From Organizations to Organizational Fields: The Evolution of Civic Innovation Ecosystems

Claudel, Matthew

doi:10.22215/timreview/1163

Cited by 12 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 30 publications

(44 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the literature on the underlying relational dynamics shaping the smart city ecology, the inter-organizational make-up of smart city development is usually framed as “innovation system” (Leydesdorff and Deakin, 2011) or “innovation ecosystem” (Claudel, 2018; Snow et al, 2016). These systems mobilize various types of actors and facilitate the transfer of knowledge and ideas and the pooling of resources.…”

Section: Theoretical Framework: Smart City Ecologies and Types Of Csosmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Selective inclusion: Civil society involvement in the smart city ecology of Amsterdam

Rose

Thiel

Grabher

2022

European Urban and Regional Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although research on smart cities increasingly acknowledges the involvement of civil society actors, most studies fall short when it comes to clarifying the specific modalities of civil society involvement. By probing into the smart city ecology that has developed around the Amsterdam Smart City-Foundation, we explore not only the extent to which the civil society is part of a smart city ecology but also what role civil society actors hold within this ecology. This article draws on data gathered and analyzed through quantitative and qualitative methods. The qualitative analysis focuses on analyzing the institutional dynamics that shape civil society involvement in Amsterdam’s smart city ecology. The quantitative data are used to unravel the relational dynamics by quantifying collaborative patterns between different types of organizations in Amsterdam’s smart city ecology. Our findings reveal that powerful institutional dynamics, manifested through normative pressures, favor the involvement of socially oriented civil society actors. At the same time, however, relational dynamics that shape the collaborative patterns in the projects of the ecology rather exclude the socially oriented civil society at the benefit of an economically oriented civil society. In other words, while the entire ecology rhetorically adheres to an ethos of pervasive civil society involvement, politically, socially, and civically oriented civil society actors lack inter-organizational collaboration—even in the supposedly inclusive context of Amsterdam.

show abstract

Section: Theoretical Framework: Smart City Ecologies and Types Of Csosmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…With a permanent secretariat, the ASC-Foundation is a “trusted third party” (van Winden et al, 2016: 13) and an “innovation intermediary” (Claudel, 2018; also in Raven et al, 2019). In this role, the ASC-Foundation has reduced its direct involvement in smart city projects.…”

Section: Findings I: Institutional Dynamics Of Civil Society Involvementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Selective inclusion: Civil society involvement in the smart city ecology of Amsterdam

Rose

Thiel

Grabher

2022

European Urban and Regional Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Their attempts to align smartness with civic innovation underline that the development of new services and technologies need to co-evolve with public engagement. This requires developing and sustaining new networks of collaboration across domains to find models of urban governance that are adaptive to increased datafication (Claudel, 2018).…”

Section: Smartness Through Living Labsmentioning

confidence: 99%

What smartness does in the smart city: From visions to policy

Baykurt

Raetzsch

2020

Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article examines what smartness does on the ground by examining how its anticipatory media visions have been interpreted and acted on in policy decisions and local implementations since the early 2000s. Using a comparative-historical analysis that draws on fieldwork in aspiring smart cities in the United States and Europe, we argue that the visions of smartness are neither singular nor fixed across time and space. Instead, the role of smartness in diffusing new technologies is recruited and reshaped in the present to lend legitimacy to future public and private interventions. We first demonstrate that the narrative of crisis, often associated with smartness, shifted from a pre-2008 emphasis on sustainability and climate change to a post-financial crisis engagement with entrepreneurship and platformization. We then discuss how the development of smart city initiatives has followed divergent paths in the United States and Europe, with big tech companies dominating in the former and the ‘living lab’ model prevailing in the latter. Our analysis highlights the importance of investigating the complex relationships between anticipatory media visions of smartness and their varying, down-to-earth implementations in the built environment rather than solely focusing on the discursive appeal of techno-idealism. It also explains the enduring appeal of smartness as an urban vision, despite its various shortcomings, by revealing its adaptability to the changing social and political–economic shifts.

show abstract

“…In particular, interesting research opportunities are arising as some living labs that have been operating for a long time are ending their operations, merging into new forms of collaborative innovation (cf. Claudel, 2018;Steen & van Bueren, 2017), or establishing financial mechanisms to support their operations after the initial funding dries out.…”

Section: A Topic Modelling Analysis Of Living Labs Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%