This paper introduces a Special Topic on social innovation in the governance of urban communities. It also seeks to widen the debate on the meaning of social innovation both in social science theory and as a tool for empirical research on socioeconomic development and governance at the local level. This debate is organised around ALMOLIN-i.e. alternative models for local innovation as utilised in the SINGOCOM (social innovation in governance in (local) communities) research. The first section explains the role of social innovation in neighbourhood development and how it is best addressed from theoretical, historical and experience-oriented viewpoints. The second section provides a survey of the definitions of social innovation in a variety of social science fields, while the third section mobilises various strands of literature that will be of use for the analytical refinement of ALMOLIN. Section four illustrates how ALMOLIN is used as an analytical tool for empirical research. The final section shows some avenues for future research on social innovation.
MOULAERT F. and SEKIA F. (2003) Territorial innovation models: a critical survey, Reg. Studies 37 , 289-302. This paper provides a critical review of the literature on territorial innovation models (industrial districts, milieux innovateurs , new industrial spaces, local production systems, etc.). The review is organized in two stages. First, the main features of each of these models and their view of innovation are compared. Second, their theoretical building blocks are reconstructed and evaluated from the point of view of conceptual clarity and analytical coherence. It is found that despite some semantic unity among the concepts used (economies of agglomeration, endogenous development, systems of innovation, evolution and learning, network organization and governance), territorial innovation models (TIMs) suffer from conceptual ambiguity. The latter is mainly a consequence of the way territorial innovation is theorized, i.e. in terms of technologically driven innovation and a business culture that is mainly instrumental to the capitalist market logic. This pressing ideological priority pushes the "conceptual flexibility' of TIMs across the border of coherent theory building. MOULAERT F. et SEKIA F. (2003) Des modèles de l'innovation territoriale: une étude critique, Reg. Studies 37 , 289-302. Cet article cherche à fournir une étude critique de la documenatation sur les modèles de l' innovation territoriale (p.e. districts industriels, milieux innovateurs, nouveaux espaces industriels, systèmes de production locaux). L'étude se fait à deux temps. Dans un premier temps, on compare les principaux caractéristiques de chacun de ces modèles et leur point de vue sur l'innovation. Dans un deuxième temps, on reconstruit et é value leurs éléments de base théoriques quant à leur précision conceptuelle et à leur cohérence analytique. Il s'avère que malgré une certaine unité sémantique pour ce qui est des notions employées (économies d' agglomération, développement autochtone, systèmes d' innovation, évolution et apprentissage, organisation de réseau et gouvernance), les modèles d'innovation territoriales (MIT) souffrent d'une ambiguité conceptuelle. Ceci remonte à la façon de théoriser l'innovation territoriale; c'est à dire, en termes de l'innovation déterminée par la technologie et par une culture d'entreprise qui répond dans une large mesure au credo du marché. La priorité idéologique urgente pousse la " flexibilité conceptuelle' des MIT au-delà de la frontière de la construction des théories cohérentes. MOULAERT F. und SEKIA F. (2003) Territoriale Innovationsmodelle: eine kritische Untersuchung, Reg. Studies 37 , 289-302. Der vorliegende Aufsatz liefert einen kritischen Ü berblick über die Literatur, die sich mit territorialen Innovationsmodellen befaßt (Industriegebiete, milieux innovateurs, neue Industrieräume, örtliche Produktionssysteme, usw.). Der Überblick besteht aus zwei Teilen: zuerst werden sowohl die Hauptzüge jedes dieser Modelle als auch ihre Ansichten über Innovation verglichen. Dem folgt eine Rekonstrukt...
This paper summarizes the theoretical insights drawn from a study of thirteen largescale urban development projects (UDPs) in twelve European Union countries. The project focused on the way in which globalization and liberalization articulate with the emergence of new forms of governance, on the formation of a new scalar gestalt of governing and on the relationship between large-scale urban development and political, social and economic power relations in the city. Among the most important conclusions, we found that:• Large-scale UDPs have increasingly been used as a vehicle to establish exceptionality measures in planning and policy procedures. This is part of a neoliberal "New Urban Policy" approach and its selective "middle-and upperclass" democracy. It is associated with new forms of "governing" urban interventions, characterized by less democratic and more elite-driven priorities.• Local democratic participation mechanisms are not respected or are applied in a very "formalist" way, resulting in a new choreography of elite power. However, grassroots movements occasionally manage to turn the course of events in favor of local participation and of modest social returns for deprived social groups.• The UDPs are poorly integrated at best into the wider urban process and planning system. As a consequence, their impact on a city as a whole and on the areas where the projects are located remains ambiguous.• Most UDPs accentuate socioeconomic polarization through the working of real-estate markets (price rises and displacement of social or low-income
Summary. This paper attempts to provide a clear perspective on defining the social economy today. It addresses the question of the relevance of a unifying concept with its need to embrace the existing diversity of approaches and concepts. To this end, it surveys both historical and contemporary academic literature, as well as practice-rooted conceptualisations of the social economy. The first section outlines the analytical challenges to a reconstruction of the social economy concept. The second enhances the historical and space-bound diversity in theorising and institutionalising social economy practices. Section 3 focuses on contemporary reconceptualisations of the social economy in Francophone and Anglo-Saxon literature, while section 4 then suggests improvements to current 'social economy' concepts, by linking them to both the lessons of history and the views of social economy practitioners today.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.