PR 00144: verschil tussen versies

Geen bewerkingssamenvatting
Geen bewerkingssamenvatting
 
(6 tussenliggende versies door dezelfde gebruiker niet weergegeven)
Regel 21: Regel 21:
Outline --> Introduction - Body - Conclusion. Two paragraphs up to one page of text. ~ 300 words.  
Outline --> Introduction - Body - Conclusion. Two paragraphs up to one page of text. ~ 300 words.  


=== Paper 1 - Introducing the concept of place in socially innovative actions  ===
=== Paper 1 - Social innovation and the role of the encounter  ===
* De huidige discussie gaat vooral om de verschillende definities van SI (wat is de correcte definitie). Wel aangeven waar in het debat / welke traditie we ons bevinden (maximalistische / minimalistisch en transformative / radical opzoeken).
The social innovation process, as a method and a practise, is dynamic and includes a plethora of different actors. It derives from bringing together these different actors that usually do not maintain relationships or only in direct conflict. This paper aims at elucidating the level of the individual in socially innovative actions. It investigates how the relationships between different actors are (re)organised by drawing on the concept of '''the encounter''' frequently used in the human and social geography literature. Careful consideration is asked for the types of encounters sought for and avoided by individuals.    
** Minimalist - Maximalist: "A third type of radical innovation has been elaborated by Mangabeira Unger. He distinguishes between '''minimalist social innovations''' which give a human face to an otherwise unsupportable situation, and '''maximalist social innovations''' that aim at deep changes. ”
** Transformative - Radical 
* GAP: hoe het proces in zijn gang gaat is onvoldoende scherp. Zeker wat aan toe te voegen: microniveau. Een scherpere blik op SI.
* Wat gebeurt er? Daar is niet veel naar gekeken.
* Combinatie met Human and Social Geography
* '''PLACE'''
'''ABSTRACT'''


As the position of the nation state has weakened with decentralisation as result, local socially innovative actions have come to the attention of a plethora of actors. As a means to an end and an end in itself, social innovation has increasingly gained the interest of academics, practitioners and policy makers alike. Much has been said about the definition of social innovation and also the outcomes have been discussed at large. The process dimension of socially innovative actions is less explored. Especially the micro level with the individual as a central point of focus has gained little to no attention in the current discussion.  
Social innovation works towards social change through social actions and conscious awareness. Mutual learning plays an important role in this. The role of '''the narrative''' has often come to the forefront implicating its research significance as a method through narrative analyses for interpreting human meaning and experience. Yet, the role of the narrative in working practises in mutual learning, mobilising action, and bringing about change has received little to no attention in the public administration discipline.    


Consequently, this study focusses on what is happening on a micro level during the process of social innovation. More specifically, this first paper enhances the discussion by introducing the concept of '''place.''' Decentralisation has enhanced the position of place in organising society. As a location with a purpose it is perceived as something people take shared responsibility of. It presupposes a position of equivalence and pluralism. Place is where the development of new, or the transformation of, social relations between individuals takes place, being at the centre of socially innovative actions.  
To explore the role of the encounter and the narrative in the social innovation process this study draws on a combination of qualitative data. Process documents from different projects are used to determine explicit points of encounter. In-depth interviews and a focus group enhance this data by elucidating inexplicit points of encounter and the role of the narrative within this. 


In order to explore the concept of place in the process of social innovation, this study takes on a cross-disciplinary approach and draws on the human and social geography literature. Instead of looking at shared norms and values and following a pre-given set, it focusses on altering the meaning of what it is to be social in the process. The results are relevant for researchers, practitioners and policy makers interested in the greater picture of social innovation.
Against the background of decentralisation and the growing importance of investing in a public meeting culture, understanding the role of the encounter in socially innovative actions could support public administrators in facilitating alternative structures for societal change. Introducing the narrative, and hence ethnography in innovation, as a practise could provide policy makers an additional instrument for mutual learning and thus to gain a qualitative insight of the relationships between people and the topics of importance to enhance quality of life from a policy perspective.    
* Borzaga, C., & Bodini, R. (2012). What to make of social innovation? Towards a framework for policy development. ''Euricse Working Paper, N.036''(12)    
* Grimm, R., Fox, C., Baines, S., & Albertson, K. (2013). Social innovation, an answer to contemporary societal challenges? Locating the concept in theory and practice. ''Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research, 26''(4), 436-455.    
* Moulaert, F., MacCallum, D., Mehmood, A., & Hamdouch, A. (2013). ''The international handbook on social innovation: Collective action, social learning and transdisciplinary research''. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.    
* Valentine, G. (2008). Living with difference: reflections on geographies of encounter. ''Progress in Human Geography, 32''(3), 323-337. 


''Social innovation, as a means to an end and an end it itself, has increasingly gained the interest of academics, practisioners and policy makers alike. The discussion has largely focussed on the goals of social innovation as well as on finding common ground regarding the definition. Social innovation addresses local social needs and global societal challenges. It does so by using social means through the development of new, or the transformation of, social relations. These socially innovative actions are driven by different processes to enable groups to better satisfy their human needs and improve their living conditions.''
=== Paper 2 - Introducing the concept of place in socially innovative actions ===
As the position of the nation state has weakened with decentralisation as result, local socially innovative actions have come to the attention of a plethora of actors. As a means to an end and an end in itself, social innovation has increasingly gained the interest of academics, practitioners and policy makers alike. Much has been said about the definition of social innovation and also the outcomes have been discussed at large. The process dimension of socially innovative actions is less explored. Especially the micro level with the individual as a central point of focus has gained little to no attention in the current discussion.    


''Instead of joining the greater discussion on the content, outcomes and definition of social innovation, this study focusses on the process dimension. More specifically, it aims at elucidating the processes of social learning, individual and collective awareness rising, and socio-political mobilisation. At a microlevel it explores the connections between the different actors partaking in socially innovative actions.''
Consequently, this study focusses on what is happening on a micro level during the process of social innovation. More specifically, this first paper enhances the discussion by introducing the concept of '''place.''' Decentralisation has enhanced the position of place in organising society. As a location with a purpose it is perceived as something people take shared responsibility of. It presupposes a position of equivalence and pluralism. Place is where the development of new, or the transformation of, social relations between individuals takes place, being at the centre of socially innovative actions.    


''Place making: look at the potential of place-based forms of solidarity and care. Recent thinking about citizenship. Look at what people actually do. Who is active in the public space? Increased importance of place in our society. Making place becomes an important project.''
In order to explore the concept of place in the process of social innovation, this study takes on a cross-disciplinary approach and draws on the human and social geography literature. Instead of looking at shared norms and values and following a pre-given set, it focusses on altering the meaning of what it is to be social in the process. 


=== Paper 2 - Social innovation and the role of the encounter ===
It draws on in-depth interviews with individuals involved in the different social innovation processes. Especially the project of the Zeeuwse Huiskamer is used as the case for this study. De Zeeuwse Huiskamer is a project that aims at bringing people together. Living longer at home independently in a pleasant way is of interest to a plethora of people. Questions such as “What is going well and what can be improved? Are there gaps between supply and demand, how does cooperation and contemporary society support living longer at home independently?” are explored in these projects. The aim is to jointly formulate solutions to questions around well-being, living and care. 
* lijn: mooi dat er wordt gekeken naar het niveau van organisatie; maar wat gebeurt er op het niveau van individuen?
* relatie met overheden: kunnen publieke instellingen ook innovatief zijn?
* inter-organisatorisch kijken. Niet: wie is de leider / kenmerken e.d. Wel: hoe zit het met de verhouding tussen al die mensen. Dat mist in literatuur!
* etnografisch meerwaarde toevoegen. Gebeurt nog niet in bestuurswetenschappen (public administration). Etnografie en innovatie.
* '''THE ENCOUNTER + NARRATIVE'''
'''ABSTRACT'''


The social innovation process, as a method and a practise, is dynamic and includes a plethora of different actors. It derives from bringing together these different actors that usually do not maintain relationships or only in direct conflict. The previous paper explored the role of place in connecting people. This paper aims at further elucidating the level of the individual in socially innovative actions. It investigates how the relationships between different actors are (re)organised by drawing on the concept of '''the encounter''' frequently used in the human and social geography literature. Careful consideration is asked for the types of encounters sought for and avoided by individuals.
The results are relevant for researchers, practitioners and policy makers interested in the greater picture of social innovation.    
 
* Amin, A. (2008). Collective culture and urban public space. ''City, 12''(1), 5-24.  
Social innovation works towards social change through social actions and conscious awareness. Mutual learning plays an important role in this. The role of '''the narrative''' has often come to the forefront implicating its research significance through narrative analyses for interpreting human meaning and experience. Yet, the practical role of the narrative in mutual learning, mobilising action, and bringing about change has received little to no attention in the public administration discipline.  
* Massey, D. (2004). Geography of responsibility. ''Geografiska Annaler, 86''(1), 5-18.  
 
* Moulaert, F., MacCallum, D., Mehmood, A., & Hamdouch, A. (2013). ''The international handbook on social innovation: Collective action, social learning and transdisciplinary research''. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.    
Against the background of decentralisation and the growing importance of investing in a public meeting culture, understanding the role of the encounter in socially innovative actions could support public administrators in facilitating alternative structures for societal change. Introducing the narrative, and hence ethnography in innovation, as a practise could provide policy makers an additional instrument for mutual learning and thus to gain a qualitative insight of the relationships between people and the topics of importance to enhance quality of life from a policy perspective.    
 
* Moulaert: "''Social innovation is not innovation in its ends only. SI hence works towards social change through the deepening and the broadening of participation, the establishment of more inclusive organisational procedures, the development of the capacity for collective action and the fundamental change of human attitudes and behaviour."''
* In vergelijk met Zapf (2003, p.427) ''"...process of change in the social structure of a society in its constitutive institutions, cultural patterns, associated social actions and conscious awareness"''
* "Social innovation derives from bringing together different actors that normally do not maintain relationships or only in direct conflict. Reorganise the connections between different actors - mutual learning (narratives?)" (Klein 2010). --> '''Link this with "The encounter", link to human/social geography'''
<u>Overdenkingen plaats:</u>
 
Greep natiestaten verzwakt en decentralisaties -> plaats belangrijker. Relationeel. Verknoping van relaties. Groepen delen weinig behalve de plaats waar ze samenkomen. Gedeelde verantwoordelijkheid. Plaats -> nieuwe gemeenschappelijkheid. Laagdrempelig. Vanuit nabijheid. Afhankelijkheid (krimp?) -> lotsverbondenheid. Samen verantwoordelijkheid nemen voor een plaats veronderstelt een positie van gelijkwaardigheid.
 
Overheid: gelijke kansen. Democratische plicht om om te investeren in een publiek ontmoetingsstructuur. Ook: Potentieel van plaat-gebaseerde vormen van care. Burgerschap als praktijk. Wat mensen concreet doen. Toegenomen belang van plaats in het organiseren van ons samenleven.
=== Paper 3 - Ethics of care: Means to an end or end in itself? ===
=== Paper 3 - Ethics of care: Means to an end or end in itself? ===


* link innovatie: rol van ethics in gemeenschap vormen. Is dat:
The previous two papers explored the role of place and encounter in the social innovation process. Social dynamics for the development of new or existing relationships between individuals is at the core of social innovation. The development of the capacity of collective action is what aimed for. Still, these social means are often solely perceived as a side effect of the social innovation process. Nevertheless, within the encounter between people, social dynamics are an inevitable factor.    
* zorgdragen voor ipv innovatief menstype te zijn (als individu) of is de ethics of care die in de gemeenschap ontstaat de sociale innovatie?
* '''CARE + THE COMMONS'''
'''ABSTRACT'''
 
The previous two papers explored the role of place and encounter in the social innovation process. Social dynamics for the development of new or existing relationships between individuals is at the core of social innovation. The development of the capacity of collective action is what aimed for. Still, these social means are often solely perceived as a side effect of the social innovation process. Nevertheless, within the encounter between people, social dynamics are an inevitable factor. 
 
A concept which could meaningfully explain the social dynamics in collective action is the concept of '''care.''' Care is at times used as a synonym for solidarity and could be understood as connections that are made between individuals on the basis of natural predispositions. Apart from natural predisposition, moral principles are also influencing the development of relationships in socially innovative actions. Hence, the theory of an '''ethics of care,''' in which interpersonal relationships and benevolence are a virtue to moral actions, could meaningfully address the social dynamics in the social innovation process. In short, this paper focusses in particular on how individuals take care of each other. This leads to the question if an ethics of care is a means to an end, or an end in itself in social innovation. 
 
In the current discussion of citizenship different forms of place-based care could potentially influence collective action. In this vein, care may become part of '''the commons.''' This study perceives the commons as a group of people taking responsibility for organising and providing local services of importance to them. It is a field of new social practises based on socio-cultural change. Practises of care could inhibit or open up possibilities to change people's attitude towards other individuals and wider social groups. Understanding ethics and care as part of the commons 
 
The results of this research are relevant for public administrators to better understand the role of ethics of care in micro practises. It will enhance the understanding of how the choices of individuals effects societal change.
 
* But how can we make visible the human relations that underlie care? conception of care - as part of the commons. Care: connections that are made on the basis of our natural predisposition to love, empathise, reciprocate and share meanings. The commons: where community organizes and provides its own services: Instead asking us to understand commons as an informal social activity from the bottom up known as ‘commoning’. This is where the real ideas for change are conceived and grow.
 
* The Commons – "a vision of empowered citizens taking charge of their lives and their endangered resources"(Bollier & Helfrich 2012) – is a field of possibilities and new social practices, based on sharing, cooperation, reciprocity and socio-cultural change. These practices are providing pioneering solutions to the challenge of how to reproduce our livelihoods beyond market and state.   
 
The aim of this study is to recognise care and different responsibilities formed in material, technological, symbolic and imagined space. ....can be extended as a form of interest in the commons.
 
The emphasis is placed not just on immediate contact experiences, but also on how the accrued histories of social experience and material circumstances contributing to the individual's feelings about different sorts of encounters. In particular, how do 'real' and 'imagined' feelings and practices of care inhibit or open up the possibilities that a bridge is being made between people's attitudes to particular individuals and to wider social groups. 
 
Place making: look at the potential of place-based forms of solidarity and care. Recent thinking about citizenship. Look at what people actually do. Who is active in the public space? Increased importance of place in our society. Making place becomes an important project.
 
Ethics of care: looks at ethics which pays more attention to emotional and private role of ethical judgments.
 
Look at the actual practices in everyday life settings and grass-roots movements
 
Care for each other plays everywhere; we look at how it works in neighbourhoods and in the family.


Focus on the individual experiences.
A concept which could meaningfully explain the social dynamics in collective action is the concept of '''care.''' Care is at times used as a synonym for solidarity and could be understood as connections that are made between individuals on the basis of natural predispositions. Apart from natural predisposition, moral principles are also influencing the development of relationships in socially innovative actions. Hence, the theory of an '''ethics of care,''' in which interpersonal relationships and benevolence are a virtue to moral actions, could meaningfully address the social dynamics in the social innovation process. In short, this paper focusses in particular on how individuals take care of each other. This leads to the question if an ethics of care is a means to an end, or an end in itself in social innovation.    


(To scan the landscape for evidence and proposals for new ways of gathering diversity into a functioning ‘commons’.  
In order to explore the role of an ethics of care in the social innovation process this study draws on in-depth interviews. 


Argument link with social innovation: the role of ethics in community building:  
The results of this research are relevant for public administrators to better understand the role of ethics of care in micro practises. It will enhance the understanding of how the choices of individuals effects societal change.    
 
* Amin, A. (2012). ''Land of strangers''. Cambridge: Polity.
Not a focus on the innovative individual but:
* Cajaiba-Santana, G. (2014). Social innovation: Moving the field forward. A conceptual framework. ''Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 82'', 42-51.
 
* Gibson-Graham, J. K. (2003). An ethics of the local. ''Rethinking Marxism, 15''(1), 49-74. 
are the different ways to care for each other that arise in the community a social innovation in itself?


=== Paper 4 - Politics of care for social innovation  ===
=== Paper 4 - Politics of care for social innovation  ===
* Hoe kun je politici hier in meenemen; houding cultiveren. Niet in bestuurlijke zin maar houding als persoon.
The involvement of civil society to bring about social change while also renovating democracy has gained importance in public administration. Transparency, legitimacy and democracy need to be guaranteed with specific governance mechanisms. Apart from bringing about cultural change amongst civil society, this also depends on a cultural change in public administration. Social innovation aims at eliminating the long lines set by rules and regulations by bypassing existing welfare state institutions. Local socially innovative actions tend to highlight the need for recognition and representation and could hence help to improve conventional welfare state politics. Still, a sense of togetherness and pluralism does not rest alone on the idea of recognition and community, or i.e. the commons.    
* antropologie van beleidsmakers.
'''ABSTRACT'''


The involvement of civil society to bring about social change while also renovating democracy has gained importance in public administration. Transparency, legitimacy and democracy need to be guaranteed with specific governance mechanisms. Apart from bringing about cultural change amongst civil society, this also depends on a cultural change in public administration. Social innovation aims at eliminating the long lines set by rules and regulations by bypassing existing welfare state institutions. Local forms of social innovation tend to highlight the need for recognition and reprensentation and could hence help to improve conventional welfare state politics. Still, a sense of togetherness and pluralism does not rest alone on an the idea of recognision and community (the commons)                 
Instead of looking at the code or the principles, the norms and the values, this paper focusses on the cultivation of the political person. In particular, the self-formation as an ethical subject involving practices of forming the ethical political subject. It puts emphasis on the attitude of a divers set of policy makers rather than looking at the administrative perspective. Which attitudes and practices could enable ethically sensitive, negotiated settlements between different groups and individuals in the social innovation process and the construction of the commons. It looks at what a '''politics of care''' could be and how local politics participate in ethics of care and building new communities and collaboration. 


Instead of looking at the code or the principles, the norms and the values, this paper focusses on the cultivation of the political person. In particular, the self-formation as an ethical subject involving practices of forming the ethical political subject. It puts emphasis on the attitude of a divers set of policy makers rather than looking at the administrative perspective. Which attitudes and practices could enable ethically sensitive, negotiated settlements between different groups and individuals in the social innovation process and the construction of the commons. It looks at what a '''politics of care''' could be and how local politics participate in ethics of care and building new communities and collaboration.        
In-depth interviews with policy makers are used as method to explore this research. Aldermen and civil servants of different municipalities in the Netherlands are the sample in particular.    


The aim is to explore the '''anthropology of policy makers''' to enable a more affective and informal perspective for the political subject. More so, to explore how anthropology, as a means, could enable more attitude and greater determination in mobilising action and leading change in an organisational settings.
The aim is to explore the '''anthropology of policy makers''' to enable a more affective and informal perspective for the political subject. More so, to explore how anthropology, as a means, could change attitudes and enhance determination in mobilising action and leading change in an organisational setting. The paper looks at places where the commons exercise their responsibility in order to provide policy makers a closer look into micro political opportunities. Hence, the results are relevant for public administration and policy makers in particular.    
 
* Grimm, R., Fox, C., Baines, S., & Albertson, K. (2013). Social innovation, an answer to contemporary societal challenges? Locating the concept in theory and practice. ''Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research, 26''(4), 436-455.  
The paper looks at places where the commons exercise their responsibility in order to provide policy makers a closer look into micro political opportunities. Hence, the results are relevant for public administration and policy makers in particular.  
* Pinxten, H., & Verstraete, G. (1998). ''Cultuur en Macht. Over identiteit en conflict in een multiculturele wereld''. Antwerpen: Uitgeverij Houtekiet.
 
''i.e. (focus: decision makers’ and civil servants’ ) capacity in learning to develop spaces for common decisions, integrate different sources of power and aims and elaborate new practices of working together.''
 
''While the previous papers focussed especially on the individual in the social innovation process, this paper concentrates on political responsibility and political practice. Referring to the concept of care''
 
''will enable us to identify more precisely the problems associated with…..as the are constructed in the proces of social innovation. We focus on the process dimension of SI as this dimension is most relevant to the governance challenges….''
* ''(Chambon, David and Devevey 1982). Chambon et al. argue that social innovation practices are different from existing practices because they respond to a society which is blocked by ‘institutions’. Social innovation rejects ‘long circuits’ and aims to shorten way between appearance of need and its satisfaction by bypassing existing (welfare) state institutions.'' 


=== Paper 5 - What happens when you become the best practise ===
=== Paper 5 - What happens when you become the best practise ===
* Dit bekijken met een externe blik en hoe het het project en de mensen en de plaats heeft veranderd
The up-scaling of local socially innovative actions is of paramount importance to a variety of actors included and excluded in the process. The so-called best practise should lead by example and practises should become transferrable to other cases and contexts. Yet, the local social innovation is oftentimes context-bound and running on bottom-up initiatives and practises. Transferring it to other places and context could therefore be problematic. In addition, gaining publicity as best-practise could work as an accelerator but may also act as a boundary for success.    
* de rol van plaats
* vanuit het perspectief van best practice / reflectie over de eigen positie
* sociale mobiliteit / creëert hiërarchie / hoe valt dat in de groep
'''ABSTRACT'''
 
The up-scaling of local socially innovative actions is of paramount importance to a variety of actors included and excluded in the process. The so-called best practise should lead by example and practises should become transferrable to other cases and contexts. Yet, the local social innovation is oftentimes context-bound and running on bottom-up initiatives and practises. Gaining publicity could work as an accelerator but may also act as a boundary for succes.
 
The social innovation process is often influenced by political pressure, in itself influenced by socio-economic and socio-demographic challenges such as legitimacy and inclusiveness. Public institutions and in particular the key persons involved in the process are facing great challenges. Favourable conditions need to be created, yet simultaneously a risk assessment is asked for taking into account inequality, keeping in control of the exclusionary process and avoiding risks of delegation and passive subsidiary. At the same time the local organisation, i.e. the local promoters, are equally concerned with the dynamics of internal relations, living up to the expectations of policy makers, the pressure of subsidies, timeframes and publicity. Hence, a functioning connection between the bottom up perspective and top down practices is of paramount importance.
 
Local socially innovative actions act as micro-processes making macro-political settlements possible. This paper takes a closer look at the practise of social innovation to identify in more detail the governance challenges and dilemma's faced when becoming a succes story. The focus shall not solely be on the intervention or action in isolation but includes its spatial form and institutional embedding as well. It looks at contextual conditions, collaboration, interdependence, the awareness of it and the actual creation of active trust and reflexive engagement. This paper analyses how these tensions play out in actual practices as they are constructed in practices of social innovation.
 
The aim of this paper is to gain a better understanding of the balance among social, managerial and political aims, devoting special attention to responsibility and accountability, both within the commons and public institutions as well as their partnerships with different kind of actors. The unit of analysis are localised social innovations and include its spatial form and institutional embedding. In particular, the case of Ulrum is utilised as an example in this paper. The results of this research are relevant for actors partaking in the social innovation process as well as public administration.   
 
''That is its multi scaler and networked nature as a complex assemblage of actors, institutions and instruments, as an intrinsic part of the social innovation process.''   
 
''The focus of this paper is on governance challenges and dilemma’s .... on a regional and national level.''   
 
''Look into the possibilities and the boundaries of citizenship.''   
 
''and include its spatial form and institutional embedding''
 
''we approach localized forms of SI against the backdrop of the restructering of the wellfare state + new social challenges (participation and joint decision making?)''
 
''vraag naar participatie en inspraak: nieuwe uitdagingen. Ulrum geeft door opzet en veelheid aan partners mogelijkheden.'' 
 
''proces: risks''


''best practice -> exposure -> effects?''
Ulrum is a small village in the province of Groningen, The Netherlands. Due to population aging and dejuvination demographic changes are clearly felt and visible. In order to become a future-proof village, residents started working on changing their village in a place tailored to their needs. With a plethora of local, regional, national and international partners the residents have worked on finding a solution which fits the local needs of Ulrum. Instead of taking an external look, the project was set up from the inside, with the people who live and work in Ulrum. The official timeline of the project was three years, finishing in 2016. However, DEEL & Ulrum continues till this day. 


''Internal relations (+ encounter with the stranger)''
In order to explore what happens when you become a best-practise, this research draws on a wide selection of data. All meeting minutes are used to develop a timeline of events. This information may also be used to analyse possible changes in the project due to these events. The documentary made of the Ulrum caused a lot of commotion in the village and the project. This documentary is also used in the analyses. In addition, interviews are conducted with various people involved in the project.    


''Leaving space to citizens’ and communities’ self-organisation -> risks for:''
The aim of this study is to provide an insight of the dynamics taking place when a local project becomes a best-practise. Due to historical data, a retrospective view provides the opportunity to elucidate the process over time.    


''public institutions (focus key persons in strategic public institutions): their biggest challenge is to create favourable conditions + risks (inequality, keeping control over exclusionary processes, avoiding risks of delegation and passive subsidiary).''
The results are of interest to people involved in social innovation projects. The greater field of social innovation and public administration in particular benefit from this research.    
* Howaldt, J., Butzin, A., Domanski, D., & Kaletka, C. (2014). ''Theoretical Approaches to Social Innovation – A Critical Literature Review.'' A deliverable of the project: “Social Innovation: Driving Force of Social Change” (SI-DRIVE). Dortmund: Sozialforschungsstelle. 
* Moulaert, F., MacCallum, D., Mehmood, A., & Hamdouch, A. (2013). ''The international handbook on social innovation: Collective action, social learning and transdisciplinary research''. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.


=== Paper 6 - Auto-Ethnography for social innovation ===
=== Paper 6 - Auto-Ethnography for social innovation ===
Regel 183: Regel 104:
|Show summary=Ja
|Show summary=Ja
|Show navigation tree=Ja
|Show navigation tree=Ja
|Create process and content pages=Nee
|Show new page button=Nee
|Show sub projects=Ja
|Show sub projects=Ja
|Show participants=Nee
|Show participants=Nee
|Show sources=Nee
|Show sources=Nee
}}
}}

Huidige versie van 11 jan 2018 om 17:27

Keywords to describe our research:

  • Cross-disciplinary approach to study social innovation

Abstracts

Identify the purpose (motivation)

  • Why did you decide to do this study or project?
  • How did you conduct your research?
  • Why is this research and your findings important?
  • Why should someone read your entire essay?
  • This section should include the importance of your work, the difficulty of the area, and the impact it might have if successful.

Explain the problem at hand (problem statement)

  • What problem is your research trying to better understand or solve?
  • What is the scope of your study - a general problem, or something specific?
  • What is your main claim or argument?

Describe the method (approach)

Give your conclusion

  • What are the implications of your work?
  • Are your results general or very specific?

Outline --> Introduction - Body - Conclusion. Two paragraphs up to one page of text. ~ 300 words.

Paper 1 - Social innovation and the role of the encounter 

The social innovation process, as a method and a practise, is dynamic and includes a plethora of different actors. It derives from bringing together these different actors that usually do not maintain relationships or only in direct conflict. This paper aims at elucidating the level of the individual in socially innovative actions. It investigates how the relationships between different actors are (re)organised by drawing on the concept of the encounter frequently used in the human and social geography literature. Careful consideration is asked for the types of encounters sought for and avoided by individuals.    

Social innovation works towards social change through social actions and conscious awareness. Mutual learning plays an important role in this. The role of the narrative has often come to the forefront implicating its research significance as a method through narrative analyses for interpreting human meaning and experience. Yet, the role of the narrative in working practises in mutual learning, mobilising action, and bringing about change has received little to no attention in the public administration discipline.    

To explore the role of the encounter and the narrative in the social innovation process this study draws on a combination of qualitative data. Process documents from different projects are used to determine explicit points of encounter. In-depth interviews and a focus group enhance this data by elucidating inexplicit points of encounter and the role of the narrative within this. 

Against the background of decentralisation and the growing importance of investing in a public meeting culture, understanding the role of the encounter in socially innovative actions could support public administrators in facilitating alternative structures for societal change. Introducing the narrative, and hence ethnography in innovation, as a practise could provide policy makers an additional instrument for mutual learning and thus to gain a qualitative insight of the relationships between people and the topics of importance to enhance quality of life from a policy perspective.    

  • Borzaga, C., & Bodini, R. (2012). What to make of social innovation? Towards a framework for policy development. Euricse Working Paper, N.036(12)    
  • Grimm, R., Fox, C., Baines, S., & Albertson, K. (2013). Social innovation, an answer to contemporary societal challenges? Locating the concept in theory and practice. Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research, 26(4), 436-455.    
  • Moulaert, F., MacCallum, D., Mehmood, A., & Hamdouch, A. (2013). The international handbook on social innovation: Collective action, social learning and transdisciplinary research. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.    
  • Valentine, G. (2008). Living with difference: reflections on geographies of encounter. Progress in Human Geography, 32(3), 323-337. 

Paper 2 - Introducing the concept of place in socially innovative actions

As the position of the nation state has weakened with decentralisation as result, local socially innovative actions have come to the attention of a plethora of actors. As a means to an end and an end in itself, social innovation has increasingly gained the interest of academics, practitioners and policy makers alike. Much has been said about the definition of social innovation and also the outcomes have been discussed at large. The process dimension of socially innovative actions is less explored. Especially the micro level with the individual as a central point of focus has gained little to no attention in the current discussion.    

Consequently, this study focusses on what is happening on a micro level during the process of social innovation. More specifically, this first paper enhances the discussion by introducing the concept of place. Decentralisation has enhanced the position of place in organising society. As a location with a purpose it is perceived as something people take shared responsibility of. It presupposes a position of equivalence and pluralism. Place is where the development of new, or the transformation of, social relations between individuals takes place, being at the centre of socially innovative actions.    

In order to explore the concept of place in the process of social innovation, this study takes on a cross-disciplinary approach and draws on the human and social geography literature. Instead of looking at shared norms and values and following a pre-given set, it focusses on altering the meaning of what it is to be social in the process. 

It draws on in-depth interviews with individuals involved in the different social innovation processes. Especially the project of the Zeeuwse Huiskamer is used as the case for this study. De Zeeuwse Huiskamer is a project that aims at bringing people together. Living longer at home independently in a pleasant way is of interest to a plethora of people. Questions such as “What is going well and what can be improved? Are there gaps between supply and demand, how does cooperation and contemporary society support living longer at home independently?” are explored in these projects. The aim is to jointly formulate solutions to questions around well-being, living and care. 

The results are relevant for researchers, practitioners and policy makers interested in the greater picture of social innovation.    

  • Amin, A. (2008). Collective culture and urban public space. City, 12(1), 5-24.
  • Massey, D. (2004). Geography of responsibility. Geografiska Annaler, 86(1), 5-18.
  • Moulaert, F., MacCallum, D., Mehmood, A., & Hamdouch, A. (2013). The international handbook on social innovation: Collective action, social learning and transdisciplinary research. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.    

Paper 3 - Ethics of care: Means to an end or end in itself?

The previous two papers explored the role of place and encounter in the social innovation process. Social dynamics for the development of new or existing relationships between individuals is at the core of social innovation. The development of the capacity of collective action is what aimed for. Still, these social means are often solely perceived as a side effect of the social innovation process. Nevertheless, within the encounter between people, social dynamics are an inevitable factor.    

A concept which could meaningfully explain the social dynamics in collective action is the concept of care. Care is at times used as a synonym for solidarity and could be understood as connections that are made between individuals on the basis of natural predispositions. Apart from natural predisposition, moral principles are also influencing the development of relationships in socially innovative actions. Hence, the theory of an ethics of care, in which interpersonal relationships and benevolence are a virtue to moral actions, could meaningfully address the social dynamics in the social innovation process. In short, this paper focusses in particular on how individuals take care of each other. This leads to the question if an ethics of care is a means to an end, or an end in itself in social innovation.    

In order to explore the role of an ethics of care in the social innovation process this study draws on in-depth interviews. 

The results of this research are relevant for public administrators to better understand the role of ethics of care in micro practises. It will enhance the understanding of how the choices of individuals effects societal change.    

  • Amin, A. (2012). Land of strangers. Cambridge: Polity.
  • Cajaiba-Santana, G. (2014). Social innovation: Moving the field forward. A conceptual framework. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 82, 42-51.
  • Gibson-Graham, J. K. (2003). An ethics of the local. Rethinking Marxism, 15(1), 49-74. 

Paper 4 - Politics of care for social innovation

The involvement of civil society to bring about social change while also renovating democracy has gained importance in public administration. Transparency, legitimacy and democracy need to be guaranteed with specific governance mechanisms. Apart from bringing about cultural change amongst civil society, this also depends on a cultural change in public administration. Social innovation aims at eliminating the long lines set by rules and regulations by bypassing existing welfare state institutions. Local socially innovative actions tend to highlight the need for recognition and representation and could hence help to improve conventional welfare state politics. Still, a sense of togetherness and pluralism does not rest alone on the idea of recognition and community, or i.e. the commons.    

Instead of looking at the code or the principles, the norms and the values, this paper focusses on the cultivation of the political person. In particular, the self-formation as an ethical subject involving practices of forming the ethical political subject. It puts emphasis on the attitude of a divers set of policy makers rather than looking at the administrative perspective. Which attitudes and practices could enable ethically sensitive, negotiated settlements between different groups and individuals in the social innovation process and the construction of the commons. It looks at what a politics of care could be and how local politics participate in ethics of care and building new communities and collaboration. 

In-depth interviews with policy makers are used as method to explore this research. Aldermen and civil servants of different municipalities in the Netherlands are the sample in particular.    

The aim is to explore the anthropology of policy makers to enable a more affective and informal perspective for the political subject. More so, to explore how anthropology, as a means, could change attitudes and enhance determination in mobilising action and leading change in an organisational setting. The paper looks at places where the commons exercise their responsibility in order to provide policy makers a closer look into micro political opportunities. Hence, the results are relevant for public administration and policy makers in particular.    

  • Grimm, R., Fox, C., Baines, S., & Albertson, K. (2013). Social innovation, an answer to contemporary societal challenges? Locating the concept in theory and practice. Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research, 26(4), 436-455.
  • Pinxten, H., & Verstraete, G. (1998). Cultuur en Macht. Over identiteit en conflict in een multiculturele wereld. Antwerpen: Uitgeverij Houtekiet.

Paper 5 - What happens when you become the best practise

The up-scaling of local socially innovative actions is of paramount importance to a variety of actors included and excluded in the process. The so-called best practise should lead by example and practises should become transferrable to other cases and contexts. Yet, the local social innovation is oftentimes context-bound and running on bottom-up initiatives and practises. Transferring it to other places and context could therefore be problematic. In addition, gaining publicity as best-practise could work as an accelerator but may also act as a boundary for success.    

Ulrum is a small village in the province of Groningen, The Netherlands. Due to population aging and dejuvination demographic changes are clearly felt and visible. In order to become a future-proof village, residents started working on changing their village in a place tailored to their needs. With a plethora of local, regional, national and international partners the residents have worked on finding a solution which fits the local needs of Ulrum. Instead of taking an external look, the project was set up from the inside, with the people who live and work in Ulrum. The official timeline of the project was three years, finishing in 2016. However, DEEL & Ulrum continues till this day. 

In order to explore what happens when you become a best-practise, this research draws on a wide selection of data. All meeting minutes are used to develop a timeline of events. This information may also be used to analyse possible changes in the project due to these events. The documentary made of the Ulrum caused a lot of commotion in the village and the project. This documentary is also used in the analyses. In addition, interviews are conducted with various people involved in the project.    

The aim of this study is to provide an insight of the dynamics taking place when a local project becomes a best-practise. Due to historical data, a retrospective view provides the opportunity to elucidate the process over time.    

The results are of interest to people involved in social innovation projects. The greater field of social innovation and public administration in particular benefit from this research.    

  • Howaldt, J., Butzin, A., Domanski, D., & Kaletka, C. (2014). Theoretical Approaches to Social Innovation – A Critical Literature Review. A deliverable of the project: “Social Innovation: Driving Force of Social Change” (SI-DRIVE). Dortmund: Sozialforschungsstelle. 
  • Moulaert, F., MacCallum, D., Mehmood, A., & Hamdouch, A. (2013). The international handbook on social innovation: Collective action, social learning and transdisciplinary research. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

Paper 6 - Auto-Ethnography for social innovation

The last paper focusses on the role of the intermediary, the facilitator, the professional in the process of social innovation. Concentrating on managing and creating innovative and productive contexts and to value each other’s strengths and avoid each other weaknesses is one of the tasks of the intermediary.

The central supporting role of the professional and the public meeting culture is compelling in the social innovation process. It is of importance to explore this role if only to undermine the illusion of spontaneous care and direct solidarity. Place-bound and local forms of direct types of care are strongly interwoven with the indirect care of the welfare state through financing professionals and the meeting culture. The role of reflection and balancing power through perpetuating or imposing priorities from outside is what the professional needs to cope with. Within this the encounter with different kind of people is also challenge and furthermore a risk full process. Absorbing this risk is key to the process of socially innovative actions. Yet, for who is the professional absorbing this risk, the local community or political figures and bodies. Who is the object of care, of solidarity, is the question. Within the encounter the professional continuously takes on a different role, in which they themselves become a different person, a stranger.

Through auto-ethnography this paper explores the field of tension between distance and involvement of alienation and appropriation, the self-evidence of the researcher and the informants in thinking, feeling and doing. It provides an insight of the dynamics in the case of Ulrum.

The aim of this paper is presenting an alternative for making personal experiences relevant for people in similar positions and the pedagogy discipline in particular.

  • Ellis, Carolyn (2004). The ethnographic I: A methodological novel about autoethnography. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press.
  • Ellis, Carolyn (2009). Telling tales on neighbors: Ethics in two voices. International Review of Qualitative Research, 2(1), 3-28.



























Written papers and articles

Startdatum
juli 6, 2017
Einddatum





Onderwerpen

Subprojecten

ProjectStartdatumEinddatumSamenvatting
Paper 13 oktober 2017Social innovation and the role of the encounter
Paper 21 oktober 2018Introducing the concept of place in socially innovative actions
Paper 31 oktober 2018Ethics of Care: Means to an end or end in itself?
Paper 41 oktober 2018Politics of care for social innovation
Paper 51 oktober 2018What happens when you become the best practise?
Paper 61 oktober 2018Auto-ethnography for social innovation

HZ Kenniscentrum Kusttoerisme
Edisonweg 4
Postbus 364
4380 AJ Vlissingen
kenniscentrumtoerisme@hz.nl

Blijf op de hoogte!

Meld je aan voor onze nieuwsbrief:

Aanmelden

Copyright 2024 HZ Kenniscentrum Kusttoerisme | Disclaimer | Cookieverklaring | Privacyverklaring

Overgenomen van "https://kenniscentrumtoerisme.nl/wiki/index.php?title=PR_00144&oldid=50609"