![Sample our Built Environment journals, sign in here to start your access, Latest two full volumes FREE to you for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5926/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Built-Environment.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
Questioning the purely business-orientated, technology-centred use of the term ‘innovation’, research on social innovation has gained momentum in recent years. While significant progress has been made as regards the theoretical foundation of social innovation, the ‘ecosystem’ facilitating respective innovative activities remains rather vague and ambiguous. Most research informing our understanding draws on related but distinct concepts, such as Regional Innovation Systems (RIS). Following on from this debate, this article reflects on common features and differences between social innovation and other forms of innovation, and the resulting requirements for a Social Innovation Ecosystem (SIES). Drawing on data from the two European research projects, SIMPACT and SI-DRIVE, the article reflects on SIES from the perspective of RIS as an analytical framework, and strategic and management concept. It is argued that, due to a multiplicity of social innovation activities and their local embeddedness, no best solution for SIES exists. We posit that establishing a SIES necessitates (1) a mode of governance that integrates actors from civil society, and the social, economic and academic field; (2) social innovation hubs, labs and transfer centres as intermediaries that accelerate social innovation activities; and (3) the integration of different modes of innovation in transformational innovation strategies.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
Notes
1 A wicked problem is a social or cultural problem that is difficult or impossible to solve due to incomplete or contradictory knowledge, the number of actors involved, the large economic burden and interconnectedness with other problems (Murray, Caulier-Grice, & Mulgan, Citation2010; Rittel & Webber, Citation1973; Weber & Khademian, Citation2008). Examples include the failure of modern welfare states, global resource constraints, impacts of mass urbanization, increasing health and social care costs, growing inequality as well as growing cultural diversity to name but a few.
2 The three projects received funding from the EU’s 7th Framework Programme for research, technological development and demonstration. Project results are accessible through the projects’ websites: www.simpact-project.eu and www.si-drive.eu.
3 With his diamond model Porter (Citation1990) is an exception. He emphasizes ambitious and strong local lead markets as one of the four diamonds that facilitate cluster development.
4 Howaldt et al. (Citation2016, p. 9) define social innovation as ‘a new combination or new configuration of social practices in certain areas of action or social contexts, prompted by certain actors or constellations of actors in an intentional targeted manner with the goal of better satisfying or answering needs and problems than is possible on the basis of established practices; at the end socially accepted and diffused (partly or widely) throughout society or in certain societal sub-areas, and finally established and institutionalized as social practices. […] This working definition also foresees that, depending on circumstances of social change, interests, policies and power, successfully implemented social innovations may be transformed, established in a wider societal context and ultimately institutionalized as regular social practice or made routine.’
5 ‘Social innovation refers to novel combinations of ideas and distinct forms of collaboration that transcend established institutional contexts with the effect of empowering and (re)engaging vulnerable groups either in the process of social innovation or as a result of it.’ (Terstriep, Citation2016b, p. 6)