Social Innovation and Social Change – How to increase the impact of social innovation - PowerPoint Presentation

Slide1

Social Innovation and Social Change – How to increase the impact of social innovation

Josef Hochgerner, Centre for Social Innovation (ZSI) and European School of Social Innovation (ESSI)24th of October 2017, 3:30 p.m.The Royal Flemish Academy of Science and the Arts, Brussels

The key principle

of understanding social innovation is – contrary to many common ‚prima vista‘ assessments – the notion of innovation, not doing something ‚

social‘ in the sense of

welfare, care or aid.

According to the

mainstream

concept of innovation, an innovation is considered a product, process or service which proves superior to other (older or contemporaneous) products etc., and thus becomes successfully introduced in markets, to emphasize this a bit: in the market economy. Schumpeter in his very original publication of the ‚Theory of economic development‘ (1912) pointed out that business firms, an SME or multi-national corporation alike, are deemed to permantly develop new products and processes by recombination of the production factors (soil, labour, capital). Thus an economic enterprise actually must re-invent itself to avoid downturns of revenues and potential collapse.

PAGE 2

Innovation

As ‘economic development’ is in the core of innovation

, so is ‘societal development’ in the core of social innovation: “An innovation is … social to the extent that it varies social action, and is socially accepted and diffused in society” (D 1.3, 58)The SI-DRIVE approach to social innovation looks out for new combinations of practices, i.e. new figurations of doing things, of modes and patterns of social action. They are prompted and adopted by actors (individuals, groupings or any type of organisation) in parts or – rarely – the whole of society.Regarding the commonly used – but widely indeterminate – term ‘social change’, social innovations may be drivers or transformers, as well as subject to change by ‘social dynamics’ (more appropriate than ‘social change’). Yet whatever term – social change or social dynamics – we use: Social innovation is part of it, and its impact

depends on the socio-demographic properties, expectations, opinions and interests of those affected. Impact is the

essential criterion to identify new practices as social innovation. However, the prefix social does not necessarily imply that impacts will be ‘good’ or even ‘better’ for all affected. Whether or not a social innovation proves better, as good as, or worse than previous and competing figurations of practices

is a very special task in the processes of initiation, implementation and analyses of impact(s) born by social innovations.

PAGE

3Social innovation

PAGE 4

What makes a figuration of new practices a ‘social innovation’?

Award

criteria

applied

by „SozialMarie“, Austrian Prize for Social Innovation: www.sozialmarie.orgCharacteristic properties of the new practices in the course of SI developmentNovelty of the idea: Rarely in absolute terms, usually relatively better in respect of the location, time, social strata, or field of action concernedSocial quality of the intervention: Involvement and active participation (involvement) of the beneficiaries and other stakeholdersSustainability of the implementation: The new practices are accepted, adopted and performed by the those concernedNotable impact: Effective practices become operational and replicated beyond the pioneering initiative (project); replicability and up- or outscaling instigate or modify social change

PAGE 5

Social changeTo consider ‚social dynamics‘ avoids the potential trap of looking at social change

as a sequence of

seemingly stable states of

societal development. (D 1.3, 6)

This

again depicts an analogy to Schumpeters basics of economic thinking, namely to consider economic development not as moves from one stable state to another one, but to see it as chains of unstable equilibria, not leaning towards a stable state, but innately to change. Social change is not simply the combined result of all social innovations. The key issue in understanding and analysing the relationship between social innovation and social change is to identify and determine the characteristic features of ongoing social dynamics (change) in a society at a certain time and/or in a particular

region on the one

hand

;

and

to

e

stablish

a

typology

of

social

innovations

,

based

on

what

sort

of

impact

they

deliver

, on

the

other

hand

.

A

third

step

of

analysis

would

then

allow

to

clarify

the

interplay

,

reciprocal

effects

and

mutual

reactions

between

specific

social

innovations

and

the

broader

waves

of

social

change

in a

society

under

concrete

historic

and

regional

conditions

. (cf. → Slide # 7)

This definition provides

guidance into which domains we should look at when analysing impact of social innovation. However, it should not lead to

the tempting

conclusion, abstract indicators of

structural, institutional or

behavioural change would allow factual measurement of impact. Instead, if we want to single out impacts of social innovations, we need to stick to the concept of – say – mutations of processes in order to identify the endogen, relational and reflexive impact of social innovations in the complex and wide arena of social more general social dynamics. PAGE 6Characteristic features of social dynamicsWhat is „social change“ from a sociological point of view

?⇨ Zapf (2003) denotes

five

dimensions

or

levels

of

social

change

:

Socio-economic

structures

and

social

systems

Institutions

(

social

and

adminstrative

/organisational

ones

)

Cultural

patterns

(„Frames

of

reference

“,

what

is

„normal“)

Behaviour

(

individuals

,

groups

,

responses

to

norms

,

values

)

Consciousness

(

perceptions

,

acceptance

,

resistance

,

hopes

/

anxieties

)

PAGE 7

Established social and cultural patterns

…

maintained

by – relatively

stable – “frames of reference“[facilitating easy comprehension of, and compliance with what is „normal“]Selectiveperceptions

Filtered

Information

Knowledge,

awareness

Roles

Values

Norms

Relations

New

practices

=

social

innovations

Behaviour

,

social

action

&

potential

change

Opinions,

attitudes

„

environs

“:

media

,

societal

institutions

,

networks

,

peer

groups

....

The

‘CULTURAL

LEARNING CYCLE‘

A first proposition to

narrow down the vast and unclear, often even confusing multitude of activities termed ‚social innovation‘ in all sectors of the society, was laid out by BEPA (2010, 26f.):

PAGE 8

The range

of changes

in

social dynamicsThree perspectives to analyse objectives and impact: The „social demand“ perspective, The „societal challenges“ perspective, and The „systemic change“ perspectiveAgnès Hubert et al. (BEPA – Bureau of European Policy Advisors) 2010: „Empowering people – driving change. Social Innovation in the European Union.“ http://ec.europa.eu/bepa/pdf/publications_pdf/social_innovation.pdf Most social innovations address direct needs of certain

groups of

people

,

and

usually

they

have

limited potential

to

scale

.

However

,

social

relevance

must not

be

seen as a result of scaling; relevance

stems from the urgency of

needs and potential effects

of unmet needs

. When it

comes to social innovations adressing (big) societal challenges,

or even systemic change (transformative social change), it becomes more difficult to (a) find examples, and (b) to collate concrete effects (

impact) of social

innovations to such major and sometimes

disruptive developments. - Last but not least: It makes

a big difference, if a social innovation aims at changes on community- or on societal

level! [cf. → slide # 10]

PAGE 9

Global

challenges

are

rapidly

changing living and working conditions at individual, groups, organisations‘, and societal levels

Climate

Change

Environment

Energy

Mechanisation

I

ndustry

4.0,

synthetic

biology

,

nukes

, ...

Labour

Ways

of

working

,

working

conditions

,

salaries

,

security

,

alienation

…

Public

finances

Taxes

,

debts

,

social

systems

,

health

& care

Conflicts

National,

religious

,

civil

and

international

wars

,

flight

and

migration

Poverty

Income

disparities

,

centre-periphery

,

e

xclusion

,

crime

…

Society

Shaped on (historic, regional, economic) purposes → states, nations

, corporations

…

Formally

defined

and documented membership, changeable (e.g. citzenship)Rules and regulations shall be in line with values, yet are dominantRules are legitimate and binding beyond personal relations (e.g. in „communities“!)Functions in principle independently from individuals (depiction in an

image: Society

appears

„

Domino-like“

)

Members:

may

vary

,

according

to

rules

,

official

roles

are

widely

i

ndependent

from individual

preferences. Society

can expand

(almost) unlimited, includes a lot of

communities; and may – in case of crisis – dissolve into (conflicting)

communities.

CommunityEmerges

and develops in „

organic“ (from „blood“ to associations of

likeminded) Emotional connexions, membership is (basicly)

un-conditional and subjectiv after birth, initiation ritual adoption …

Examples: Family relatives, „gang“ political

groupings … danger: „

People‘s community“ [„Volksgemeinschaft“] Common values

dominate rules

Existence and

functioning depends on – particular – individuals (often charismatic

leader/ “Führer“; depiction: „Puzzle“) Members:

substitution rather difficult or even impossible, offices/duties/functions formed

more by incumbents

than rules

.

Communities

are

limited in

size

/

numbers

, do

neither

necessarily

create

,

nor

necessarily

strengthen Society.

The

scope of social innovations: „Society“ ≠ „community“ …… a fundamental difference!PAGE 10

PAGE 11

Not

one

big

innovation

, nor a series of innovations only! → result of a powerful socio-technical system,enabled by a particular innovation cultureSociety generates innovations to expand ranges of action ...

Earth rise from moon orbit, December 24, 1968

A walk in the sunshine,

July 21, 1969

...

and

reaches

sometimes

out

to

very

spectacular

achievements

:

„Sputnik

shock

“ in

the

U.S. →

and

the

vision

thereafter

The

dominant innovation

culture mainly drives

changes in „societal sediments“ by technology

: Technology made ‚skin‘ of

societyThe power structures in societyModes of

communication in society

, between individuals,

organisations, organisms and artifactsFrames of

reference, shaping

manners,

mores, myths & ritesEmotional balance in a society

(security / insecurity, hope / fear,

empathy / hatred … )

PAGE 12

All innovations are socially relevant, i.e. they impact all sediments – yet: different degrees and pace,

and by

diverse methods

Over-

laps

PAGE 13

A short outlook on future impact measurement

Only

if

implemented and accepted by people and social entities concerned, new practices or varied forms of social action cross the threshold from an idea or invention to become an innovation, visible and determinable by its impact. Thus the implementation of new practices asserting impact on living and working conditions (ways of life), either of individuals, certain social groupings and organisations in parts or the whole of a society shall be considered social innovation – and may alter or nudge social change in some way.SI-DRIVE was not intended

to deliver a ready-made

or

even

tested

methodology

to

measure

impact

of

social

innovations

.

Nevertheless, a promising strategic perspective for

future research might be developed along the following lines (keywords):Pull together statistical data

available from around the world indicating degrees of

human and social development in countries and

world regions (UN: HDI, World Bank: World Development Indicators, Social Progress Index, World

Wealth Report, … and more).Analyse

the strong and weak points in comparative studies to identify country-wise pressing issus on either scale (immediate

social demand, societal challenges, systemic and transformative change).Then relate social innovations in the respective countries to the dominant issues to measure impact per country or region.

From cases of social innovations in the SI-DRIVE database we learned that some form of co-creation  

is common to all social innovations At the same time, social innovations seem to provide at least some kind of empowerment at least one generic social impact. In addition, social innovations are embedded in a great variety of eco-systems, ranging from conducive to hostile socio-economic and cultural environments

.When analysing such

properties, objectives and

processes of the

cases

six typical models of social innovations turn out to appear widely spread across the world regions surveyed:Social innovation as new or improved serviceThe DIY (Do-it-yourself) model: Social innovation as self-helpSocial innovation emerging from co-creationSocial innovation as a cooperativeSocial innovation initiated to drive social changeSupport measures improving the social innovation eco-system PAGE 14Impact characteristics of diverse types of social innovation

Still necessary: Improve the comprehension of what social innovation is – and is not – in the general public, scientific, political and practitioners’ communities.

Intensify learning from social innovation projects (successful ones as well as failed attempts), in particular concerning procedures leading to institutionalisation of SI.Establish platforms and institutional collaboration among social innovation organisations of different kinds to better provide education, training, research and advisory services.Develop stable social innovation eco-systems in cities, regions, countries and on European levels; this requires close collaboration with administrative bodies from local till European levels, yet also with actors and carriers of RTDI policies.Quality, ambitious claims, competence and preparedness to take risks above quantity and social innovation labelling.

PAGE 15

Conclusion

: Ways

to

increase impact (very pragmatic)

PAGE 16

www.si-drive.euThank you very much!Prof. Dr. Josef Hochgerner, Zentrum für Soziale Innovation, ZSICentre for Social Innovation, Vienna. www.zsi.at

, hochgerner@zsi.at