How Empowering is Social Innovation?Identifying Barriers to Participation in Community-driven Innovation Dr. Mónica Edwards-Schachter Dr. Svenja Tams 

www.ingenio.upv.eswww.bath.ac.uk/management/faculty

Social Innovation Research Conference‘Social frontiers: the next edge of social innovation research’14th-15th November 2013, London (UK)

2

Building the collective intelligence(on-line & off-line …)

Means?

Ends?

OBJECTIVE

To explore knowledge generation and

power dynamics in collaborative

innovation between private, public and

civil actors in Living Lab (LLs) contexts

Growing diversity of societal experiments and ‘innovation labs’: Living Labs, Change Labs, Rural Labs, Urban Labs, Social Spaces of Research and Innovation (SSRI), social clusters …

CROSS-SECTOR PARTNERSHIPS IN NEW INNOVATION SPACES

Bajaj Rural Development Lab (India)http://www.cmu.edu/bajaj/

LLs are new models of organizing collaborative innovation

involving a plurality of actors from business, government and civil

sectors, named as cross-sector partnerships (XSPs) and Private-

Public-People Partnerships (PPPPs )

LLs are real-life test and experimentation environments where users and producers co-create innovations

LLs have been characterised by the European Commission as PPPPs for user-driven open innovation

Openess Co-creation Exploration Experimentation Evaluation

LL: The European Network of LL (ENoLL) definition

Livi

ng

Lab

Soci

al

RESEARCH QUESTIONS

How do actors in community-based innovations

perceive empowerment and participation in the

knowledge generation process?

Which conditions enable, or constrain, empowerment

and participation in community-driven innovation?

Bridging divides in knowledge generation

Collaborations can take place in an environment marked by

competition, conflict and imbalance of power among multiple actors

7

Reproduction of ‘hidden’ power, ‘embodied dispositions’ and socially stratified spaces (‘natural order of things’)

(Bordieu, 1989; Hayward 2000)

Sets of rules and resources that actors draw upon as they act and produce knowledge and power in the social system

Social practices reproduce mechanisms of exclusion at the bottom and the top

(DiMaggio, 1988; Heiskala, 2001, 2007; Scott, 2008; Alasuutari, 2010)

Power and knowledge are constructed in relations and social practices with use, struggle and negotiation of conscious and unconscious strategies

(Foucault, 1977; Giddens 1982, 1984)

Knowledge generation and power dynamics in PPPPs: theoretical approach (‘practical lens’)

RELATIONS

STRUCTURE/AGENCY

CULTURE

Image: Untitled, Alexander Calder (1898 1976)‑

METHODOLOGY

Literature review and empirical study of Living Labs

(N= 120) using both quantitative and qualitative

data

Qualitative methodology: Case study, including in-

depth interviews and a focus group meeting

FINDINGS: The role of users and communities in LLs

0

20

40

60

80

10085

70.8

25.8%

Multiple interpretations and purposes of ‘community’ and ‘users’/based-centred-driven-led’ innovations

Power dynamics are ignored in LL s and collaborative innovation

N = 120 LLs

LLs for social innovation # the social impact of LLs

User centred(detection needs)

User driven(co-creators)

User centred (testing)

CASE STUDY: CVIDA VILA-REAL LL

Informal LL emerged as a PPPPs organization with support of the municipal government

Generated in a dialogic process with

intermediation of CVida Vila-real, a non-profit association (2008 to 2010)

People-centered model focused in

identifying needs favouring community-driven

innovations increasing the neighbours’

participation and collaborative governance processes in the city

ITC SYSTEM

PEOPLE NEEDS

LOCAL RESOURCES

PEO

PLE

LOCAL COMPANIES AND AUTHORITIES

Quality of life

•Innovation opportunities•Improvement opportunities•Governance support

http://www.cvida.comhttp://es-es.facebook.com/CvidaVilareal

Source: Institute of Biomechanics of Valencia (IBV)

FINDINGS: How do actors perceive empowerment and participation in community-based innovations?

‘Co-creation’ is seen as a non-problematic mechanism which implicitly contributes to social cohesion and SIs

Collaboration is perceived throughout different ‘lens’: ‘Instrumental/efficiency’ versus ‘transformative’ discourses

‘Political manoeuvrings and open conflicts’ can have both positive and negative outcomes on effective empowerment and participation

Community leaders act as ‘knowledge’ brokers/mediators with an important role in the ‘stabilization’ of the social relations

Inequalities and lack of skills and capacities

Knowledge perceived as a power struggle to compete for funding opportunities

Conflicting interests (e.g., actors don’t expect that collaborative innovation be a win-win situation for participants if some of them have ‘knowledge’/expertise and privileges in the access to information)

FINDINGS: Which conditions enable, or constrain, empowerment and participation in community-driven innovation?

The ‘place’ to collaborate matters (physical and social spaces that enable or constrain dialogue, trust, transparency, reciprocity, identity …)

CONCLUSION

Governance of LLs and alternative models of collaborative innovation

needs to consider how the power dynamics (relational, structural and

cultural potential barriers) can enable or constrain the participation of

people as ‘users’ and ‘co-creators’ of knowledge

Empowerment and participation can be affected by knowledge

asymmetries and struggles between different rationalities (e.g.,

‘instrumental’ versus ‘transformative’)

Community leaders have a relevant role to improve participation, acting as

‘mediators’ in the social interactions, enabling confidence, identity

recognition and self-worth

A critical and reflective attitude and a new

research agenda are required to understand

power dynamics and the meaning of

knowledge and ‘co-creation’ beyond the

current ‘traditional knowledge bases’ in

collaborative innovation processes

A FINAL COMMENT

innovation

ethnographic knowledge

critical knowledge

symbolic and artistic knowledge

synthetic knowledge

Diversity of LIVING LABS – Multiple actors

indigenous knowledge

analytic knowledge

SOCIAL innovations

TECHNOLOGICAL innovations

scientifc knowledge local

knowledge

technological knowledge

tacitknowledge

tacitknowledge

THANKS!

Dr. Mónica Edwards-Schachtermoed@ingenio.upv.es

Dr. Svenja Tamss.tams@bath.ac.uk