PR 00144

Keywords to describe our research:

• Cross-disciplinary approach to study social innovation

Abstracts

Identify the purpose (motivation)

• Why did you decide to do this study or project?
• How did you conduct your research?
• Why is this research and your findings important?
• Why should someone read your entire essay?
• This section should include the importance of your work, the difficulty of the area, and the impact it might have if successful.

Explain the problem at hand (problem statement)

• What problem is your research trying to better understand or solve?
• What is the scope of your study - a general problem, or something specific?
• What is your main claim or argument?

Describe the method (approach)

Give your conclusion

• What are the implications of your work?
• Are your results general or very specific?

Outline --> Introduction - Body - Conclusion. Two paragraphs up to one page of text. ~ 300 words.

Paper 1 - Introducing the concept of place in socially innovative actions 

• De huidige discussie gaat vooral om de verschillende definities van SI (wat is de correcte definitie). Wel aangeven waar in het debat / welke traditie we ons bevinden (maximalistische / minimalistisch en transformative / radical opzoeken).
  • Minimalist - Maximalist: "A third type of radical innovation has been elaborated by Mangabeira Unger. He distinguishes between minimalist social innovations which give a human face to an otherwise unsupportable situation, and maximalist social innovations that aim at deep changes. ”
  • Transformative - Radical
• GAP: hoe het proces in zijn gang gaat is onvoldoende scherp. Zeker wat aan toe te voegen: microniveau. Een scherpere blik op SI.
• Wat gebeurt er? Daar is niet veel naar gekeken.
• Combinatie met Human and Social Geography
• PLACE

ABSTRACT

As the position of the nation state has weakened with decentralisation as result, local socially innovative actions have come to the attention of a plethora of actors. As a means to an end and an end in itself, social innovation has increasingly gained the interest of academics, practitioners and policy makers alike. Much has been said about the definition of social innovation and also the outcomes have been discussed at large. The process dimension of socially innovative actions is less explored. Especially the micro level with the individual as a central point of focus has gained little to no attention in the current discussion.

Consequently, this study focusses on what is happening on a micro level during the process of social innovation. More specifically, this first paper enhances the discussion by introducing the concept of place. Decentralisation has enhanced the position of place in organising society. As a location with a purpose it is perceived as something people take shared responsibility of. It presupposes a position of equivalence and pluralism. Place is where the development of new, or the transformation of, social relations between individuals takes place, being at the centre of socially innovative actions.

In order to explore the concept of place in the process of social innovation, this study takes on a cross-disciplinary approach and draws on the human and social geography literature. Instead of looking at shared norms and values and following a pre-given set, it focusses on altering the meaning of what it is to be social in the process. The results are relevant for researchers, practitioners and policy makers interested in the greater picture of social innovation.

Social innovation, as a means to an end and an end it itself, has increasingly gained the interest of academics, practisioners and policy makers alike. The discussion has largely focussed on the goals of social innovation as well as on finding common ground regarding the definition. Social innovation addresses local social needs and global societal challenges. It does so by using social means through the development of new, or the transformation of, social relations. These socially innovative actions are driven by different processes to enable groups to better satisfy their human needs and improve their living conditions.

Instead of joining the greater discussion on the content, outcomes and definition of social innovation, this study focusses on the process dimension. More specifically, it aims at elucidating the processes of social learning, individual and collective awareness rising, and socio-political mobilisation. At a microlevel it explores the connections between the different actors partaking in socially innovative actions.

Place making: look at the potential of place-based forms of solidarity and care. Recent thinking about citizenship. Look at what people actually do. Who is active in the public space? Increased importance of place in our society. Making place becomes an important project.

Paper 2 - Social innovation and the role of the encounter

• lijn: mooi dat er wordt gekeken naar het niveau van organisatie; maar wat gebeurt er op het niveau van individuen?
• relatie met overheden: kunnen publieke instellingen ook innovatief zijn?
• inter-organisatorisch kijken. Niet: wie is de leider / kenmerken e.d. Wel: hoe zit het met de verhouding tussen al die mensen. Dat mist in literatuur!
• etnografisch meerwaarde toevoegen. Gebeurt nog niet in bestuurswetenschappen (public administration). Etnografie en innovatie.
• THE ENCOUNTER + NARRATIVE

ABSTRACT

The social innovation process, as a method and a practise, is dynamic and includes a plethora of different actors. It derives from bringing together these different actors that usually do not maintain relationships or only in direct conflict. The previous paper explored the role of place in connecting people. This paper aims at further elucidating the level of the individual in socially innovative actions. It investigates how the relationships between different actors are (re)organised by drawing on the concept of the encounter frequently used in the human and social geography literature. Careful consideration is asked for the types of encounters sought for and avoided by individuals.

Social innovation works towards social change through social actions and conscious awareness. Mutual learning plays an important role in this. The role of the narrative has often come to the forefront implicating its research significance through narrative analyses for interpreting human meaning and experience. Yet, the practical role of the narrative in mutual learning, mobilising action, and bringing about change has received little to no attention in the public administration discipline.

Against the background of decentralisation and the growing importance of investing in a public meeting culture, understanding the role of the encounter in socially innovative actions could support public administrators in facilitating alternative structures for societal change. Introducing the narrative, and hence ethnography in innovation, as a practise could provide policy makers an additional instrument for mutual learning and thus to gain a qualitative insight of the relationships between people and the topics of importance to enhance quality of life from a policy perspective.    

• Moulaert: "Social innovation is not innovation in its ends only. SI hence works towards social change through the deepening and the broadening of participation, the establishment of more inclusive organisational procedures, the development of the capacity for collective action and the fundamental change of human attitudes and behaviour."
• In vergelijk met Zapf (2003, p.427) "...process of change in the social structure of a society in its constitutive institutions, cultural patterns, associated social actions and conscious awareness"
• "Social innovation derives from bringing together different actors that normally do not maintain relationships or only in direct conflict. Reorganise the connections between different actors - mutual learning (narratives?)" (Klein 2010). --> Link this with "The encounter", link to human/social geography

Overdenkingen plaats:

Greep natiestaten verzwakt en decentralisaties -> plaats belangrijker. Relationeel. Verknoping van relaties. Groepen delen weinig behalve de plaats waar ze samenkomen. Gedeelde verantwoordelijkheid. Plaats -> nieuwe gemeenschappelijkheid. Laagdrempelig. Vanuit nabijheid. Afhankelijkheid (krimp?) -> lotsverbondenheid. Samen verantwoordelijkheid nemen voor een plaats veronderstelt een positie van gelijkwaardigheid.

Overheid: gelijke kansen. Democratische plicht om om te investeren in een publiek ontmoetingsstructuur. Ook: Potentieel van plaat-gebaseerde vormen van care. Burgerschap als praktijk. Wat mensen concreet doen. Toegenomen belang van plaats in het organiseren van ons samenleven.

Paper 3 - Ethics of care: Means to an end or end in itself?

• link innovatie: rol van ethics in gemeenschap vormen. Is dat:
• zorgdragen voor ipv innovatief menstype te zijn (als individu) of is de ethics of care die in de gemeenschap ontstaat de sociale innovatie?
• CARE + THE COMMONS

ABSTRACT

The previous two papers explored the role of place and encounter in the social innovation process. Social dynamics for the development of new or existing relationships between individuals is at the core of social innovation. The development of the capacity of collective action is what aimed for. Still, these social means are often solely perceived as a side effect of the social innovation process. Nevertheless, within the encounter between people, social dynamics are an inevitable factor.

A concept which could meaningfully explain the social dynamics in collective action is the concept of care. Care is at times used as a synonym for solidarity and could be understood as connections that are made between individuals on the basis of natural predispositions. Apart from natural predisposition, moral principles are also influencing the development of relationships in socially innovative actions. Hence, the theory of an ethics of care, in which interpersonal relationships and benevolence are a virtue to moral actions, could meaningfully address the social dynamics in the social innovation process. In short, this paper focusses in particular on how individuals take care of each other. This leads to the question if an ethics of care is a means to an end, or an end in itself in social innovation.

In the current discussion of citizenship different forms of place-based care could potentially influence collective action. In this vein, care may become part of the commons. This study perceives the commons as a group of people taking responsibility for organising and providing local services of importance to them. It is a field of new social practises based on socio-cultural change. Practises of care could inhibit or open up possibilities to change people's attitude towards other individuals and wider social groups. Understanding ethics and care as part of the commons

The results of this research are relevant for public administrators to better understand the role of ethics of care in micro practises. It will enhance the understanding of how the choices of individuals effects societal change.

• But how can we make visible the human relations that underlie care? conception of care - as part of the commons. Care: connections that are made on the basis of our natural predisposition to love, empathise, reciprocate and share meanings. The commons: where community organizes and provides its own services: Instead asking us to understand commons as an informal social activity from the bottom up known as ‘commoning’. This is where the real ideas for change are conceived and grow.

• The Commons – "a vision of empowered citizens taking charge of their lives and their endangered resources"(Bollier & Helfrich 2012) – is a field of possibilities and new social practices, based on sharing, cooperation, reciprocity and socio-cultural change. These practices are providing pioneering solutions to the challenge of how to reproduce our livelihoods beyond market and state. 

The aim of this study is to recognise care and different responsibilities formed in material, technological, symbolic and imagined space. ....can be extended as a form of interest in the commons.

The emphasis is placed not just on immediate contact experiences, but also on how the accrued histories of social experience and material circumstances contributing to the individual's feelings about different sorts of encounters. In particular, how do 'real' and 'imagined' feelings and practices of care inhibit or open up the possibilities that a bridge is being made between people's attitudes to particular individuals and to wider social groups.

Place making: look at the potential of place-based forms of solidarity and care. Recent thinking about citizenship. Look at what people actually do. Who is active in the public space? Increased importance of place in our society. Making place becomes an important project.

Ethics of care: looks at ethics which pays more attention to emotional and private role of ethical judgments.

Look at the actual practices in everyday life settings and grass-roots movements

Care for each other plays everywhere; we look at how it works in neighbourhoods and in the family.

Focus on the individual experiences.

(To scan the landscape for evidence and proposals for new ways of gathering diversity into a functioning ‘commons’.

Argument link with social innovation: the role of ethics in community building:

Not a focus on the innovative individual but:

are the different ways to care for each other that arise in the community a social innovation in itself?

Paper 4 - Politics of care for social innovation

• Hoe kun je politici hier in meenemen; houding cultiveren. Niet in bestuurlijke zin maar houding als persoon.
• antropologie van beleidsmakers.

ABSTRACT

                * (Chambon, David and Devevey 1982). Chambon et al. argue that social innovation practices are different from existing practices because they respond to a society which is blocked by ‘institutions’. Social innovation rejects ‘long circuits’ and aims to shorten way between appearance of need and its satisfaction by bypassing existing (welfare) state institutions.  

Paper 5 - What happens when you become the best practise

The up-scaling of local socially innovative actions is of paramount importance to a variety of actors included and excluded in the process. The so-called best practise should lead by example and practises should become transferrable to other cases and contexts. Yet, the local social innovation is oftentimes context-bound and running on bottom-up initiatives and practises. Transferring it to other places and context could therefore be problematic. In addition, gaining publicity as best-practise could work as an accelerator but may also act as a boundary for success.    

Ulrum is a small village in the province of Groningen, The Netherlands. Due to population aging and dejuvination demographic changes are clearly felt and visible. In order to become a future-proof village, residents started working on changing their village in a place tailored to their needs. With a plethora of local, regional, national and international partners the residents have worked on finding a solution which fits the local needs of Ulrum. Instead of taking an external look, the project was set up from the inside, with the people who live and work in Ulrum. The official timeline of the project was three years, finishing in 2016. However, DEEL & Ulrum continues till this day. 

In order to explore what happens when you become a best-practise, this research draws on a wide selection of data. All meeting minutes are used to develop a timeline of events. This information may also be used to analyse possible changes in the project due to these events. The documentary made of the Ulrum caused a lot of commotion in the village and the project. This documentary is also used in the analyses. In addition, interviews are conducted with various people involved in the project.    

The aim of this study is to provide an insight of the dynamics taking place when a local project becomes a best-practise. Due to historical data, a retrospective view provides the opportunity to elucidate the process over time.    

The results are of interest to people involved in social innovation projects. The greater field of social innovation and public administration in particular benefit from this research.    

• Howaldt, J., Butzin, A., Domanski, D., & Kaletka, C. (2014). Theoretical Approaches to Social Innovation – A Critical Literature Review. A deliverable of the project: “Social Innovation: Driving Force of Social Change” (SI-DRIVE). Dortmund: Sozialforschungsstelle. 
• Moulaert, F., MacCallum, D., Mehmood, A., & Hamdouch, A. (2013). The international handbook on social innovation: Collective action, social learning and transdisciplinary research. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

Paper 6 - Auto-Ethnography for social innovation

The last paper focusses on the role of the intermediary, the facilitator, the professional in the process of social innovation. Concentrating on managing and creating innovative and productive contexts and to value each other’s strengths and avoid each other weaknesses is one of the tasks of the intermediary.

The central supporting role of the professional and the public meeting culture is compelling in the social innovation process. It is of importance to explore this role if only to undermine the illusion of spontaneous care and direct solidarity. Place-bound and local forms of direct types of care are strongly interwoven with the indirect care of the welfare state through financing professionals and the meeting culture. The role of reflection and balancing power through perpetuating or imposing priorities from outside is what the professional needs to cope with. Within this the encounter with different kind of people is also challenge and furthermore a risk full process. Absorbing this risk is key to the process of socially innovative actions. Yet, for who is the professional absorbing this risk, the local community or political figures and bodies. Who is the object of care, of solidarity, is the question. Within the encounter the professional continuously takes on a different role, in which they themselves become a different person, a stranger.

Through auto-ethnography this paper explores the field of tension between distance and involvement of alienation and appropriation, the self-evidence of the researcher and the informants in thinking, feeling and doing. It provides an insight of the dynamics in the case of Ulrum.

The aim of this paper is presenting an alternative for making personal experiences relevant for people in similar positions and the pedagogy discipline in particular.

• Ellis, Carolyn (2004). The ethnographic I: A methodological novel about autoethnography. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press.
• Ellis, Carolyn (2009). Telling tales on neighbors: Ethics in two voices. International Review of Qualitative Research, 2(1), 3-28.

Written papers and articles

Startdatum

juli 6, 2017

Einddatum

Onderwerpen

Subprojecten

Project	Startdatum	Einddatum	Samenvatting
Paper 1	3 oktober 2017		Social innovation and the role of the encounter
Paper 2	1 oktober 2018		Introducing the concept of place in socially innovative actions
Paper 3	1 oktober 2018		Ethics of Care: Means to an end or end in itself?
Paper 4	1 oktober 2018		Politics of care for social innovation
Paper 5	1 oktober 2018		What happens when you become the best practise?
Paper 6	1 oktober 2018		Auto-ethnography for social innovation

HZ Kenniscentrum Kusttoerisme
Edisonweg 4
Postbus 364
4380 AJ Vlissingen
kenniscentrumtoerisme@hz.nl

• linkedin
• facebook

Blijf op de hoogte!

Meld je aan voor onze nieuwsbrief:

Aanmelden

Copyright 2024 HZ Kenniscentrum Kusttoerisme | Disclaimer | Cookieverklaring | Privacyverklaring