No abstract

Social innovation is perceived as a collaborative response from civic society actors to societal challenges and as such is increasingly being recognised as a driver for sustainable development. Social innovation promotes civic values, particularly in marginalised rural areas that are often struggling with biophysical and market limits, as well as shortages of public funding. In order to identify diverging development paths (DDPs) for social innovation, in this article, we use two large sets of empirical material from the SIMRA research project. First, for meta-analyses of social innovation in diverse situations and contexts, we use 211 validated social innovation examples. Second, we rely on 11 in-depth cases to reflect on the contexts and dimensions of social innovation. The elaboration of conceptualisation and deductive analyses result in the creation of a typology of social innovation DDPs, with four DDPs identified and explained. The article provides an improved understanding of how social innovation emerges and develops and how to capture processes and resulting changes in marginalised rural areas in order to turn such areas' diversity into strengths. An important conclusion is that social innovation involves both local and external actors, yet cannot develop without specific internal local activity and local knowledge.

To better understand how constantly changing human-environment interactions could be better organized to respond to current challenges, we examined the Ukrainian Carpathians as an example case of complex forest social-ecological systems (FSES). We did it by interviewing diverse and relevant local stakeholder (N=450). In particular, we strived to: i) outline how people and nature are linked and interact in coupled FSES; ii) examine the preferences of stakeholders on the forests and associated ecosystem services (ES); iii) map key drivers threatening well-being of FSES and iv) identify potential responses to address the challenges at a local scale. To answer these questions we followed a mixed method route by integrating qualitative (participatory) and quantitative data collection and analyses, with further application of a Driving Force-Pressure-State-Impact-Response (DPSIR) framework in combination with the ES approach in order to assess benefits, threats to these benefits, and responses regarding the studied FSES. We found that the key benefit from FSES is timber and non-wood forest products (like berries and mushrooms), but also various regulating services were ranked highly by respondents. To explore social-ecological innovation, with potential responses of forest-dependent communities to challenges they face, we employed a commonly used assumption that governance must fit to the particular characteristics of FSES in order to enable sustainability. For the particular case of the Ukrainian Carpathians, we identified and discussed the following five nonconformities or "misfits" threatening sustainability: 1) Spatial misfit in legislation; 2) Poor contextualization; 3) Trap of the single ES; 4) Participatory misfit; and 5) Robbing the commons. By conceptualizing those key threats, we proposed responses for sustainability. The findings contributed to an advanced understanding of complex FSES, their key challenges and potential solutions in order to secure well-being of people and nature in coupled social-ecological systems, in the conditions of a changing world.

No abstract

Social innovation is a process in which local communities build social and cultural capital to address challenges and social needs. The diffusion of social innovation requires compelling narratives that encourage people to join them. Using qualitative techniques and a multiple case study methodology, this article examines the content of narratives of social innovation in rural areas and how actors construct, spread and change them. We propose a narrative analytical framework comprising four key components: problematisation; solutions and goals; actors; and plot, which we apply to three initiatives in Scotland and Spain. Our findings suggest that marginalisation, the natural environment and community activation are central themes in the content of narratives. In addition, we explain how policies and public actors can support social innovation as well as how collective leadership of social innovations can reduce imbalances in power relations, and contribute to a consistent evolution of narratives over time, enhancing the sustainability of social innovation projects overall.