ideals of countering expert dominance to today’s focus on learning and social innovation, where citizen participation is conceptualized as co-creation and co-production. Despite this development, there is a lack of research to know how this new governance context is taking place in the SC arena. Addressing this situation, in this article, we present an exhaustive survey of the research literature and a deep study of the experience in participative initiatives followed by SCs in Europe. Through an analysis of 149 SC initiatives from 76 European cities, we provide interesting insights about how participatory models have been introduced in the different areas and dimensions of the cities, how citizen engagement is promoted in SC initiatives, and whether the so-called creative SCs are those with a higher number of projects governed in a participatory way.

Participer au renforcement de communautés de pratique autour de la cocréation et se faire inspirer pour se lancer dans l’aventure. Telle est l’intention de ce manuel complet et très illustré. Le Guide pratique sur la cocréation est issu des années d’expérience des auteurs sur le terrain. Il présente un processus de cocréation et fournit plusieurs éléments de réflexion à intégrer ainsi que des pistes concrètes menant à l’action.

The importance of knowledge co-creation – the joint production of innovation between industry, research and possibly other stakeholders, such as civil society – has been increasingly acknowledged. This paper builds on 13 cross-country case studies and co-creation experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic to characterise the diversity of knowledge co-creation initiatives and identify lessons for policy. The paper identifies a strong rationale for policy to support knowledge co-creation because the benefits of successful co-creation initiatives outweigh the initial co-ordination costs. Moreover, knowledge co-creation initiatives can contribute to democratising innovation. Successful initiatives engage all stakeholders and have effective governance and management structures. They also have clearly defined ownership and use rights of the collaborations’ outcomes and benefit from favourable conditions to operate, including temporary staff mobility and institutional set-ups that facilitate collaboration and effective communication among participants.

The importance of knowledge co-creation – the joint production of innovation between industry, research and possibly other stakeholders, such as civil society – has been increasingly acknowledged. This paper builds on 13 cross-country case studies and co-creation experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic to characterise the diversity of knowledge co-creation initiatives and identify lessons for policy. The paper identifies a strong rationale for policy to support knowledge co-creation because the benefits of successful co-creation initiatives outweigh the initial co-ordination costs. Moreover, knowledge co-creation initiatives can contribute to democratising innovation. Successful initiatives engage all stakeholders and have effective governance and management structures. They also have clearly defined ownership and use rights of the collaborations’ outcomes and benefit from favourable conditions to operate, including temporary staff mobility and institutional set-ups that facilitate collaboration and effective communication among participants.

In an increasingly globalized world, the challenges of society need to be tackled not by single organisations but by a multitude of stakeholders. Universities can contribute by extending their role and by collaborating with external stakeholders. This study employs qualitative methods to explore how a university engages with its innovation ecosystem through two different projects.The findings, connected to the development of educational and digital systems,show: 1) evidence of two extreme approaches to external stakeholder engagement and 2) three levels of tensions (multi-layered tensions) - on an overarching level, between stakeholder groups, and within groups of stakeholders. The contribution connects to literature on open innovation, quadruple helixes and lastly to university social innovation, especially responsibility diffusion.

Context Partnership between patients and health-care professionals (HCPs) is a concept that needs a valid, practical measure to facilitate its use by patients and HCPs. Objective To co-construct a tool for measuring the degree of partnership between patients and HCPs. Design The CADICEE tool was developed in four steps: (1) generate key dimensions of patient partnership in clinical care; (2) co-construct the tool; (3) assess face and content validity from patients’ and HCPs’ viewpoints; and (4) assess the usability of the tool and explore its measurement performance. Results The CADICEE tool comprises 24 items under 7 dimensions: 1) relationship of Confidence or trust between the patient and the HCPs; 2) patient Autonomy; 3) patient participation in Decisions related to care; 4) shared Information on patient health status or care; 5) patient personal Context; 6) Empathy; and 7) recognition of Expertise. Assessment of the tool's usability and measurement performance showed, in a convenience sample of 246 patients and relatives, high face validity, acceptability and relevance for both patients and HCPs, as well as good construct validity. Conclusions The CADICEE tool is developed in co-construction with patients to evaluate the degree of partnership in care desired by patients in their relationship with HCPs. The tool can be used in various clinical contexts and in different health-care settings. Patient or Public Contribution Patients were involved in determining the importance of constructing this questionnaire. They co-constructed it, pre-tested it and were part of the entire questionnaire development process. Three patients participated in the writing of the article.

Context Partnership between patients and health-care professionals (HCPs) is a concept that needs a valid, practical measure to facilitate its use by patients and HCPs. Objective To co-construct a tool for measuring the degree of partnership between patients and HCPs. Design The CADICEE tool was developed in four steps: (1) generate key dimensions of patient partnership in clinical care; (2) co-construct the tool; (3) assess face and content validity from patients’ and HCPs’ viewpoints; and (4) assess the usability of the tool and explore its measurement performance. Results The CADICEE tool comprises 24 items under 7 dimensions: 1) relationship of Confidence or trust between the patient and the HCPs; 2) patient Autonomy; 3) patient participation in Decisions related to care; 4) shared Information on patient health status or care; 5) patient personal Context; 6) Empathy; and 7) recognition of Expertise. Assessment of the tool's usability and measurement performance showed, in a convenience sample of 246 patients and relatives, high face validity, acceptability and relevance for both patients and HCPs, as well as good construct validity. Conclusions The CADICEE tool is developed in co-construction with patients to evaluate the degree of partnership in care desired by patients in their relationship with HCPs. The tool can be used in various clinical contexts and in different health-care settings. Patient or Public Contribution Patients were involved in determining the importance of constructing this questionnaire. They co-constructed it, pre-tested it and were part of the entire questionnaire development process. Three patients participated in the writing of the article.

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.

Digital platforms help develop the open value co-creation strategic alliances, reshape traditional B2B relationships, and promote inclusive social innovation. This research explores the nature of coopetition between the digital platform and its participants. The focus is on how the platform-based alliance balances the contradiction between value creation and appropriation. The support evidence derives from a Stackelberg game in the context of cooperative advertising. Either the platform or the participant supporting advertising in the alliance prompts a Pareto improvement for all players. But the increased profit would be mainly occupied by the dominant platform. The incentive mechanism of profit sharing can promote the alliance to co-create value in a sustainable manner. The game illustrates the significance of cooperative relationships to co-create a larger total value and the existence of an unequal win-win relationship in the strategic alliance. The contradictory logic of cooperation and competition can be accommodated in the platform-based alliance. The dynamic coopetition is involved in a partially convergent interest structure and impacted by power asymmetry. The results highlight the balance between the tensions and harmonies through value creation and appropriation. • Social innovation through value co-creation in the platform-based alliance. • The dynamic coopetition to balance the contradictory logic of value creation and appropriation. • An unequal win-win relationship in cooperative advertising. • The partially convergent interest structure is impacted by power asymmetry.

Digital platforms help develop the open value co-creation strategic alliances, reshape traditional B2B relationships, and promote inclusive social innovation. This research explores the nature of coopetition between the digital platform and its participants. The focus is on how the platform-based alliance balances the contradiction between value creation and appropriation. The support evidence derives from a Stackelberg game in the context of cooperative advertising. Either the platform or the participant supporting advertising in the alliance prompts a Pareto improvement for all players. But the increased profit would be mainly occupied by the dominant platform. The incentive mechanism of profit sharing can promote the alliance to co-create value in a sustainable manner. The game illustrates the significance of cooperative relationships to co-create a larger total value and the existence of an unequal win-win relationship in the strategic alliance. The contradictory logic of cooperation and competition can be accommodated in the platform-based alliance. The dynamic coopetition is involved in a partially convergent interest structure and impacted by power asymmetry. The results highlight the balance between the tensions and harmonies through value creation and appropriation. • Social innovation through value co-creation in the platform-based alliance. • The dynamic coopetition to balance the contradictory logic of value creation and appropriation. • An unequal win-win relationship in cooperative advertising. • The partially convergent interest structure is impacted by power asymmetry.

This study examined the role of Higher Educational Institutions (HEIs) in promoting, creating, and sustaining social innovation. Recently, HEIs have extended their contribution beyond the traditional function of teaching and research to perform in socio-economic problem-solving. Considering the increasing trends of higher education involvement in social innovation practices, this study tries to examine the tools such as learning processes and systemic thinking approach that could be helpful to align the function and responsibilities of HEIs towards social innovation. The objective is to develop a theoretical understanding of the "co-creation for social innovation" concept and to understand the functions and activities of HEIs that can contribute to this process. To promote co-creation for social innovation, HEIs should actively encourage collaborative learning tools that focus on open platforms for collective action and systemic change that help them to engage with society and strengthen their collaboration with social actors. Different activities such as mutual learning and knowledge diffusion using a transdisciplinary approach, technology-based learning and collaboration, and relational transformation are key enablers that can promote social innovation.

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.

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.

This study examined the role of Higher Educational Institutions (HEIs) in promoting, creating, and sustaining social innovation. Recently, HEIs have extended their contribution beyond the traditional function of teaching and research to perform in socio-economic problem-solving. Considering the increasing trends of higher education involvement in social innovation practices, this study tries to examine the tools such as learning processes and systemic thinking approach that could be helpful to align the function and responsibilities of HEIs towards social innovation. The objective is to develop a theoretical understanding of the "co-creation for social innovation" concept and to understand the functions and activities of HEIs that can contribute to this process. To promote co-creation for social innovation, HEIs should actively encourage collaborative learning tools that focus on open platforms for collective action and systemic change that help them to engage with society and strengthen their collaboration with social actors. Different activities such as mutual learning and knowledge diffusion using a transdisciplinary approach, technology-based learning and collaboration, and relational transformation are key enablers that can promote social innovation.