AI multilingual tools for social innovation: new perspectives on civic technologies, digital empowerment and inclusive governance

The recent surge of investment in Civic Technologies represents a unique opportunity to realize the potential of Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) for improving democratic participation. In this review, we study what technologies are proposed and evaluated in the academic literature for such goal. We focus our exploration on how civic technology is used in the collaborative creation of solutions for social issues and innovations for public services (i.e., social innovation). Our goal is to provide researchers, designers, and practitioners a starting point to understand both the academic state of the art and the existing opportunities for ICT in a democracy.

Correction: AI multilingual tools for social innovation: new perspectives on civic technologies, digital empowerment and inclusive governance

BackgroundSocial innovation in health is a community-engaged process that links social change and health improvement, drawing on the diverse strengths of local individuals and institutions. However, there are few studies...

PurposeThis article seeks to characterize and assess a new type of resilient, socially conscious and competitive enterprise that simultaneously encompasses open and social innovation – aligning both business and social outcomes – and which will gain increasing importance in post-pandemic competitiveness.Design/methodology/approachA mixed method approach based on sequential deductive triangulation analysis (QUAN/qual) is used. First, data gathered from the Chilean innovation survey is used to quantify the percentage of firms implementing open and social innovation simultaneously, and to assess their relative performance in relation to other types of innovative firms. Second, a qualitative multiple-case study analysis reveals the perceptions of senior managers regarding the applicability of this approach in terms of building resilience and strengthening future competitiveness in line with sustainable development goals.FindingsSocial innovation is a relatively rare event (7.2% of firms in the sample). While social innovation occurs equally in monopolistic and perfectly competitive industries, the authors’ findings suggest that in order to adopt social and open innovation effectively, firms need to set entry barriers such as economies of scale. On the other hand, open innovation is a more common event (15.4% of firms in the sample), which correlates closely with absolute and relative performance indicators. Moreover, the results suggest that open innovation enables a greater understanding of societal needs, thus making social innovation more effective.Research limitations/implicationsTheoretical developments coupled with descriptive and qualitative evidence reveal the innovative capabilities that up-and-coming enterprises may possess. The findings suggest that at times of far-reaching technological, social and political change, enterprises should share some of their knowledge and resources with wider society. Only then will more equal, resilient and cohesive societies be built.Originality/valueThis article combines two seemingly unrelated literature streams (open and social innovation) in order to elucidate the enterprise of tomorrow, which will be capable of achieving sustainable development whilst reaching high levels of competitiveness.

Drivers of joint cropland management strategies in agri-food cooperatives

This study explores the intersection of social innovation, universities, and territorial dynamics, focusing on how these elements foster the development of social innovation hubs, specifically university incubators. Addressing gaps in existing literature, the research examines the institutional configurations, power relations, and strategies that support these processes, with a particular emphasis on the mutual relationship between social innovation and spatialisation processes. The research involved a comparative analysis of university incubators in Brazil, Argentina, and Italy, regions with significant yet distinct experiences of social innovation environments. Quantitative research analyzed 186 incubators in Brazil, 91 in Argentina, and 197 in Italy, followed by qualitative case studies of five incubators (two each in Brazil and Argentina, and one in Italy) deemed particularly relevant. The study employed qualitative methods, including biographical reconstructions of innovators and assessments of incubation approaches, to identify governance models of social incubators. Key findings reveal that in Latin American contexts, social incubators emerged as responses to economic crises, initially fostering grassroots solidarity and later serving as mechanisms for job creation and economic regeneration. The Brazilian and Argentinian incubators demonstrated a participatory and circular governance model, aligning with the Open Innovation paradigm, while the Italian case displayed a more unidirectional approach from university to territory. All the analyzed cases highlighted the critical role of universities in weaving relational networks among diverse actors, including educators, students, technicians, local businesses, artisans, and marginalized community members. This aligns with an infrastructuring approach that transcends traditional stakeholder frameworks, fostering ecosystem-based incubation to promote social and territorial innovation. The Latin American experiences were particularly notable for engaging traditionally marginalized actors through participatory methodologies, confirming the efficacy of quadruple and quintuple helix models in transforming social relations. Despite these advancements, the Italian case struggled to empower local actors fully, reflecting challenges in achieving capability-building—a key element in social innovation. The study identifies specific capabilities required to involve territorial actors in the quintuple helix model and emphasizes the importance of participatory, inclusive, and collaborative governance in transforming social relations to achieve economic, psychological, social, and political empowerment. While offering valuable insights into university-led social incubators, the study calls for further exploration of diverse forms of social innovation hubs across broader contexts and countries.

This special issue was supported by an Australian National University GrandChallenges grant (Social Cohesion, Diversity and Inclusion) to Israr Qureshi.

Distinguished schools of thought, within the increasing impact of the ‘Innovation District’ phenomenon, have highlighted the ‘Innovation Center’ idea and its interpretations as physical structures able to build a powerful nexus for social and institutional innovation in urban regeneration. These ‘intermediate places’ can be considered interactive playgrounds, triggering new horizons in urban policies toward shared, inclusionary solutions more likely to meet the needs of local communities. Social innovation is strictly path-dependent, enabled by ‘opportunity windows’ in which local actors get mutual engagement and advantage, addressing contextual needs, while creating virtuous cooperation and new governance arrangements. The thesis of the paper is that innovation centers—as ‘intermediate places’—can be successful if they are built to recover direct relationships between the various stakeholders in the urban arena; consequently, the operative capacity of practices can expand the planning strategies providing the perspective of a long-term change. Through comparisons and drawbacks arising from case studies selected from different cultural and physical geographies (City of Boston, Massachusetts, USA, and Bologna, Italy), the paper emphasizes the recognition of the variety of ‘intermediate places’, encompassing the diversity of actors, within a strategy for an authentic urban innovation ecosystem.KeywordsSocial innovationIntermediate placesInstitutional innovation

In the era of digital changes and technological renewal of society, e-democracy tools and civic technologies are becoming increasingly important, contributing to increasing transparency, accountability of the authorities and involving citizens in decision-making processes at the local level. The introduction of tools such as electronic petitions, online voting, digital platforms for participation in budgeting and public discussions opens up new opportunities for intensifying civic participation and building partnerships between the government and the community. Given the limited financial resources of local governments, it is important to assess the economic effectiveness of such digital initiatives. It is equally important to investigate the extent to which e-democracy tools contribute to cost optimization, improved management decisions, and sustainable local development. The relevance of the topic is also due to the need to find effective models of community management in the context of decentralization and public power reform in Ukraine. Electronic services and participatory technologies are becoming not only a means of communication, but also a strategic resource for increasing trust in local authorities, attracting investments, and increasing the competitiveness of territorial communities. The study of the economic efficiency of the implementation of e-democracy tools is extremely relevant and has both theoretical and practical significance for local governments, the public and the scientific community. In the process of decentralization and strengthening the role of local self-government, the issue of increasing the efficiency of management of the development of territorial communities is of particular relevance. One of the modern tools that contributes to this is e-democracy, a system of mechanisms for digital interaction between the government and citizens, which ensures transparency, accountability and participation of the population in decision-making. At the same time, civic technologies also play an active role in this), which encompass digital platforms, services and tools to simplify citizens' participation in public life. The purpose of this study is to increase the openness of government, strengthen the participation of citizens in decision-making and ensure the sustainable development of territorial communities, the task of assessing the economic efficiency of the implementation of appropriate digital mechanisms is urgent. In the period of modernization of public administration through digital tools, the key role is played by the introduction of e-democracy tools and civic technologies, which create conditions for the active involvement of the population in governance processes and ensure the transparency of the functioning of authorities and the formation of an effective model of interaction between citizens and the state. Electronic democracy (e-democracy) is a modern form of implementing democratic processes through digital information and communication solutions. This technology includes digital tools that ensure citizen participation in decision-making, access to public information, communication with authorities, control over the activities of officials and organization of public initiatives. The introduction of e-democracy tools and civic technologies in the activities of local administrative bodies is not only a manifestation of the democratization of management processes, but also an important factor in increasing the economic efficiency of local development. The analysis confirms that with proper technical, organizational and regulatory support, digital tools contribute to cost optimization, increased transparency of resource allocation, reduced administrative burden and citizen involvement in decision-making. In addition, such technologies contribute to increasing public trust in local authorities, intensify civic participation and form a culture of open governance. This, in turn, leads to better management decisions focused on the real needs of the community, which allows for more efficient use of financial and material resources. In the long term, this ensures budget savings, reducing social risks, increasing the investment attractiveness of territories and generally strengthening the institutional capacity of local self-government.

Purpose This chapter emphasizes the importance of potential and realized capabilities in building and sustaining social innovations. We present an assessment of the drivers and barriers to the development of social innovation ecosystems through the use of internal (absorptive capacities) and external organizational capabilities (open social innovation). A particular emphasis is placed on social innovation outcomes and impacts. The capability approach is particularly useful for measuring social innovation impacts and investigating the “micro-meso-macro” of linkages that underlie the process of social innovation. Methodology/approach Our methodological approach measures social innovations’ outcomes and impact through an aggregative model, which takes into consideration different forms of capabilities that are engendered in the process of or as a result of social innovation. This methodology highlights the importance of social innovation drivers and contexts in which knowledge exploration and exploitation lead to the creation of capabilities that help social innovators to respond to unfulfilled social needs. Findings The research presented in this chapter provides a new perspective on how the capability approach can be used to assess and measure individual and collective actions when facing social challenges. Research implications Our research supports and complements the findings of the EU project SIMPACT an acronym for “Boosting the Impact of SI in Europe through Economic Underpinnings,” by highlighting the processes and outcomes and SI impact measurement. Social The measurement of social innovation outcomes and impact has gained importance for policy makers and constitutes a strategic tool for designing policies in support of social entrepreneurs, social investors, and private and public organizations which participate in cocreating and implementing innovative projects. Originality/value The research presented in this chapter sheds light on the “micro-meso-macro” linkages that foster social innovation ecosystems, and offer valuable tools and guidelines to researchers, practitioners, and policymaker in the field of innovation in general and social innovation in particular.

This dissertation responds to recent calls for teacher education in a first-year writing context. Studies addressing the intersections between composition and applied linguistics have emphasized the dynamic and situated nature of writing and language practices (Pennycook, 2010; Canagarajah, 2013a, 2013b; Horner, Lu, Royster, Trimbur, 2011; Lorimer-Leonard, 2013; Seloni, 2014); however, it is urgent to investigate how linguistically diverse writing instructors negotiate their teaching strategies across settings to implement pedagogies that accurately reflect writers’ practices in and outside academic contexts and across Englishes. While scholars have proposed terms such as “dialogical pedagogies” (Canagarajah, 2013a) or teaching English as “translingual activism” (Pennycook, 2008), situated teaching practices that encourage the utilization and exploration of linguistically diverse and transnational literacies are yet to be explored. A methodology consisting of constructivist grounded theory and ethnographically-oriented case studies was employed in this study to report findings on the following research questions: 1) How do linguistically diverse writing instructors understand linguistic diversity in relation to writing instruction? Which of their diverse linguistic resources, if any, do they integrate in their own teaching? 2) How do linguistically diverse writing teachers transform their understanding of linguistic diversity into writing pedagogies? 3) What are the institutional, curricular and contextual forces that allow them to or prevent them from enacting transnational writing as well as linguistic diversity? The findings from this study illustrate that instructors understand linguistic diversity in multiple and divergent ways based on their lived experiences across language systems and borders and intersectional identities; thus, the classroom becomes a contested space where language is continuously redefined and constructed. Through various means and by utilizing different language constructs, instructors challenge the myths of linguistic homogeneity (Matsuda, 2006) and homogeneity (Horner, Lu, Royster, &Trimbur, 2011) in the composition classroom; however, as they labor to reconstruct language, other issues arise like dealing with the native/non-native binary, the tokenization of linguistically diverse writers, and the deficit mindset in regards to linguistic diversity. The findings described in this dissertation have implications for teacher education, writing program administration and pedagogies for first-year composition and multilingual writing.

This dissertation responds to recent calls for teacher education in a first-year writing context. Studies addressing the intersections between composition and applied linguistics have emphasized the dynamic and situated nature of writing and language practices (Pennycook, 2010; Canagarajah, 2013a, 2013b; Horner, Lu, Royster, Trimbur, 2011; Lorimer-Leonard, 2013; Seloni, 2014); however, it is urgent to investigate how linguistically diverse writing instructors negotiate their teaching strategies across settings to implement pedagogies that accurately reflect writers’ practices in and outside academic contexts and across Englishes. While scholars have proposed terms such as “dialogical pedagogies” (Canagarajah, 2013a) or teaching English as “translingual activism” (Pennycook, 2008), situated teaching practices that encourage the utilization and exploration of linguistically diverse and transnational literacies are yet to be explored. A methodology consisting of constructivist grounded theory and ethnographically-oriented case studies was employed in this study to report findings on the following research questions: 1) How do linguistically diverse writing instructors understand linguistic diversity in relation to writing instruction? Which of their diverse linguistic resources, if any, do they integrate in their own teaching? 2) How do linguistically diverse writing teachers transform their understanding of linguistic diversity into writing pedagogies? 3) What are the institutional, curricular and contextual forces that allow them to or prevent them from enacting transnational writing as well as linguistic diversity? The findings from this study illustrate that instructors understand linguistic diversity in multiple and divergent ways based on their lived experiences across language systems and borders and intersectional identities; thus, the classroom becomes a contested space where language is continuously redefined and constructed. Through various means and by utilizing different language constructs, instructors challenge the myths of linguistic homogeneity (Matsuda, 2006) and homogeneity (Horner, Lu, Royster, &Trimbur, 2011) in the composition classroom; however, as they labor to reconstruct language, other issues arise like dealing with the native/non-native binary, the tokenization of linguistically diverse writers, and the deficit mindset in regards to linguistic diversity. The findings described in this dissertation have implications for teacher education, writing program administration and pedagogies for first-year composition and multilingual writing.

This paper is based on research that centres on the city of Tokyo, a mature city that is experiencing various transformations, in order to show how social capital and innovation can help build up resilient communities. It presents two major topics: 1) the potential of localities and their social capital and social innovation to actively react to change, and 2) the role of localities for inclusive urban governance. By focusing on five small neighbourhoods in the south of Taito-ward in central-east Tokyo, the paper addresses the following questions: a) what kinds of social networks and interaction exist at the local level, b) how are residents contributing to neighbourhood revitalization and community identity, and c) what are specific examples of social innovative practices, emerging in periods of crisis, in the case-study area as a direct response to the COVID-19 pandemic? By adopting a mixed methods approach drawing especially on in-depth interviews conducted with a range of independent business owners, the study reveals the dynamics between long-term residents and newcomers as they negotiate shared identities that continue to shape the present and future of some of Tokyo’s oldest neighbourhoods. The research findings highlight the need for good urban governance to draw on an improved understanding of the potential of localities, place-based social capital building, and new social practices that are emerging in local third sectors, such as volunteer-run industry-based organizations, which are vital in maintaining informal networks as an alternative to more traditional neighbourhood groups to bond, bridge, and link diverse community members.

The main objective of this chapter is to explain and understand how the enhancement of culture for the development of tourism is approached through processes of social innovation as a new form of social action that is capable of transforming the frameworks of action and proposing new formulas for the development of cultural tourist destinations. Initiatives classified as social innovation are characterised by mobilising local and external resources to change the logic of collective action and provide new responses to common problems. It is based on citizen participation, shared leadership, co-creation of knowledge, initiatives, and policies. Cultural heritage is understood in this way as linked to the society that generated it, maintains it, and gives it its own identity. The tourist using this heritage must favour its conservation and sustainability. This chapter aims to review the literature concerning social innovation in tourism and good practices in order to generate a theoretical basis so that the social innovation processes already validated can be replicated in other countries.

The COVID-19 pandemic has profoundly disrupted the provision of health services across the globe. Travel to hospitals is restricted and many health facilities have limited services, deepening financial problems for...