Social innovation in question: The theoretical and practical implications of a contested concept

Abstract

The concept of social innovation has become pervasive among practitioners and academics, though its definition remains elusive. This paper seeks to address this by suggesting a distinction between structural social innovation, which refers to wide social change in scale and scope, targeted versions of social innovation, which can be either radical or complementary to current socio-economic institutions, and instrumental social innovation, when it is used to rebrand previous agendas in a way that is more appealing to stakeholders. These four types of social innovation are discussed referring to practical examples in the literature. We then explore ways in which the concept could be further developed by engaging with the concepts of socio-technical transitions and the foundational economy.

Saying and doing: Social responsibility declared and applied

“…Stakeholder theory (Freeman, 1984) is sometimes viewed as consisting of descriptive, instrumental and normative attributes (Donaldson & Preston, 1995). A firm's commitment to social responsibility corresponds to the descriptive attribute, reporting on social responsibility-which reflects a firm's agenda-corresponds to the instrumental attribute (Marques, Morgan, & Richardson, 2018;Mulgan, 2006), and when firms engage in innovation to address social challenges, they align with the normative attribute of stakeholder theory (Marques et al, 2018). We build and test a research model that takes into account the three attributes of stakeholder theory.…”

Innovation and Social Investment Programs in Europe

“…The concept of a Social Investment welfare paradigm has become highly influential in public policy globally, especially in Europe. It implies that spending on welfare is a long‐term investment to improve prospects for economic and social participation (Hemerijck, ; ; Leoni, ). Policy interventions typical of Social Investment include labor market activation and early years education and care.…”

“…In terms of how and by whom Social Investment is financed, most of the cases examined are funded wholly or mainly through public sources, and just over half of the case studies involved European Union (EU) funding. This is perhaps not surprising: the EU is a key factor in Social Investment, and has increased its policy and wider role since the financial crash of 2008 (Leoni, ). There are a few elements of financial input from the private and charitable sectors; a nursery in Bologna (part of the Early Education and Care case study), was made possible by an unusual arrangement of resources from public, for‐profit and private non‐profit actors.…”

Physical activity level as a booster of entrepreneurial intention: a social innovation approach

“…Social innovation has gained importance over time and is considered by several authors as new, more effective and sustainable responses to the new societal challenges of the twenty-first century. In this way, it promotes structural changes in the improvement of well-being and quality of life, to generate new forms of social change through the empowerment of citizens and reorganization of civil society, including organizations, to meet social and human needs, creating social value (e.g., Marques et al 2018;Pol and Ville 2009). According to Dawson and Daniel (2010b), social innovation plays a vital role in improving the well-being of people, communities, and society.…”