This article is based on five years of longitudinal participatory action research on how former pre‐bachelor programme students with a refugee background experience finding their way into Dutch higher education and society. The four‐member research team and authors (two of which were former refugees), found that refugee students face a significant barrier of “us‐versus‐them,” especially in an educational context. We explored how creative co‐creation contributed to rethinking difference and sameness in higher education by breaking through or transcending this divide. Creative co‐creation through play, storytelling, or constructing artefacts enables “alterity,” approaching the other from the other’s position. Movement and action help to shape the world around us: Connecting and shifting positions creates sameness while leaving space for difference. Creative co‐creation during our research process included making co‐creation artefacts and activities, thus involving outreach to broader audiences for engagement. In the research process, it became clear that successful participation matters to all students and provides more opportunities for all, not just refugee students. A new notion of “we” in Dutch higher education and society that does not perpetuate the divide between “us” and “them” requires a shared responsibility. Higher education needs the university authorities and the teachers to make room for student stories and should provide spaces for dialogue and community development.
LINK
In this article, we have presented the two-sided research design that we developed for answering the question about how and what professionals and other participants of outreach social work practices learn from innovating their own practices. We distinguished five strengths the representatives of which all have to learn to play new roles in order to improve democratization and enabling the citizenship of citizens in vulnerable situations. Without outreach research, it would not have been possible to expose the connection between the learning of representatives of these strengths and other transformation processes on an individual, team, and systemic level. This underlines the importance of outreach research for successful innovations in the social field. In our opinion, our two-sided research design is a precondition for the co-creation of these relative autonomous strengths and the connectedness of each of these three levels. This article is based on the article about the research design of a multi case study of four educational cases Martin Stam wrote for International Journal Of Qualitative Studies in Education (2013b). This research design also formed the basis for a multi case study of six social work cases (published as 'Geef de burger moed' (2012)) and of three social quarter teams (is still ongoing). Both publications were used as a pad for his lecture for NOSMO, HvA en Andragogenkring in 2013. The article presented here elaborates on the findings of the social work and social quarter team case studies.
Purpose: To explore the recent emergence of “authenticity” in fashion in terms of its linkingvalue in the context of tribal brand cultures in conjunction with value co-creation processes inmediated environments.Methodology: This study adopts a qualitative approach in the form of a case study of a youngNew York-based outdoor fashion firm. The research was divided into a netnographic study toexplore the life- and experience worlds of consumers in an online context, supported bysecondary research such as online documents, photographic footage, and media reports. Findings: Identifies the socially and emotionally charged process leading to the point of valueexchange as a key driver in the relationship between brand and consumers. Social exchangebetween consumers is where meaning is extracted and symbolic properties are converted intomarkers of collective identification. Originality/value: While most analyses on co-creation and tribal consumption focus on off- oronline contexts separately, the present study seeks to develop an understanding of the intersectingdynamics between offline activities and their shared reverberation and meaning across interactiveonline contexts. Paper type: Research paper
Co-creatie is steeds vaker de gebruikte aanpak bij het ontwikkelen van innovatieve diensten en producten in de zorg, waarbij beoogd wordt om het spanningsveld tussen stijgende zorgvraag en afnemend zorgaanbod te verminderen, zoals bij het proces van extramuralisering . Deze diensten en producten worden ontworpen door zorginnovatoren via co-creatietools en -methoden. Co-creatie bestaat niet alleen uit het betrekken van relevante stakeholders in het ontwerpproces via creatieve methoden, maar ook uit het beschouwen van specifieke omgevingselementen (zowel sociaal als fysiek) en het continu oog hebben voor de complexe zorgprocessen waar de innovaties in ingebed moeten worden. Hoe dit precies moet, is bij zorginnovatoren vaak onbekend. Juist in de extramuralisering van de zorg is innoveren vanuit een systemisch perspectief essentieel aangezien er dan juist grote (vaak onvoorspelbare) veranderingen in omgeving en processen zullen gaan optreden, zoals geïdentificeerd in het concept onderzoeks- en innovatieprogramma Co-Creating Health, van de topsectoren Life Sciences & Health en Creatieve Industrie. Doel is om in een kleinschalig project van vijf maanden de basis te leggen voor een systemische ontwerptoolkit voor extramuralisering in de zorg, waarvoor bestaande kennis uit eerdere zorginnovatieprojecten wordt geïntegreerd. In een vervolgproject kan e.e.a. opgeschaald worden naar zorgcontexten in bredere zin (en/of preventie) Op basis van een systematische review van uitgevoerde co-creatie in de zorgprojecten (feb en maart ’18), aangevuld met literatuuronderzoek m.b.t. procesanalyse en systemische methoden wordt een lijst van “werkzame toolkitelementen” geformuleerd die wordt gevalideerd door experts werkzaam bij ontwerpbureaus voor de zorg (april en mei ’18). Tot slot wordt een aantal conceptrichtingen m.b.t. vorm (al dan niet digitaal) en inhoud (bijv. kaartenset, mock-uproom of game) ontwikkeld (juni ‘18) en wordt op een vervolgonderzoeksaanvraag (bijvoorbeeld voor SIA) geanticipeerd om de toolkit(s) daadwerkelijk te kunnen gaan maken.
One of the mission-driven innovation policies of the Netherlands is energy transition which sets, among others, the challenge for a carbon-neutral built environment in 2050. Around 41% of Dutch houses do not yet have a registered energy label, and approximately 31% of the registered houses have label C or lower. This calls for action within the housing renovation industry. Bound to the 70 percent rule, a renovation plan requires full (or at least 70 percent) agreement on the renovation between relevant parties, including residents. In practice, agreement indicators focus mostly on economic and energy aspects. When indicators include people’s needs and preferences, it is expected to speed participation and agreement, increasing residents’ satisfaction and enhances the trust in public institutions. Tsavo was founded in 2015 to organise the sustainability of buildings for ambitious clients. Its sustainability process aims to accelerate renovation by keeping at their core value the social needs and preferences of residents. In this project Tsavo and TU Delft work together to optimise the sustainability process so, it includes everyone’s input and results in a sustainability plan that represents everyone. Tsavo’s role will be key in keeping the balance between both a sustainable renovation service that is cheaper and fast yet also attractive and with an impact on the quality of living. In this project, Tsavo’s sustainable renovation projects will be used to implement methods that focus on increasing participation and residents’ satisfaction. TU Delft will explore principles of attractive, accessible and representative activities to stimulate residents to decide on a renovation plan that is essential and meaningful to all.
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.
