Radical futures? Exploring the policy relevance of social innovation

Pieri, Benedetta De; Teasdale, Simon

doi:10.1108/sej-11-2020-0111

Cited by 18 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The term social innovation is extensively used in academic literature to address economic problems and pressing social issues resulting from a financial crisis (Pieri and Teasdale, 2020). Social innovation can be defined as “the process of inventing, securing support for and implementing novel solutions to the societal needs and problems” (Philis et al , 2008, p. 36).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Social entrepreneurial sustainability during the COVID-19 pandemic

Kamaludin

Xavier

Amin

2021

SEJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to explore and understand the needed entrepreneurial actions required to attain sustainability during the COVID-19 pandemic. Social entrepreneurial sustainability is defined as the process of developing sustainable solutions for social, economic or environmental problems that are not being addressed by the market. This paper intends to get a clearer picture of how social entrepreneurial sustainability is affected by the exogenous shocks caused by the pandemic. Design/methodology/approach A qualitative exploratory approach using a case study design was used. Semi-structured interviews with five CEOs and founders of accredited social enterprises in Malaysia that have proven sustainable were conducted. Triangulation was applied in this study through three different data sources to confirm and validate the emerging findings. Findings The findings reveal various innovative revenue-generating activities and business processes taken by social entrepreneurs to be sustainable during the COVID-19 pandemic, such as pivoting and forging new partnerships. Themes such as technical innovation and social innovation are critical concepts that need to be differentiated and understood. The introduction of a new construct termed “mission agility” will be of significant interest to academicians studying social entrepreneurship and sustainability. Practical implications The practical implications of this study suggest that if social enterprises implement the recommended strategies, they may achieve both short-term and long-term social entrepreneurial sustainability during the pandemic crisis and progressively into the post-pandemic era. Originality/value This study is unique by using two methods of data collection. By providing vital empirical evidence through primary and secondary data, the paper will offer robust findings and proposes recommendations on entrepreneurial strategies to foster the recovery and sustainability of social enterprises during the COVID-19 pandemic.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Social entrepreneurial sustainability during the COVID-19 pandemic

Kamaludin

Xavier

Amin

2021

SEJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…On the other side, the author sees the emergence of a democratic counter-discourse, which seeks empowerment through increased social and political participation of marginalized groups. Building on Montgomery’s outline of two social innovation narratives, other authors (Montgomery and Mazzei, 2021; Lachapelle, 2021; De Pieri and Teasdale, 2021; Purna and De Paoli, 2022) have expanded on this basic distinction: they associate the technocratic school with a reformist narrative oriented toward preserving a neoliberal status quo, whereas the empowerment school constitutes an emancipatory conception of social innovation aiming at systemic transformation. Taken together, these authors illustrate that although advocates on either side use similar terminology, they put forward opposing narratives, including distinct framings of the three dimensions of social innovation.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Following Montgomery’s thesis of two opposed camps within the field of social innovation, various authors have picked up on the distinction, describing one strand as neoliberal and hegemonic, and “incremental market-based” (De Pieri and Teasdale, 2021; also Montgomery and Mazzei, 2021), and the other as counter-hegemonic and emancipatory, seeking “radical empowerment” and “complete systemic change.” Especially the work of Geoff Mulgan is associated with the technocratic/neoliberal conception, whereas Frank Moulaert is a key figure in the democratic/emancipatory school. Advocates on either side of this discursive split are described as engaging in “an ideological battle,” in which the neoliberal variant currently dominates the mainstream, and shapes government policies and attracts most public funding (Fougère et al , 2017; Purna and De Paoli, 2022).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Scaling for social impact: understanding social innovation through local empowerment strategies

Rado,

Nuchpiam

2023

SEJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose This paper aims to provide a nuanced understanding of philosophies underpinning social innovation based on the action research strategies applied in the field. Design/methodology/approach Literature review was conducted to identify action research strategies referred to in the social innovation literature. Through stratified purposive sampling, the authors then selected nonprofit organizations, each closely associated with one of the strategies. Qualitative content analysis was applied to documents published by these organizations for an in-depth exploration of how the action research strategies frame the three dimensions of social innovation, namely, the product, process and empowerment dimensions. Findings The authors identified four broad action research strategies referred to in the social innovation literature. Each strategy inspires four distinct narratives of social innovation centered around key concepts: prototyping, evidence, asset-building and co-creation. Research limitations/implications The methodology used is characterized by depth rather than scope. Although diverse types of documents were used, the documents are limited to publications by four institutions. A deductive approach using the categories should be used in future empirical research. Originality/value The paper contributes to the discussion about different schools and research agendas in the field of social innovation. In particular, the authors examine the action research strategies adopted in the field, shedding light on incompatible views and strategies within certain research clusters while identifying common ground between authors belonging to different schools.

show abstract

“…Drawing on an evaluation of a regional development project on creating new social enterprises in Sweden, this article analyzes social innovations and social enterprises as an emerging policy area. Policies in this field are often described as both dynamic and complex [9][10][11][12]. Firstly, scholars and practitioners in the policy field disagree on definitions [13].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Public Policy for Social Innovations and Social Enterprise—What’s the Problem Represented to Be?

Johansson

Gabrielsson

2021

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Social innovations and social enterprise have been seen as innovative measures to achieve sustainable development. Drawing on an evaluation of a development project on creating social enterprises in Sweden, this article analyzes social innovations as a policy area. The policy area is often described as loaded with ideological contradictions. The aim of the article is to explore underlying premises and discourses in policy implementation aimed at creating social innovations in a comparison between two ideal types on social sustainability—(1) an individual activation strategy (responsibilization of the individual) and (2) a societal equilibrium strategy (balancing social values). The research question is inspired by Carol Bacchi’s policy theory and asks what is the problem represented to be? The analysis is carried out at the micro-level as a context-sensitive approach to explore articulations made among actors creating the policy and entrepreneurs participating in a locally organized project. The article contribute with a better understanding of how societal problems and their solutions are discursively determined, with implications for policy makers and project managers active in this policy area. The analysis and findings indicate a significant policy shift during the implementation process. Initially, the policy idea consisted of well-considered ambitions to create a long-term sustainable development. During the implementation of the project, the problem’s representation changes gradually in the direction towards individual activation. This transition is driven by pragmatic difficulties of defining the policy area, problems of separating means from ends, and the need to make decisions based on a limited range of information. We conclude by emphasizing the need for reflection on how the social dimension is defined when implementing social innovation strategies. Furthermore, there is a lack of studies of how this policy area can be linked to policies for social sustainability.

show abstract

Radical futures? Exploring the policy relevance of social innovation

Cited by 18 publications

References 43 publications

Social entrepreneurial sustainability during the COVID-19 pandemic

Social entrepreneurial sustainability during the COVID-19 pandemic

Scaling for social impact: understanding social innovation through local empowerment strategies

Public Policy for Social Innovations and Social Enterprise—What’s the Problem Represented to Be?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About