Innovation in informal settings: reflections and proposals for a research agenda

Cozzens, Susan E.; Sutz, Judith

doi:10.1080/2157930x.2013.876803

Cited by 167 publications

(119 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

112

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…By studying these relationships as causal relationships, rather than as definitional relationships, scholars may open the field to theoretical development. Clearly, nothing in this collection of papers challenges the view that inclusive innovation is promoted most effectively when innovation is not simply for the marginalized, but also by them (see, Cozzens and Sutz 2012;Heeks, Foster, and Nugroho 2014). Several studies presented in this volume lend, in various ways, support to such a hypothesis.…”

Section: The Contributions Of the Papers In This Volumementioning

confidence: 71%

“…The term 'the most needy' is deliberately relative and general, and it may seem vague compared to the widely used 'bottom of the pyramid' (BoP) criterion (Prahalad and Ramaswamy 2004; see also Kaplinsky 2011;George, McGahan, and Prabhu 2012). Following Cozzens and Sutz (2012), we are sceptical of BoP-centred definitions. We think that BoP implies a limiting and uncontextualized focus on monetized income.…”

Section: Defining the 'Inclusiveness' Of 'Inclusive Innovation'mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The question of innovation's inclusiveness becomes relevant even to developed countries where people experience relative deprivation. Defining inclusiveness in terms of the most needy entails focusing on improvements to the lives of those who emerge as the most disadvantaged in the context of a study (see also Cozzens and Sutz 2012). Defining, in each study of inclusive innovation, what characterizes 'the most needy' in that particular setting is thus important to studies of inclusive innovation.…”

Section: Defining the 'Inclusiveness' Of 'Inclusive Innovation'mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Inclusive innovation in the bioeconomy: concepts and directions for research

Bryden

Gezelius

Refsgaard

et al. 2017

Innovation and Development

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: The Contributions Of the Papers In This Volumementioning

confidence: 71%

Section: Defining the 'Inclusiveness' Of 'Inclusive Innovation'mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Defining the 'Inclusiveness' Of 'Inclusive Innovation'mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Inclusive innovation in the bioeconomy: concepts and directions for research

Bryden

Gezelius

Refsgaard

et al. 2017

Innovation and Development

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…It is a source of knowledge generation, diffusion of technologies, innovation and practices. The current STI Indicators do not acknowledge the importance of this sector in Africa, hence lack appropriate methodology for capturing them (Cozzens and Sutz, 2014). Information-gathering in this area cannot be sufficiently undertaken through conventional survey method but interviews, hence existing indicators may not sufficiently capture and account for or explain these.…”

Section: Limitations Of Sti Indicators In a Developing Country Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

Science, technology and innovation indicators in policy-making: the Nigerian experience

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article provides a critical review of the process of formulating science, technology and innovation (STI) policy in Nigeria using scientific indicators. The attainment of development goals requires a painstaking process of policy-making based on scientific evidence derivable from relevant evidence. However, in many developing countries, there is a gap between policy and development priorities as most policies are not based on scientific facts either because they are unavailable or, where they exist, unreliable. Using a system analysis framework, the article brings into perspective the fundamental role played by STI indicators in providing scientific evidence for designing, formulating and implementing national innovation policy. This can serve as a framework for utilizing scientific evidence in policy-making in a developing country context. This article is published as part of a thematic collection on scientific advice to governments.

show abstract

“…Because of its polycentric nature that links actors in the formal and informal sectors across different countries, frugal innovation might play a role in creating sustainable economic growth and inclusive development (Papaioannou, 2014). Will frugal innovation lead to sustained and equitable economic growth, or will it merely benefit a privileged few while exploiting others (George et al, 2012;Dolan and Roll, 2013;Cozzens and Sutz, 2014)?…”

Section: What Is Frugal Innovation?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Frugal Innovation and Development: Aides or Adversaries?

Knorringa¹,

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Frugal innovations aim to bring products, services and systems within the reach of billions of poor and emerging middle-class consumers. Through significantly cutting costs while safeguarding user value, frugal innovations open opportunities for new business models and may well disrupt innovation processes in entire economies. The debate on the developmental implications of frugal innovation is ideologically polarized. Whereas advocates suggest a business view of 'win-win' in which companies can earn profits while simultaneously alleviating poverty, critics argue that frugal innovation will merely exacerbate capitalist exploitation and inequality. In this contribution we argue that an empirical approach is needed to assess where and when frugal innovation is more likely to enhance inclusive development.Les innovations frugales portent des produits, des services, et des systèmes à la portée de billions de consommateurs pauvres et de l'aspirante classe moyenne. Les innovations frugales baissent les couts et préservent la valeur pour les consommateurs, et créent des nouveaux modèles économiques qui ont le potentiel de perturber les processus d'innovation dans plusieurs économies. Le débat sur les implications développementales de l'innovation frugale est idéologiquement polarisé. Les défenseurs des innovations frugales suggèrent un scenario d'affaires bénéfique pour toutes les parties, ou les entreprises peuvent réaliser des profits simultanément soulageant la pauvreté. Les critiques des innovations frugales soutiennent qu'elles vont simplement augmenter l'exploitation capitale et l'inégalité. Dans cet article, on soutien qu'un approche empirique est nécessaire pour établir où et quand une innovation frugale est plus susceptible de soutenir le développement inclusif.

show abstract

Innovation in informal settings: reflections and proposals for a research agenda

Cited by 167 publications

References 30 publications

Inclusive innovation in the bioeconomy: concepts and directions for research

Inclusive innovation in the bioeconomy: concepts and directions for research

Science, technology and innovation indicators in policy-making: the Nigerian experience

Frugal Innovation and Development: Aides or Adversaries?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About