Emancipatory Social Innovation: Within and Beyond the Innovative Society (original) (raw)

Towards a theory of transformative social innovation: A relational framework and 12 propositions

Research Policy, 2020

This paper responds to the need in innovation research for conceptual clarity and solid theory on social innovation (SI). The paper conceptualizes SI as changing social relations, involving new ways of doing, knowing, framing and organizing, and theorizes transformative social innovation (TSI) as the process of SI challenging, altering, or replacing dominant institutions in a specific social-material context. Three advances towards TSI theory are proposed. First, we reflect epistemologically on the challenges of theory-building, and propose an appropriate research design and methodology. Middle-range theory is developed through iteration between theoretical insights and comparative empirical study of 20 transnational SI networks and about 100 associated initiatives. Second, we synthesize various innovation theories and social theories into a relational framework that articulates the distributed agency and institutional hybridization involved. Third, we formulate twelve propositions on the emergence of SI initiatives, on the development of SI ecosystems, on institutionalization processes, and on the historical shaping of SI. The paper ends with a critical assessment of the advances made, also identifying further challenges for TSI theory and practice.

On the agency and dynamics of transformative social innovation

Citation: Haxeltine A., Jørgensen, M. S., Pel, B., Dumitru, A., Avelino, F., Bauler, Lema, Blanco, I., T. Chilvers, J., Cipolla, C., Dorland, J., Elle, M., Garido, S., Kemp, R., Kunze, I., Longhurst, N., Pataki, G., Rach, S., Renema, J., Ruijsink, S., Strasser, T., Tawakol, D., Weaver, P. and Wittmayer J. M. (2016) On the agency and dynamics of transformative social innovation, (TRANSIT working paper #7), TRANSIT: EU SSH.2013.3.2-1 Grant agreement no: 613169. Abstract: This working paper presents a set of propositions about the agency and dynamics of transformative social innovation (TSI) that have been developed as part of an EU-funded research project entitled “TRANsformative Social Innovation Theory” (TRANSIT; 2014-2017). These TSI propositions represent first steps towards the development of a new theory of TSI, taking the form of proto-explanations of the agency and dynamics of TSI, based on the bringing together of our empirical observations on TSI and the project's theoretical reviews and theoretical framings. Ideally this working paper should be read in conjunction with the working paper entitled “A framework for transformative social innovation” (Haxeltine et al 2016) which presents in skeletal terms the theoretical and conceptual framing of TSI developed in the TRANSIT project. This TSI framework builds on sustainability transition studies, social innovation research, social psychology studies of empowerment and other several other areas of social theory to deliver a bespoke theoretical and conceptual framework that is grounded in a relational ontology and which is being employed as a platform for the development of a middle-range theory of TSI. Next we provide a very brief overview of some key elements of the framework, in particular how we conceptualise social innovation, transformative change, and transformative social innovation. Propositions were developed for each of four relational dimensions implied by the TSI framework with also a brief statement of the topic addressed by each of the twelve propositions

‘Shaken, but not stirred’: six decades defining social innovation

Working paper 2015-04

This paper examines the evolution in the conceptualization of Social Innovation (SI) under the assumption of SI as a trans-disciplinary construct which comprises a diversity of discourses from different fields and actors. We performed a comprehensive and systematic literature review along six decades (1950-2014), extracting definitions of SI through a search of 2,339 documents in various languages retrieved from Web of Science, SCOPUS and Google scholar. To guide the inductive analysis of pluri-vocal discourses we assume innovation to be a learning-based process, introducing the notion of social practice linked to its intertwined institutional and sociocultural dimensions. We applied mixed qualitative methodologies, combining content analysis based on a social constructionist/interpretivist ontology with cognitive mapping techniques. Our findings identify some core and secondary elements underpinning two complementary perspectives (transformative and instrumental) of SI as scientific construct. They also point to a number of promising avenues for research towards the advancement of a socio-technical theory of innovation.

Definition and theory in social innovation

Social innovation is a term used globally to describe and identify quite different activities. While it’s a term that everyone likes to use, what it refers to not clear. This paper explores different definitional approaches or intentions – legitimating, theoretical, action-reflection, broad and distinctive – and considers why a definition of social innovation is important and what the crucial ingredients, informed more by practice than theory, might be. Following lessons learnt from postmodernity and critical theory, social marketing, democracy, governance and social entrepreneurship, we arrive at a definition that is value-laden, distinctive and focused - from inception to impact - on equality, justice and empowerment.

Mind the Gap: The Potential Transformative Capacity of Social Innovation

Sustainability, 2019

This paper aims to contribute to the understanding of the potential of Social Innovation (SI) for social transformation. Being a popular concept, SI has been discussed for decades, increasingly recognized for its complexity. A systematic review of the literature on SI was undertaken to understand the state-of-the-art, the evolution of the concept and its core underpinnings in order to meet the research aim of this paper. The literature is relatively broad in relation to general characteristics of SI and contexts where it is happening, but the use of the ‘social innovation’ term often reveals semantic problems, generating multiple, interchangeable and mixed understandings. In this paper, we identify and discuss two ways of using SI in the literature: (i) one that favours the materialization of SI, as something tangible that can be observed, measured and systematically analysed; we called this a cartesian approach; and (ii) another that uses systemic thinking focussing on successful f...

Social innovation: An interdisciplinary and critical review of the concept

In 2006 Muhammad Yunus and the Grameen Bank that he founded in 1983 were jointly awarded the Nobel Peace Prize "for their efforts to create economic and social development from below"1.They received this prize thanks to a simple idea which has become a worldwide social innovation: the development of microcredit which gives poor people access to banking services . Other social innovations such as fair trade, e-learning, neighborhood nurseries, restorative justice, etc. are often put forward. These are some recent examples of social innovation. However, social innovation is not an exclusivity of our times. Back in the 19th century, mutuals and cooperatives were created to improve the living conditions of marginalized urban workers. Although an old phenomenon, social innovation remains relatively understudied in the scientific literature. Nevertheless, like other related topics such as social enterprise and social entrepreneurship, social innovation is drawing increasing interest particularly in Europe and North America. The present paper aims at depicting a critical and interdisciplinary review of the various conceptions of social innovation as a first and indispensable step in order to foster the debate on the subject. This paper is organized as follows. Section 1 highlights the main uses and areas where the concept of social innovation has emerged. This preliminary analysis leads to the conclusion that there are two fundamental definitions of social innovation: an outcome-based one and a process-based one. In section 2 we develop the outcome definition and its main features whereas section 3 focuses on social innovation as a multi-stakeholder process. In section 4, we present an integrated framework of social innovation which is an attempt towards a comprehensive definition of the concept, building on the different approaches and uses prevailing in the literature. Finally, we conclude with the main findings and contributions of the present paper.

Social Innovation: Drawing Lines Around the Appropriative Usage by Mainstream Sectors

VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations

The conceptual malleability of the notion of social innovation has resulted in the appropriation of the concept in various sectors. The goal of the paper is to provide a critical view of such appropriation. We contend that this appropriation often includes the usage of the concept to advance agendas away from or opposed to that of the common good. This paper evaluates such problematic usage by identifying the distinguishing and core aspects of social innovation. These include the social need-meeting dimension geared towards marginalised or disadvantaged communities which is enacted via processes of social and/or power relations shifts of these groups. The paper locates the current trajectory of social innovation discourse to identify that it is in the actions of grassroots third sector initiatives, where the democratic side of social innovation is conserved, and calls for its advancement to prevent exploitation of disadvantaged communities and hogging of resources away from initiati...

SOCIAL INNOVATION OR SOCIAL INNOVATIONS? Redefining and typifying a catchy concept

ISRIC 2018 Conference, 5-7 September 2018 Heidelberg, 2018

In this article we analyze the concept of Social Innovation (SI) as an integral response to the new social vulnerabilities associated with globalization, demographic changes, the digital revolution and the financial crisis. I put forward a definition of SI based on the apparent complementarity between economic efficiency and democratic participation (Efficiencracy) and from a collaborative rather than competitive logic. Yet, this definition is highly conditioned by how “the social” is interpreted in market or State-based logics. From this perspective I identify at least three types of SI: pro-market, anti-market and post-market. We analyze in depth the latter, because it is the least studied and the one that seems most suitable to face these challenges and vulnerabilities.

Transformative social innovation and (dis)empowerment

Technological Forecasting and Social Change

This article responds to increasing public and academic discourses on social innovation, which often rest on the assumption that social innovation can drive societal change and empower actors to deal with societal challenges and a retreating welfare state. In order to scrutinise this assumption, this article proposes a set of concepts to study the dynamics of transformative social innovation and underlying processes of multi-actor (dis)empowerment. First, the concept of transformative social innovation is unpacked by proposing four foundational concepts to help distinguish between different pertinent 'shades' of change and innovation: 1) social innovation, (2) system innovation, (3) game-changers, and (4) narratives of change. These concepts, invoking insights from transitions studies and social innovations literature, are used to construct a conceptual account of how transformative social innovation emerges as a co-evolutionary interaction between diverse shades of change and innovation. Second, the paper critically discusses the dialectic nature of multi-actor (dis)empowerment that underlies such processes of change and innovation. The paper then demonstrates how the conceptualisations are applied to three empirical case-studies of transformative social innovation: Impact Hub, Time Banks and Credit Unions. In the conclusion we synthesise how the concepts and the empirical examples help to understand contemporary shifts in societal power relations and the changing role of the welfare state.