The meaningful participation of stakeholders in decision-making is now widely recognized as a crucial element of effective water resource management, particularly with regards to adapting to climate and environmental change. Social learning is increasingly being cited as an important component of engagement if meaningful participation is to be achieved. The exact definition of social learning is still a matter under debate, but is taken to be a process in which individuals experience a change in understanding that is brought about by social interaction. Social learning has been identified as particularly important in transboundary contexts, where it is necessary to reframe problems from a local to a basin-wide perspective. In this study, social learning is explored in the context of transboundary water resource management in the St. Lawrence River Basin. The overarching goal of this paper is to explore the potential role of serious games to improve social learning in the St. Lawrence River. To achieve this end, a two-pronged approach is followed: (1) Assessing whether social learning is currently occurring and identifying what the barriers to social learning are through interviews with the region's water resource managers; (2) Undertaking a literature review to understand the mechanisms through which serious games enhance social learning to understand which barriers serious games can break down. Interview questions were designed to explore the relevance of social learning in the St. Lawrence River basin context, and to identify the practices currently employed that impact on social learning. While examples of social learning that is occurring have been identified, preliminary results suggest that these examples are exceptions rather than the rule, and that on the whole, social learning is not occurring to its full potential. The literature review of serious games offers an assessment of such collaborative mechanisms in terms of design principles, modes of play, and their potential impact on social learning for transboundary watershed management. Serious game simulations provide new opportunities for multidirectional collaborative processes by bringing diverse stakeholders to the table, providing more equal access to a virtual negotiation or learning space to develop and share knowledge, integrating different knowledge domains, and providing opportunities to test and analyze the outcomes of novel management solutions. This paper concludes with a discussion of how serious games can address specific barriers and weaknesses to social learning in the transboundary watershed context of the St. Lawrence River Basin.
DOCUMENT
The goal of a local energy community (LEC) is to create a more sustainable, resilient, and efficient energy system by reducing dependence on centralized power sources and enabling greater participation and control by local communities and individuals. LEC requires transformations in local energy systems, and strongly depends on the preferences and actions of the local actors involved. The necessity for extensive stakeholder involvement adds complexity to the energy transition, posing a significant challenge for all involved parties. The municipality of Leidschendam-Voorburg has committed to the national decision for energy transition. It has taken a strategic approach by proceeding De Heuvel/Amstelwijk as the pioneer in this initiative, leading the way for other neighborhoods to follow. It is crucial to devise strategies that effectively facilitate stakeholder engagement. To this end, a thorough stakeholder analysis is needed. Such an analysis can focus on the identification of key stakeholders, their interests, their influence, and their behavioral characteristics in relation to the energy transition. Additionally, it's crucial to uncover the challenges encountered by these stakeholders and finally develop appropriate strategies to address them hence enhance their engagement. This thesis begins with an introduction to the research background, including a presentation of the case study and a statement of the problem identified in the field, followed by the research questions underpinning the study. A thorough literature review ensues, providing a robust synthesis of existing research relating to stakeholder engagement in LECs, with a view to expediting energy transitions. The literature review not only forms the foundation for the research methods adopted in this study but also promotes in the construction of the conceptual model. Subsequent to the literature review, the research method is detailed. The filed research is conducted in five steps: Step 1 - identification of stakeholders, Step 2 - prioritization of stakeholders, Step 3 - interviewing, Step 4 - data analysis, including stakeholder profiling with mapping and addressing challenges, and finally, Step 5 - proposal of strategies for stakeholder engagement enhancement based on the expected and current levels of stakeholders engagement. This research collects necessary information to understand the profiles of stakeholders in De Heuvel/Amstelwijk, tackle challenges faced by different stakeholders, propose strategies to increase stakeholders engagement. It not only aims to enrich the depth of theoretical knowledge on the subject matter but also strives to aid in the development of a localized energy strategy that is optimally suited for the De Heuvel/Amstelwijk neighborhood as good example for other neighborhoods.
DOCUMENT
This quick guide is written to inspire designers, policy makers, company owners, employees, educators and students to change the linear economy into a circular economy by collaborating in local value chains. This guide explains the basics of circular economy, value chains and it gives practical tips for you to work with and practical examples to learn from. It is developed within the context of the Biocup project, part of the BIOCAS Interreg project supported by the North Sea Programme of the European Regional Development Fund of the European Union.
MULTIFILE
The denim industry faces many complex sustainability challenges and has been especially criticized for its polluting and hazardous production practices. Reducing resource use of water, chemicals and energy and changing denim production practices calls for collaboration between various stakeholders, including competing denim brands. There is great benefit in combining denim brands’ resources and knowledge so that commonly defined standards and benchmarks are developed and realized on a scale that matters. Collaboration however, and especially between competitors, is highly complex and prone to fail. This project brings leading denim brands together to collectively take initial steps towards improving the ecological sustainability impact of denim production, particularly by establishing measurements, benchmarks and standards for resource use (e.g. chemicals, water, energy) and creating best practices for effective collaboration. The central research question of our project is: How do denim brands effectively collaborate together to create common, industry standards on resource use and benchmarks for improved ecological sustainability in denim production? To answer this question, we will use a mixed-method, action research approach. The project’s research setting is the Amsterdam Metropolitan Area (MRA), which has a strong denim cluster and is home to many international denim brands and start-ups.
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.
It is VHL’s mission to train high-quality, committed and innovative professionals who con-tribute to a more sustainable world , and who are able to organize and manage multi-stakeholder processes for sustainable change: graduates with transdisciplinary competences. Secondly, VHL aims to contribute to the SDG-agenda by linking its education and applied research to eight particular SDGs of which Resilient Communities is one. However, to operationalize SDGs in practice, and aligning targets and strategies of different stakeholders is difficult: ‘resilience’ and ‘sustainability’ refer to ‘wicked problems’ for which no definitive problem formulation, nor clear-cut solutions exist. Addressing wicked problems like ‘resilience’ and ‘sustainability’ requires transdisciplinary collaboration to manage and transform divergent values and conflicting interests, and to co-create sustainable innovations. This HBO postdoc views the 17 SDGs as a compass to align targets and strategies of citizens, government, civil society organizations, private sector and knowledge institutes who collaborate in Living Labs of VHL focusing on resilient communities/regions. Through spiraling action-reflection cycles, stakeholders will use the SDG compass to make success mechanisms, obstacles and trade-offs visible, assuming they stay engaged to overcome difficulties to improve interventions and innovations; this is expected to result in adapted sustainability practices and lessons learned on reaching community resilience. The postdoc’s aim is two-fold highlighting the link between research and education: (1) Design a methodology to integrate SDGs effectively in VHL’s applied research: using the SDGs as compass to improve performance and outcomes of transdisciplinary collaborations. (2) Develop a Roadmap for transdisciplinary education at course, curriculum, and institutional level with SDGs as compass. Future graduates require the competence to work together with others outside one own’s discipline, institute, culture or context. Living Labs offer a suitable learning environment to develop this competence