Social Innovation: Emancipation or More of the Same? (Inovação Social: Emancipação ou Mais do Mesmo?)

Abstract

The article discusses the existing convergences between Social Innovation and Emancipation. A systematic literature review was carried out in order to understand the motivations that lead to Social Innovation. In addition, some concrete cases of innovations in the literature reviewed have been described.

Diffusion of Social Innovation: the Innovation Provider’s Perspective

“… Agri-tech start-up profile/characteristics Number of employees, area of business, vision and mission - Online survey (through questionnaire); interview, secondary data 2. Characteristics and form/type of social innovation Purpose, products/services offered, ways of creation, context, mental models, evaluation criteria of SI as defined by start-ups; implementation area of SI Rabadijeva et al ( 2017 ); Brooks ( 1982 ) in Lisetchi and Brancu ( 2014 ); Agostini et al ( 2016 ); Avelino et al ( 2019 ); Cajaiba-Santana ( 2014 ); Dall-Orsoletta et al ( 2022 ); Daniel and Jenner ( 2022 ); Dionisio and de Vargas ( 2020 ); Grilo and Moreira ( 2022 ); Iwamoto and Cançado ( 2020 ); Mulgan et al ( 2007 ); Nicholls and Dees ( 2015 ); Pol and Ville ( 2009 ); Solis-Navarrete et al ( 2021 ); van der Have and Rubalcaba ( 2016 ); Weerawardena and Sullivan Mort ( 2006 ); González and Alonso ( 2022 ); Tidd and Bessant ( 2009 ) Online survey, interview, secondary data 3. Characteristics of the adopter (the farmers) Level of education, location, socio-cultural aspects, age, digital literacy, social system Rogers ( 1995 , 2003 ); Fatmawati ( 2019 ); Bianchi et al ( 2017 ); Abrahamson ( 1991 ); Abrahamson and Rosenkopf ( 1993 ; 1990) Online survey; Interview 4.…”

“… Characteristics of the adopter (the farmers) Level of education, location, socio-cultural aspects, age, digital literacy, social system Rogers ( 1995 , 2003 ); Fatmawati ( 2019 ); Bianchi et al ( 2017 ); Abrahamson ( 1991 ); Abrahamson and Rosenkopf ( 1993 ; 1990) Online survey; Interview 4. Diffusion stages/process Involved actors, communication channel, marketing strategy, result/impact of the diffusion Rogers ( 1995 , 2003 ); Li et al ( 2017 ); Florea ( 2015 ); Iwamoto and Cançado ( 2020 ) Online survey; Interview; secondary data 5. Decision-making for diffusion (innovation-decision process) characteristics Decision-makers, decision stages, decision consideration, purpose of the decision/stages of decision-making, type of entrepreneur Abrahamson and Rosenkopf ( 1997 ); Rogers ( 1995 , 2003 ); Lasso et al ( 2017 ) Interview; secondary data 6.…”

“…SI can be explained from two broad perspectives (Cajaiba-Santana, 2014 ), specifically from institutional and structuration perspectives. The institutional perspective depicts SI as an outcome of knowledge and resource exchange carried out by actors and then catalyzed through “legitimization activities.” This definition views SI based on the “product” or final output regarding the achievement of social goals, which may occur in various areas of implementation (Iwamoto & Cançado, 2020 ). The structuration perspective sees innovation from the undergone process (Cajaiba-Santana, 2014 ).…”

“…SI is different from TI (Solis-Navarrete et al, 2021 ). The former stresses more on social purpose, while the latter emphasizes commercial success (Iwamoto & Cançado, 2020 ). The social purpose is not always the only goal of an organization since it is often misunderstood as the sole purpose of the providers.…”

“… Source: Constructed by authors based on elaboration from (Agostini et al, 2016 ; Avelino et al, 2019 ; Cajaiba-Santana, 2014 ; Dall-Orsoletta et al, 2022 ; Daniel & Jenner, 2022 ; Dionisio & de Vargas, 2020 ; González & Alonso, 2022 ; Grilo & Moreira, 2022 ; Iwamoto & Cançado, 2020 ; Mulgan et al, 2007 ; Nicholls & Dees, 2015 ; Pol & Ville, 2009 ; Solis-Navarrete et al, 2021 ; Tidd & Bessant, 2009 ; van der Have & Rubalcaba, 2016 ; Weerawardena & Sullivan Mort, 2006 ) …”