Governance For Social Innovation Research Articles

Developing Forest Coffe Cultural Tourism and Historical Heritage Megalitic Sites in Social Innovation Governance: How Does it Work in a Sustainable Way?

This article examines the tourism potential of megalithic civilization and forest coffee from a historical and cultural standpoint. Both have new values, as they provide cultural experiences of Indonesian identity, historical heritage preservation, and local cultural practices. The study investigates the issues of collective value system governance and stakeholder participation using qualitative case studies in determining tourist development success. The study's findings revealed that the program's policy difficulty was incremental rather than transformative innovation. Community groups have linked stakeholder cooperation by acting as innovation champion, liaising with administrative and political leadership, adopting reforms, and creating innovation spaces. Both issues are relevant in terms of governance quality. Organizational changes in the public sector are an important aspect of systematic innovation and entrepreneurship. The topic of values, when approached in a civic-minded iterative manner under collaborative governance, can result in several innovative policies that enable responsible and sustainable tourism development.

Social innovation governance and the role of universities: Cases of quadruple helix partnerships in Italy

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.

Correction: Ludvig, A.; et al. Governance of Social Innovation in Forestry. Sustainability 2020, 12, 1065

Replacing the email of the fifth author Wilding Maria [...]

Governance of Social Innovation in Forestry

Over the last decade, the term social innovation has received increased attention as a potential solution to address complex global social problems and to add collective values to society. The forest sector has great potential for fostering employment, community development and reducing increased emigration from rural to urban areas. This potential is not always realised, especially in economically weak and remote rural areas. Hence, this paper tackles the question of how social innovations in forestry are able to succeed under adverse circumstances and contribute to respond to some of the before mentioned challenges? To answer this question, we first identified four very different cases across Europe that are compatible with the criteria of social innovation. Proceeding from this starting point, comparative research was undertaken with the aim to identify the cases´ specific features and key criteria for success. In the cases considered, it is evident that the sheer determination and voluntary investment of time and effort by key individuals, who were convinced of the value of the idea for the community, provided indispensable impetus to all four social innovations. In drawing its conclusions, this paper highlights the principal areas that need consideration and that hence have implications when developing supportive policies. Furthermore, we provide some insight into future research topics that would allow us to better understand the positive impacts of social innovation in the forest-based sector.

The Rise of the Hybrid Domain: Collaborative Governance for Social Innovation, by Yuko Aoyama with Balaji Parthasarathy

The Rise of the Hybrid Domain: Collaborative Governance for Social Innovation, by Yuko Aoyama with Balaji Parthasarathy

Book Review: Yuko Aoyama and Balaji Parthasarathy, The Rise of the Hybrid Domain: Collaborative Governance for Social Innovation

Yuko Aoyama and Balaji Parthasarathy, The Rise of the Hybrid Domain: Collaborative Governance for Social Innovation. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar, 2016, 232 pp., $120.00 (cased) and $108.00 (e-book). ISBN: 978 1 78536 042 8 (cased). ISBN: 978 1 78536 043 5 (e-Book).

Governing Social Innovation: Exploring the Role of ‘Discretionary Practice’ in the Negotiation of Shared Spaces of Community Food Growing

AbstractDespite the extensive areas of under‐used green and brownfield land that remain in public ownership, little academic attention has thus far been given to the role of the public sector in utilising this resource for shared forms of community food growing. Building upon recent calls for more research targeted towards the governance of social innovation, but also the spaces and places in which it occurs, this article presents an in‐depth qualitative account of one such public sector‐led attempt at instigating the co‐production of community food growing. Guided by social innovation theory and Lipsky's (1980) street level bureaucracy, the discussion pays particular attention to the discretional practice of front line public sector workers. Whilst at one level public sector‐led initiatives lack sufficient intention or scope for bringing about the transformation of existing social orders, their contribution to propagating individual and smaller scale occurrences of social innovation in the context of community food security should nevertheless not be overlooked. It is by adopting a more micro‐level, situated and process orientated approach to the analysis of alternative forms of collaborative public sector‐led community food growing, that it becomes possible to evidence the presence of innovative practice as it unfolds on the ground.