Social innovations in healthcare provision: an analysis of knowledge types and their spatial context

Figures & data

Table 1. Characteristics of synthetic, analytical and symbolic knowledge types.

	Synthetic	Analytical	Symbolic
Knowledge characteristics	Mainly tacit, context specific and practical with some codified components	Codified, highly abstract and universal	Strongly tacit and context specific
Competencies/skills used for creating knowledge	Craft and practical skills: concrete know-how	Scientific skills: abstraction, theory building and testing	Craft and practical skills Creative, imaginative and interpretive skills Deep understanding of the habits, norms and ‘everyday culture’ of specific social groupings
Applied learning practices and methods to create knowledge	Interactive learning of different actors Day-to-day activities (no planned activities) Learning by doing	Formally organized activities with outcomes documented in reports, electronic files or patent descriptions	Learning through interaction in the professional community Learning from local culture Creative processes

Source: Zukauskaite and Moodysson (2016, 592–593); Asheim (2007, 224–227); Manniche and Testa (2018); Manniche (2012).

Table 2. Expectations about frequency, origin of acquired knowledge and combinations of knowledge types for social innovations in peripheral regions.

	Synthetic	Analytical	Symbolic
Frequency of the social innovation process (Frequent, medium or seldom)	Medium to frequent	Medium	Medium to frequent
Origin of knowledge acquisition (Local or extra local)	Local and extra local? (This is not clear from the literature. However, as synthetic knowledge has elements from both analytical and symbolic knowledge, we can expect that it is acquired both extra locally and locally.)	Extra local	Local
Combination of knowledge types	All types are combined as social innovation actors share and exchange different forms of knowledge (Bock 2012; Bosworth et al. 2016; Neumeier 2017).

Table 3. Combination of knowledge types: frequencies and main task types by social innovation phase.

		Synthetic-analytical	Synthetic-symbolic	Analytical-symbolic
Phase 1: Idea proposing and concretization	Frequency (frequent, medium or seldom)	Frequent	Frequent	Hardly ever
	Main task type	Conceptual work	In-group organizing	–
Phase 2: Build-up/development	Frequency	Frequent	Frequent	Seldom
	Main task type	Implementation tasks	Conceptual work	Conceptual work
Phase 3: Operating and sustaining	Frequency	Frequent	Frequent	Seldom
	Main task type	Implementation tasks	Implementation tasks	Conceptual work

Table 4. Frequency, main actor type involved and origin of acquired knowledge by social innovation phase.

	Synthetic			Analytical			Symbolic
	Frequency of applied synthetic knowledge (Frequent, medium or seldom)	Spatial context		Frequency of applied analytical knowledge	Spatial context		Frequency of applied symbolic knowledge	Spatial context
		Main actor types involved (Local or extra local with/without local reference)	Origin of acquired knowledge (Local or extra local)		Main actor types involved	Origin of acquired knowledge		Main actor types involved	Origin of acquired knowledge
Phase 1: Idea proposing and concretization	Frequent	Local and extra local with local reference	Local and extra local	Medium	Extra local with local reference	Extra local	Seldom	Extra local with local reference	Local
Phase 2: Build-up/development	Frequent	Local and extra local with local reference	Local and extra local	Medium	Local and extra local with local reference	Extra local	Seldom	Local and extra local with local reference	Local
Phase 3: Operating and sustaining	Frequent	Local and extra local with local reference	Local and extra local	Frequent	Local, extra local with local reference and extra local without local reference	Extra local	Medium	Local and extra local with local reference	Local

Zukauskaite, E., and J. Moodysson. 2016. “Multiple Paths of Development: Knowledge Bases and Institutional Characteristics of the Swedish Food Sector.” European Planning Studies 24: 589–606. doi:10.1080/09654313.2015.1092502.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Asheim, B. 2007. “Differentiated Knowledge Bases and Varieties of Regional Innovation Systems.” Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research 20: 223–241. doi:10.1080/13511610701722846.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Manniche, J., and S. Testa. 2018. “Towards a Multi-Levelled Social Process Perspective on Firm Innovation: Integrating Micro, Meso and Macro Concepts of Knowledge Creation.” Industry and Innovation 25: 365–388. doi:10.1080/13662716.2017.1414746.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Manniche, J. 2012. “Combinatorial Knowledge Dynamics: On the Usefulness of the Differentiated Knowledge Bases Model.” European Planning Studies 20: 1823–1841. doi:10.1080/09654313.2012.723423.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Bock, B. B. 2012. “Social Innovation and Sustainability; How to Disentangle the Buzzword and its Application in the Field of Agriculture and Rural Development.” Studies in Agricultural Economics 114: 57–63. doi:10.7896/j.1209.

 Google Scholar

Bosworth, G., F. Rizzo, D. Marquardt, D. Strijker, T. Haartsen, and A. Aagaard Thuesen. 2016. “Identifying Social Innovations in European Local Rural Development Initiatives.” Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research 29: 442–461. doi:10.1080/13511610.2016.1176555.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Neumeier, S. 2017. “Social Innovation in Rural Development: Identifying the Key Factors of Success.” Geographical Journal 183: 34–46. doi:10.1111/geoj.12180.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar