Shared Vision Planning (SVP) is a collaborative approach to water (resource) management that combines three practices: (1) traditional water resources planning; (2) structured participation of stakeholders; (3) (collaborative) computer modeling and simulation. The authors argue that there are ample opportunities for learning and innovation in SVP when we look at it as a form of Policy Analysis (PA) in a multi-actor context. SVP faces three classic PA dilemmas: (1) the role of experts and scientific knowledge in policymaking; (2) The design and management of participatory and interactive planning processes; and (3) the (ab)use of computer models and simulations in (multi actor) policymaking. In dealing with these dilemmas, SVP can benefit from looking at the richness of PA methodology, such as for stakeholder analysis and process management. And it can innovate by incorporating some of the rapid developments now taking place in the field of (serious) gaming and simulation (S&G) for policy analysis. In return, the principles, methods, and case studies of SVP can significantly enhance how we perform PA for multi-actor water (resource) management.
DOCUMENT
Social innovation and co-creation have been discussed in academic literature for the last twenty years. However, the interrelatedness and application of these concepts in European Union policy deserves more attention. In our study, we focus on this relationship and application, by analysing the value of co-creation for social innovation. By analysing a large EU dataset, we showed that social innovation and co-creation were used more and more widely and that their use took off after 2010 and 2015 respectively. By applying a contextual analysis, we also revealed that both concepts became connected in EU policy on research and innovation. Our analysis also shows that co-creation became an indicator for successful social innovation in the Horizon Europe Framework programme. These results show the importance of co-creation in policies, but because the concept has not been defined properly, this carries the risk of simplifying co-creation into a box-ticking exercise.
DOCUMENT
The authors analyze the policy discourse on the utility of games for society at the level of the European Union, and for five EU countries, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, Germany, Italy and Norway. The ongoing study is part of a Research Roadmap developed within the GALA Network of Excellence on Serious Games (2010-2014, EU FP7). The authors identify four policy discourses on the utility of serious games that they label as Technology Enhanced Learning; Creative Innovation; Social Inclusion and Empowerment and Complex Systems. The polcies applicable to SGs in the five European countries are briely described and compared. It was seen that some countries have explicit policies for SGs (the Netherlands, Germany); whereas most of the countries only have implicit policies not directly addressing SGs but which can be used to support SGs development and use.
DOCUMENT
The last decade we saw an increasing academic, policy, and professional interest in the use of co-creation to tackle societal challenges. Most research focused on qualitative analysis of case studies. This led to an understanding that co-creation is essential for social innovation. We started this paper by analyzing co-creation strategies ex ante to understand how EU-funded consortia intend to tackle societal challenges. By quantitatively analyzing 300 EU projects and qualitatively analyzing the Horizon2020 “co-creation for growth and inclusion” call, our research revealed four different types of consortia. We characterized these types by the coordinators and dubbed them, respectively, as research led, government led, enterprise led, and other led. These consortia were quite different in terms of diversity and preferred partners. We also distinguished three distinct co-creation strategies that are focused on inclusion of stakeholders, the outcome, or tool development. We discovered that these strategies are not linked to types of consortia or projects, but only to the call text. We therefore conclude that the policy design of Horizon2020 led to a program that aims to stimulate innovation, but has become too rigid to be able to do so.
DOCUMENT
Co-creation and social innovation are currently linked concepts in both policy and academic research. Almost always, the attitude towards these concepts is intrinsically positive, although evidence of their added value is lacking. In my research, I looked at the development of social innovation and co-creation in theory and practice. By analysing the use of these notions in EU policies, EU grants and awarded EU projects, I was able to show that both concepts are not only unclear, but are also mutually strengthen and add value to each other. For example, co-creation is seen as an integral part of social innovation and therefore stakeholder involvement is sufficient to qualify as good social innovation, without further evidence. A systematic literature review supports these findings.Because of the ambiguity of both concepts and the fact that they reinforce each other, there is hardly any attention to the quality of co-creation as such within social innovation. We witness this not only in social innovation projects, but also, for example, in so-called living labs. In order to monitor and improve the quality of co-creation within social innovation, an evaluation framework was developed based on a systematic literature review. This framework can be used by both policy makers and participants in social innovation projects.
DOCUMENT
Between 2009 and 2013 a project has been executed in the Utrecht region to strengthen the workplace innovation capacity of SMEs (My Company 2.0). The participating companies were asked to fill in a questionnaire on the workplace innovation capacity of the company at two moments: at the beginning (T0) and at the end of the project (T1). The workplace innovation capacity was measured with questions about the organization (responds on changing demands in the environment), labor (employee flexibility), strategy (innovation with other companies) and market (improvement or renewal of products/services). We divided the companies (n=103) into two groups, namely companies that implemented an intervention an companies that did not. We found that the companies that received an intervention during the project had a significantly higher score with regard to the workplace innovation capacity at T1 compared to T0. The companies in which no intervention took place had a small (not significant) decrease in workplace innovation capacity between the baseline- (T0) and the post- test (T1). We also compared the data with data from a national reference population. It appeared that the companies in our study scored higher in workplace innovation capacity at both measurements (T0 and T1) than the reference population
DOCUMENT
While the concept of Responsible Innovation is increasingly common among researchers and policy makers, it is still unknown what it means in a business context. This study aims to identify which aspects of Responsible Innovation are conceptually similar and dissimilar from social- and sustainable innovation. Our conceptual analysis is based on literature reviews of responsible-, social-, and sustainable innovation. The insights obtained are used for conceptualising Responsible Innovation in a business context. The main conclusion is that Responsible Innovation differs from social- and sustainable innovation as it: (1) also considers possible detrimental implications of innovation, (2) includes a mechanism for responding to uncertainties associated with innovation and (3) achieves a democratic governance of the innovation. However, achieving the latter will not be realistic in a business context. The results of this study are relevant for researchers, managers and policy makers who are interested in responsible innovation in the business context.
DOCUMENT
Energy policies are vital tools used by countries to regulate economic and social development as well as guarantee national security. To address the problems of fragmented policy objectives, conflicting tools, and overlapping initiatives, the internal logic and evolutionary trends of energy policies must be explored using the policy content. This study uses 38,277 energy policies as a database and summarizes the four energy policy objectives: clean, low-carbon, safe, and efficient. Using the TextCNN model to classify and deconstruct policies, the LDA + Word2vec theme conceptualization and similarity calculations were compared with the EISMD evolution framework to determine the energy policy theme evolution path. Results indicate that the density of energy policies has increased. Policies have become more comprehensive, barriers between objectives have gradually been broken, and low-carbon objectives have been strengthened. The evolution types are more diversified, evolution paths are more complicated, and the evolution types are often related to technology, industry, and market maturity. Traditional energy themes evolve through inheritance and merger; emerging technology and industry themes evolve through innovation, inheritance, and splitting. Moreover, this study provides a replicable analytical framework for the study of policy evolution in other sectors and evidence for optimizing energy policy design
DOCUMENT
Since the film of Al Gore An inconvenient truth, sustainability stands high on the national agenda of most countries. Concern for the environment is one of the main reasons in combination with opportunities to innovate. In general, innovation and entrepreneurship are important in the realm of national economies because they hold the key to the continuity and growth of companies (e.g. Hage, 1999; Cooper, 1987; Van de Ven, 2007) and economic growth within a country. It is therefore obvious that national governments are investing money to enable and improve innovation management and entrepreneurial behaviour within organizations with sustainability in mind. Policy measures are aimed at reduction of carbon dioxide emission, waste management and alternative use of energy sources and materials. In line with these measures companies are urged to integrate sustainability in their business processes and search for innovative sustainable solutions. While on a national level policy measures towards a more sustainable society are defined, enterprises - and especially small and medium sized companies - lag behind and fail in incorporating these measures appropriately in their day-to day business. As a result research for sustainability has become an important driver for innovation. Within the Centre for Innovation and Entrepreneurship (CI&E) at The Hague University of Applied Sciences we have taken the initiative to develop an innovation and research program for the construction industry to help small and medium sized companies (SME's) integrate sustainability in their business processes, while simultaneously professionalizing students and lecturers. This paper is part of ongoing research among 40 companies in the region of South-Holland. The companies are mostly SME's varying from very small (6 employees) to middle-sized (more than 100). According to Rennings (2000) while innovation processes toward sustainable development have received increasing attention during the past years, theoretical and methodological approaches to analyse these processes are poorly developed. This paper describes a theoretical approach developed at our university's Centre for Innovation and Entrepreneurship, which combines education and research. It is an inductive approach that departs from real-life problems encountered by companies, and is aimed at developing a model that supports companies in integrating sustainability in their business and innovation processes. We describe the experiences so far with a number of companies in the construction industry, which participate in the innovation and research program described above and the barriers they encounter. Our sustainable program is centred on four themes: cradle-to-cradle, social corporate responsibility, climateneutral construction and sustainability and customer orientation in the building process. It is an exploratory research in which students and undergraduates are involved under the supervision of a lecturer as senior researcher of this program. Through an in-depth analysis of the companies, participant observation and indepth interviews with the owners/directors of the companies, experts and prominent sustainable trendsetters, insight is gained in innovation processes towards sustainable development. Preliminary conclusions show that on a company level one of the main bottlenecks is the dilemma posed by the need for profit for the continuity of a company, while taking into account people and planet. The main bottleneck is however the inability of companies to translate policy measures into strategy and operations. This paper is set up as follows. In section 2 we give an account of European and Dutch policy measures geared at stimulating sustainability in a business context and especially the building and construction industry. In section 3 an overview is given of the economic importance and characteristics of the Dutch building and construction industry and the problems in this sector. These problems are offset against the opportunity of sustainability as a strategic option for SME's in this sector. In section 4 the innovation and research program developed at the CI&E is introduced in the context of the main research question. Following that in section 5, methodological choices are addressed and the research design is presented. We finalize this paper in section 6 with our conclusions and recommendations for further research.
DOCUMENT
In this policy brief we recommend that in order to face numerous societal challenges such as migration and climate change, regional governments should create a culture of innovation by opening up themselves and stimulate active citizenship by supporting so called Public Sector Innovation (PSI) labs. These labs bring together different types of stakeholders that will explore new solutions for societalchallenges and come up with new policies to tackle them. This method has been developed and tested in a large EU funded research project.
DOCUMENT
