The chapter describes the methodology applied throughout the experimentation, the application of co-design, the tools used and their role briefly illustrating the single cases. The underlying assumption is that design methodologies and tools are more suitable to support co-creation for the inclusion of society in science and innovation since their aim is to implement co-creation processes from the ideation of new products, services and processes to their real implementation. What differentiates design from other co-creation methodologies is the role of prototypes and their experimentation in real contexts.

Since the summer of 2020, researchers from ten projects pertaining to the Horizon2020 Science with and for Society (SwafS) call have been meeting virtually as the SwafS14 Monitoring and Evaluation ecosystem. Topics of discussion were the trials and tribulations of their regional Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) projects as well as their strategies for monitoring and evaluation. In this paper we make a first attempt at presenting these issues as problems of translation between different kinds of stakeholders. After an exploration of the diversity of stakeholders and the process of translation in regional RRI, we suggest evaluative conversations as a way of improving regional RRI. We intend to develop this idea in the future and that these conversations will facilitate more responsible and engaged monitoring and evaluation and contribute to better R&I policies.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. 1. Introduction Confronted with a range of complex challenges, public administrations (PA) are faced with increasing pressure to improve their innovation capacity (Cavenago et al., 2016; Potts & Kastelle, 2010). The emergence of the "co-society" paradigm nurtured by open innovation and digital technologies has given way to completely new citizens behaviours (Garaud, 2016), such as mobilization for the "commons", data sharing and service sharing. Hence, the user is no longer simply a receiver or a spectator but an actor (Fluicity, 2015). This new trend is questioning both the decision-making and the implementation processes in the public sphere and is putting increasing expectations of greater citizen participation in the design and delivery of public services and societal challenges that require new solutions. The demand for smarter solutions and for a new generation of citizen-centred services is growing both among citizens and within administrations, as a consequence there is an urgent need to promote innovation and experimentation in the public sector.

No abstract

Recognising the lack of local and economically accessible facilities, technologies, and public engagement in local recycling, the chapter tackles the challenge of introducing Circular Economy to cope with plastic waste in Copenhagen. The need for circular systemic innovation and holistic production models for recycling plastics led to consider how local micro entrepreneurs, SMEs, commercial resellers and citizens can collaborate for a common, sustainable goal. The chapter presents ‘Plastic In, Plastic Out’ (PIPO), a Circular system for local sourcing, recycling and production of sustainable plastic building materials and products.