As the economy becomes more globalized, a growing number of events are exerting an influence on activity and innovation globally in different fields. Therefore, we argue that "eventful cities" can act as important catalysts for eventfulness in other places as well. This article analyzes the case of the Sónar electronic music festival, an event that originated in Barcelona, Spain, but which now runs different editions in many cities worldwide. This empirical study of the innovation capacity of a cultural event examines how a locally based music festival has transformed itself by using the global "space of flows" to influence the local "space of places." The Sónar Festival has turned itself into a relational hub in a global cultural network, using stylistic innovations to link geographically dispersed nodes in order to create new products, open up new markets, and strengthen its own position as a global source of eventfulness.
MULTIFILE
Gaming Horizons is a EU-funded project that explored the role of video games in culture, the economy and education. We engaged with more than 280 stakeholders through interviews, workshops and webinars.
LINK
Background:Children with asthma can decrease the impact of their disease by improving their physical activity (PA). However, health care providers lack interventions for children with asthma that effectively increase their PA levels and achieve behavior change. A technology-supported approach can positively influence PA and physical functioning in children.Objective:The aims of this study were to develop a technology-supported intervention that facilitates health care providers in promoting PA for children (aged 8 to 12 years) with asthma and to systematically describe this developmental process.Methods:Intervention mapping (IM) was applied to develop a blended and technology-supported intervention in cocreation with children with asthma, their parents, and health care providers. In accordance with the IM framework, the following steps were performed: conduct a needs assessment; define the intervention outcome, performance objectives, and change objectives; select theory-based intervention methods and strategies; create components of the intervention and conduct pilot tests; create an implementation plan; and create an evaluation plan.Results:We developed the blended intervention Foxfit that consists of an app with a PA monitor for children (aged 8 to 12 years) with asthma and a web-based dashboard for their health care provider. The intervention focuses on PA in everyday life to improve social participation. Foxfit contains components based on behavior change principles and gamification, including goal setting, rewards, action planning, monitoring, shaping knowledge, a gamified story, personal coaching and feedback, and a tailored approach. An evaluation plan was created to assess the intervention’s usability and feasibility for both children and health care providers.Conclusions:The IM framework was very useful for systematically developing a technology-supported intervention and for describing the translational process from scientific evidence, the needs and wishes of future users, and behavior change principles into this intervention. This has led to the technology-supported intervention Foxfit that facilitates health care providers in promoting PA in children with asthma. The structured description of the development process and functional components shows the way behavior change techniques are incorporated in the intervention.Trial Registration:International Clinical Trial Registry Platform NTR6658; https://tinyurl.com/3rxejksf
Hoogwaardig afvalhout van bewoners, bouwbedrijven en meubelmakers blijft momenteel ongebruikt omdat het te arbeidsintensief is om grote hoeveelheden ongelijke stukken hout van verschillende afmetingen en soorten te verwerken. Waardevol hout wordt waardeloos afval, tegen de principes van de circulaire economie in. In CW.Code werken Powerhouse Company, Bureau HUNC en Vrijpaleis samen met de HvA om te onderzoeken hoe een toegankelijke ontwerptool te ontwikkelen om upcycling en waardecreatie van afvalhout te faciliteren. In andere projecten hebben HvA en partners verschillende objecten gemaakt van afvalhout: een stoel, een receptiebalie, kleine meubels en objecten voor de openbare ruimte, vervaardigd met industriële robots. Deze objecten zijn 3D gemodelleerd met behulp van specifieke algoritmen, in de algemeen gebruikte ontwerpsoftware Rhino en Grasshopper. De projectpartners willen nu onderzoeken hoe deze algoritmen via een toegankelijke tool bruikbaar te maken voor creatieve praktijken. Deze tool integreert generatieve ontwerpalgoritmen en regelsets die rekening houden met beschikbaar afvalhout, en de ecologische, financiële en sociale impact van resulterende ontwerpen evalueren. De belangrijkste ontwerpparameters kunnen worden gemanipuleerd door ontwerpers en/of eindgebruikers, waardoor het een waardevol hulpmiddel wordt voor het co-creëren van circulaire toepassingen voor afvalhout. Dit onderzoek wordt uitgevoerd door HvA Digital Production Research Group, met bovengenoemde partners. HUNC heeft ervaring met stadsontwikkeling waarbij gebruik wordt gemaakt van lokaal gekapt afvalhout. Vrijpaleis biedt toegang tot een actieve, lokale community van makers met een sterke band met buurtbewoners. Powerhouse Company heeft ervaring in het ontwerpen met hout in de bouw. Alle drie kunnen profiteren van slimmere circulaire ontwerptools, waarbij beschikbaar materiaal, productiebeperkingen en impactevaluatie worden geïntegreerd. De tool wordt ontwikkeld en getest voor twee designcases: een binnenmeubelobject en een buitengevelelement. Bevindingen hiervan zullen leidend zijn bij de ontwikkeling van de tool. Na afronding van het project is een bètaversie gereed voor validatie door ontwerpers, bewonerscollectieven en onderzoek/onderwijs van de HvA.
De afgelopen twee decennia is er veel meer aandacht ontstaan bij onderzoekers en beleidsmakers voor het begrip co-creatie. Bijna altijd wordt de rol van co-creatie als positief en essentieel gezien in een proces waarin maatschappelijke of publieke uitdagingen worden onderzocht en opgelost (zogenaamde sociale innovatie). Het meeste onderzoek naar deze twee begrippen is kwalitatief van aard en gebaseerd op ‘case studies’.In zijn promotieonderzoek kijkt Peter Broekema naar de rol van co-creatie binnen sociale innovatie in Europese samenwerkingsprojecten. In zijn eerste artikel heeft hij de begrippen co-creatie en sociale innovatie tussen 1995 en 2018 binnen de EU geanalyseerd en geconcludeerd dat beide begrippen steeds breder gebruikt worden en samen met het begrip impact zijn getransformeerd tot een beleidsparadigma.In het tweede artikel keek Peter Broekema hoe beide begrippen doorwerken in specifieke subsidieoproepen en hoe consortia deze begrippen toepassen en samenwerken. Hierbij bleek dat er weliswaar verschillende typen consortia bestaan, maar dat zij geen specifieke co-creatiestrategie hadden.In zijn laatste twee artikelen zal hij gedetailleerd kijken naar een aantal EU projecten en vaststellen hoe de samenwerking is verlopen en hoe tevreden de verschillende partners zijn met het resultaat. Peter Broekema maakt hiervoor gebruik van projecten waarin hij zelf participeert (ACCOMPLISSH, INEDIT en SHIINE).EU beleidsparadigma van sociale innovatie in combinatie met co-creatie en impact. Co-creatie vindt vaak binnen eigen type stakehodlers plaatsAbstractSocial innovation and co-creation are both relatively new concepts, that have been studied by scholars for roughly twenty years and are still heavily contested. The former emerged as a response to the more technologically focused concept of innovation and the latter originally solely described the collaboration of end-users in the development of new products, processes or services. Between 2010-2015, both concepts have been adapted and started to be used more widely by for example EU policymakers in their effort to tackle so called ‘grand societal challenges’. Within this narrative – which could be called co-creation for social innovation, it is almost a prerequisite that partners – especially citizens - from different backgrounds and sectors actively work together towards specific societal challenges. Relevance and aimHowever, the exact contribution of co-creation to social innovation projects is still unclear. Most research on co-creation has been focussing on the involvement of end-users in the development of products, processes and services. In general, scholars conclude that the involvement of end-users is effective and leads to a higher level of customer satisfaction. Only recently, research into the involvement of citizens in social innovation projects has started to emerge. However, the majority of research on co-creation for social innovation has been focusing on collaborations between two types of partners in the quadruple helix (citizens, governments, enterprises and universities). Because of this, it is still unclear what co-creation in social innovation projects with more different type of partners entails exactly. More importantly however, is that most research has been based on national case studies in which partners from different sectors collaborate in a familiar ‘national’ setting. Normally institutional and/or cultural contexts influence co-creation (for example the ‘poldermodel’in the Netherlands or the more confrontational model in France), so by looking at projects in a central EU and different local contexts it becomes clear how context effects co-creation for social innovation.Therefore this project will analyse a number of international co-creation projects that aim for social innovation with different types of stakeholders in a European and multi-stakeholder setting.With this research we will find out what people in different contexts believe is co-creation and social innovation, how this process works in different contexts and how co-creation contributes to social innovation.Research question and - sub questionsThe project will answer the following question: “What is the added value of co-creation in European funded collaboration projects that aim for social innovation?” To answer the main question, the research has been subdivided into four sub questions:1) What is the assumed added value of co-creation for social innovation?2) How is the added value of co-creation for social innovation being expressed ex ante and ex post in EU projects that aim specifically for social innovation by co-creation?3) How do partners and stakeholders envision the co-creation process beforehand and continuously shape this process in EU projects to maximise social innovation?4) How do partners and stakeholders regard the added value of co-creation for social innovation in EU projects that that aim for social innovation?Key conceptsThe research will focus on the interplay between the two main concepts a) co-creation and b) social innovation. For now, we are using the following working definitions:a) co-creation is a non-linear process that involves multiple actors and stakeholders in the ideation, implementation and assessment of products, services, policies and systems with the aim of improving their efficiency and effectiveness, and the satisfaction of those who take part in the process.b) social innovation is the invention, development and implementation of new ideas with the purpose to (immediately) relieve and (eventually) solve social problems, which are in the long run directed at the social inclusion of individuals, groups or communities.It is clear that both definitions are quite opaque, but also distinguish roughly the same phases (ideation/invention, development, implementation and assessment) and also distinguish different levels (products/services, policies and systems). Both concepts will be studied within the policy framework of the EU, in which a specific value to both concepts has been attributed, mostly because policymakers regard co-creation with universities and end-users almost as a prerequisite for social innovation. Based on preliminary research, EU policies seem to define social innovation in close reation with ‘societal impact’, which could defined as: “the long lasting effect of an activity on society, because it is aimed at solving social problems”, and therefore in this specific context social innovation seems to encompasses societal impact. For now, I will use this working definition of social innovation and will closely look at the entanglement with impact in the first outlined paper.MethodologyIn general, I will use a qualitative mixed method approach and grounded theory to answer the main research question (mRQ). In order to better understand the added value of co-creation for social innovation in an EU policy setting, the research will:SubRQ1) start with an analysis of academic literature on co-creation and social impact. This analysis will be followed by and confronted with an analysis of EU policy documents. SubRQ2) use a qualitative data analysis at nineteen EU funded projects to understand how co-creation is envisoned within social innovation projects by using the quintuple helix approach (knowledge flows between partners and stakeholders in an EU setting) and the proposed social innovation journey model. By contrasting the findings from the QDA phase of the project with other research on social innovation we will be able to find arachetypes of social innovation in relation with the (perceived) added value of co-creation within social innovation. SubRQ3) These archetypes will be used to understand the process of co-creation for social innovation by looking closely at behavioural interactions within two social innovation projects. This close examination will be carried out by carrying out interviews with key stakeholders and partners and participant observation.SubRQ4) The archetypes will also be used to understand the perceived added value by looking closely at behavioural interactions within two social innovation projects. This close examination will be carried out by carrying out interviews with key stakeholders and partners and participant observation.ImpactThe project will contribute to a better understanding of the relationship between co-creation and social innovation on different levels:a) Theoretical: the research will analyse the concepts of co-creation and social innovation in relation to each other by looking at the origins of the concepts, the adaptation in different fields and the uptake within EU policies;b) Methodological: a model will be developed to study and understand the non-lineair process of co-creation within social innovation, by focusing on social innovation pathways and social innovation strategies within a quintuple helix setting (i) academia, ii) enterprises and iii) governments that work together to improve iv) society in an v) EU setting);c) Empirical: the project will (for the first time) collect data on behavioural interactions and the satisfaction levels of these interactions between stakeholders and partners in an EU project.d) Societal: the results of the research could be used to optimize the support for social innovation projects and also for the development of specific funding calls.
GAMING HORIZONS is a multidisciplinary project that aims to expand the research and innovation agenda on serious gaming and gamification. The project is particularly interested in the use of games for learning and cultural development. Gamification - and gaming more broadly – are very important from a socio-economic point of view, but over the past few years they have been at the centre of critical and challenging debates, which highlighted issues such as gender and minority representation, and exploitative game mechanics. Our project’s key contention is that it is important for the European ICT community to engage with design trends and social themes that have affected profoundly the mainstream and ‘independent’ game development cultures over the past few years, especially because the boundaries between leisure and serious games are increasingly blurred. GAMING HORIZONS is a direct response to the official recognition by the H2020 programme of work that multidisciplinary research can help to advance the integration between Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) and the Social Sciences and the Humanities (SSH). The project’s objective is to enable a higher uptake of socially responsible ICT-related research in relation to gaming. This objective will be achieved through a research-based exchange between communities of developers, policy makers, users and researchers. The methodology will involve innovative data collection activities and consultations with a range of stakeholders over a period of 14 months. We will interrogate the official ‘H2020 discourse’ on gamification – with a particular focus on ‘gamified learning’ - whilst engaging with experts, developers and critical commentators through interviews, events, workshops and systematic dialogue with an Advisory Board. Ultimately, GAMING HORIZONS will help identify future directions at the intersection of ethics, social research, and both the digital entertainment and serious games industries.EU FundingThe 14-month research project 'Gaming Horizons' was funded by the European Commission through the Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme.
