Social innovations are new social practices that aim to meet social needs in a better way than the existing solutions,[1][2][3] resulting from - for example - working conditions, education, community development or health. These ideas are created with the goal of extending and strengthening civil society. Social innovation includes the social processes of innovation, such as open source methods and techniques and also the innovations which have a social purpose—like activism, crowdfunding, time-based currency, telehealth, cohousing, coworking, universal basic income, collaborative consumption, social enterprise, participatory budgeting, repair Café, virtual volunteering, microcredit, or distance learning. There are many definitions of social innovation, however, they usually include the broad criteria about social objectives, social interaction between actors or actor diversity, social outputs, and innovativeness (The innovation should be at least "new" to the beneficiaries it targets, but it does not have to be new to the world). Different definitions include different combinations and different number of these criteria (e.g. EU is using definition, stressing out social objectives and actors interaction).[4] Transformative social innovation not only introduces new approaches to seemingly intractable problems, but is successful in changing the social institutions that created the problem in the first place.[5]
According to Herrero de Egaña B., social innovation is defined as "new or novel ways that society has to deal with Relevant Social Challenges (RSCh), that are more effective, efficient and sustainable or that generate greater impact than the previous ones and that contribute to making it stronger and more articulated".[6]
Geoff Mulgan defines social innovation as consisting of "activities and services that are motivated by the goal of meeting a social need and that are predominantly developed and diffused through organisations whose primary purposes are social."[10] Social innovation is understood in contrast to business innovation, which is aimed at profit maximization. The European Commission cites it as "another way to produce value, with less focus on financial profit and more on real demands or needs."[11] More specifically, it defines social innovation as comprising "innovations that are social in both their ends and their means. They are innovations that are not only good for society but also enhance individuals’ capacity to act."[12]
Focus and application
Social Innovation has an inter-sectoral approach and is universally applicable.[13] Social Innovations are launched by a variety of actors, including research institutions, companies and independent organizations, which tend to use their respective definitions of Social Innovation. Therefore, it is worth discussing what distinguishes it from other forms of social work or innovation.
Social Innovation focuses on the process of innovation, how innovation and change take shape (as opposed to the more traditional definition of innovation, giving priority to the internal organization of firms and their productivity). It likewise centers on new work and new forms of cooperation (business models),[14] especially on those that work towards the attainment of a sustainable society.
Social innovation can take place within government; the for-profit sector, the nonprofit sector (also known as the third sector), or in the spaces between them. Higher education institutions, such as the Cambridge Centre for Social Innovation, Cambridge Judge Business School, University of Cambridge, leverage the power of research to support this aim. Research has focused on the types of platforms needed to facilitate such cross-sector collaborative social innovation.[15] Historical studies suggest that transforming any system may take many years, and requires not only the capacity for multiple partnerships, but also for engaging policy, legal and economic institutions.[16]
Social entrepreneurship, like social enterprise, is typically in the nonprofit sector excluding both for-profit and public organizations. Both social entrepreneurship and social enterprise are important contributions to social innovation by creating social value and introducing new ways of achieving goals. Social entrepreneurship brings "new patterns and possibilities for innovation" and are willing to do things that existing organizations are not willing to do.[17]
Social innovation success is often shaped by strategic alliances.[18] Those startups motivated by a social mission can improve their business performance via equity and non-equity strategic alliances, to enhance growth and foster social innovation. However, sustainable growth requires to attract the right investments at the right stage of development of the startup. Cacciolatti et al. (2020) developed a framework based on international business theory to explain the mechanisms regulating strategic alliances and firm performance in the context of startups with a social mission.[19]
Social innovation is often an effort of mental creativity which involves fluency and flexibility from a wide range of disciplines. The act of social innovation in a sector is mostly connected with diverse disciplines within the society. The social innovation theory of 'connected difference' emphasizes three key dimensions to social innovation.[10] First, innovations are usually new combinations or hybrids of existing elements, rather than completely new. Second, their practice involves cutting across organizational or disciplinary boundaries. Lastly, they leave behind compelling new relationships between previously separate individuals and groups.[20] Social innovation is also gaining visibility within academia.[1]
In the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, far-reaching investments in scientific research and community infrastructure laid the groundwork for many social and economic improvements in society. Despite the challenges of industrialisation, optimism about the power of technology to promote positive change created momentum for social innovation projects in healthcare, housing, sanitation, public infrastructure, communication, and transportation.[21]
Since 2014, a subdomain of social innovation has been defined in relation to the introduction of digital technologies. The subdomain is called digital social innovation and refers to "a type of social and collaborative innovation in which innovators, users and communities collaborate using digital technologies to co-create knowledge and solutions for a wide range of social needs and at a scale and speed that was unimaginable before the rise of the Internet".[22]
History
Social innovation was discussed in the writings of figures such as Peter Drucker and Michael Young (founder of the Open University and dozens of other organizations) in the 1960s.[23] It also appeared in the work of French writers in the 1970s, such as Pierre Rosanvallon, Jacques Fournier, and Jacques Attali.[24] However, the themes and concepts in social innovation existed long before. Benjamin Franklin, for example, talked about small modifications within the social organization of communities[25] that could help to solve everyday problems. Many radical 19th century reformers like Robert Owen, founder of the cooperative movement, promoted innovation in the social field and all of the great sociologists including Karl Marx, Max Weber and Émile Durkheim focused attention on broader processes of social change. In recent years, the work of Gabriel Tarde on the concept of imitation has been rediscovered by social scientists in order to better understand social innovation and its relation to social change.[26] Other theories of innovation became prominent in the 20th century, many of which had social implications, without putting social progress at the center of the theory. Joseph Schumpeter, for example, addressed the process of innovation directly with his theory of creative destruction and his definition of entrepreneurs as people who combined existing elements in new ways to create a new product or service. Beginning in the 1980s, writers on technological change increasingly addressed how social factors affect technology diffusion.[27]
The article "Rediscovering Social Innovation" mentions how social innovations are dependent on history and the change in institutions. The article discusses the ten recent social innovations reflecting current change to include:
Charter schools and other educational initiatives: Charter schools are a social innovation that provides an alternative avenue for students to continue to develop and build upon their educational foundation without many of the issues prominent in the public school system. These primary and secondary schools are publicly funded and operate independently, which allows the teachers and parents to collaboratively develop alternative teaching methods for their students as related regulations are less stringent for Charter Schools.[17] Other educational initiatives include institutions such as the West Philadelphia Community Free School, operated by the School District of Philadelphia's experimental Office of Innovative Programs from 1969 to 1978.[28]
Community-centered planning: This social innovation allows communities to plan and develop systems that cater solutions to their specific local needs by using their historical knowledge and other local resources.[17]
Emissions trading: The Emissions Trading program was designed to address issues associated with the continuous increase in pollution. The program provides solutions such as setting a cap on the amount that certain pollutants can be emitted, and implementing a permit system to control the amount of pollution produced by each participating business. If a business needs to use more pollution than permitted, it can purchase credits from a business that has not emitted its maximum permitted amount. The goal of the Emissions Trading program is that, over time and with increased awareness, society will limit the types and the numbers of pollutants emitted to what is only necessary.[17]
Fair trade: Products including coffee, sugar, and chocolate are currently being traded without high standards that result in tough conditions for farmers and a less sustainable environment. Fair trade is a movement that certifies traders to exchange with the farmers that produce these products. The idea behind this movement is that by being paid a living-wage, being able to meet social and environmental standards and promoting "environmental sustainability, the lives of these farmers will be improved.[17]
Individual Development Accounts: This social innovation is made to support the working poor with saving decisions that they have made to better enhance their lives. This initiative will give $2 per every $1 saved by the working poor for College tuition, purchasing a home, starting a business, and other similar and productive initiatives. This is made possible by philanthropic, government and corporate sponsors that donate to this cause.[17]
International labor standards: Labor standards differ country-to-country, with some agreeably better than others. In effort to internationally align these, the International Labor Organization, participating governments, and employees contributed to the development of standards that protect workers’ rights to freedom, equity, security, and human dignity".[17]
Microfinance: This social innovation is created to support those financially unable to gain access to financial services such as banking, lending, and insurance. The ultimate goal of Microfinance is to enable an escape from poverty by helping to improve the living conditions and financial viability among the impoverished program participants.[17]
Socially responsible investing: "An investment strategy that attempts to maximize both financial and social returns. Investors generally favor businesses and other organizations whose practices support environmental sustainability, human rights, and consumer protection."[17]
Supported employment: Supported employment is a social innovation geared towards helping disabled or disadvantaged workers who are un- or under-employed due to their condition obtain suitable employment. The Support Employment service provides access to job coaches, transportation, assistive technology, specialized job training, and individual tailored supervision in effort to help program participants become more competitive applicants and better prepared overall for the job market.[17]
Developments since 2000
Academic research, blogs and websites feature social innovation, along with organizations working on the boundaries of research and practical action. Topics include:
Social entrepreneurship, which is the practice of creating new organizations focusing on non-market activities.[31]
Responsible Research and Innovation, which takes into account effects and potential impacts on the environment and society. It includes Engagement of all societal actors (researchers, industry, policymakers and civil society); Gender Equality; Science Education; Open Access; Ethics; and Governance.
Online volunteering, a free service launched in 2000 whereby individuals from all over the world contribute to the needs of development organizations and public institutions[32]
Open source innovation, in which the intellectual property involved in a product or service is made freely available.[33]
Collaborative approaches which involve stakeholders who are not directly responsible for some activity, such as stockholders and unions collaborating on business issue and business collaborating with government on regulatory issues.[14][34][17]
Localized influences that make some localities particularly innovative.[36]
Institutional or system entrepreneurship which focuses on agents who work at a broad system level in order to create the conditions which will allow innovations to have a lasting impact.[37]
Public health innovation and co-design of equity centered health[39][40]
Social innovation in tourism development, which involve creation of innovative and appropriate development strategies to involve local communities as a key agent in the decision-making and planning of tourism destinations.[41]
Institutional support
The United States created an Office for Social Innovation in the White House, which is funding projects that combine public and private resources.[42] with foundations that support social innovation.[43] In 2010, the US government listed 11 investments made by its 'Social Innovation Fund', with public funding more than matched by philanthropic organizations. This fund focuses on partnerships with charities, social enterprises, and business.[42] Moreover, educational institutions are now increasingly supporting teaching and research in the area of social innovation. In addition to pioneered efforts by institutions such as the Harvard Business School's Initiative on Social Enterprise (launched 1993)[44] and Said Business School's Skoll Centre for Social Entrepreneurship (launched 2003),[45] INSEAD[46] and other universities now offer short-term programs in Social Innovation, and a few such as Cambridge Centre for Social Innovation, Cambridge Judge Business School, University of Cambridge, and Goldsmiths, University of London[47] offer Masters courses dedicated entirely to the study of theory and practice in relation to social entrepreneurship and innovation. The Cambridge Centre for Social Innovation's aim is to build best practices across business, civil society, policy and academia for a more equitable, inclusive and sustainable world.
Public policy makers support social innovation in the UK, Australia, China and Denmark, as well.[48] The European Union's innovation strategy[49] was the first well-funded research and development strategy to emphasize social innovation.[50]
In 2002, the South Australian government, led by Premier and Social Inclusion Minister Mike Rann, embraced a ten-year social innovation strategy with big investments and a focus on reform in areas such as homelessness, school retention, mental health and disability services.
The Common Ground[51] and Street to Home homelessness initiatives and the Australian Centre for Social Innovation[52] were established in Adelaide and many reforms trialed in South Australia have been adopted nationally throughout Australia. This initiative, headed by Monsignor David Cappo, South Australia's Social Inclusion Commissioner, was advised by 'Thinkers in Residence' Geoff Mulgan and New York social entrepreneur Rosanne Haggerty.
Role in curbing corruption
Lin and Chen, in "The Impact of Societal and Social innovation: a case-based approach" have argued that social innovation's goal is to produce actions that are "socially valuable and good for many".[53]
In governance, its main role is to enhance and maximize the trust of citizens through active involvement in society, whether in the public or private sphere.[53] Social innovation's role in curbing corruption is carried out through two main mediums. Firstly, it is institutionalized through actors (in the public and the private sectors), and secondly, it is executed with new tools available, specifically ICTs.
Local and regional development
Literature on social innovation in relation to territorial/regional development covers innovation in the social economy, i.e. strategies for satisfaction of human needs; and innovation in the sense of transforming and/or sustaining social relations, especially governance relations at the regional and local level. Beginning in the late 1980s, Jean-Louis Laville and Frank Moulaert researched social innovation.[54][55] In Canada CRISES[56] initiated this type of research. Another, larger project was SINGOCOM[57] a European CommissionFramework 5 project, which pioneered so-called "Alternative Models for Local Innovation" (ALMOLIN). These models were further elaborated through community actions covered by KATARSIS[58] and SOCIAL POLIS.[59] More recent works focus on the societal role of the economic life in terms of innovations in social practices and social relations at the local and regional levels. Social Innovation, therefore, is increasingly seen as a process and a strategy to foster human development through solidarity, cooperation, and cultural diversity.[60][61]
The EU funded URBACT programme is designed to help cities to exchange and learn around urban policies. The URBACT methodology can be seen as a social innovation action planning approach. A typical URBACT network would have ten cities working on a specific theme such as active inclusion or regenerating disadvantaged neighbourhoods. They examine good practice and then working through a local support group use the results to inform their local action plan.[62]
The Social Innovation Europe[63] initiative, funded by the European Commission's Directorate General for Enterprise and Industry, was set up to map social innovation at a European level, by creating a directory of grass-roots examples of social innovation from across the 27 member states.
The European Commission funded the SELUSI study between 2008 - 2013 that looked at over 550 social ventures and examined how these insights can spark change and innovation at a much larger scale. It looked at business models of social ventures in five countries - UK being one of them – identifying which specific practices evolved by social ventures are particularly successful, and how and by whom – be it social enterprise, public sector body or mainstream business – they can be most effectively scaled-up.
The European Commission has launched a new initiative (project) in 2013 under FP7 funding, with the aim to build a network of incubators for social innovation across regions and countries. This network facilitates identification of 300 social innovation examples and facilitates its scaling. The network is organised in a way to identify new models for scaling of social innovations across various geographical clusters in collaboration with each other, communicating the ideas, finding the tools and funds, developing business plans and models in order to promote the new promising ideas throughout Europe.
A guide also exists that provides a way to promote social innovations at a local or regional level.[64]
Halvorson, M. J., Kurtz, S. C. (2024). This Little World: A How-To Guide for Social Innovators. Abingdon, UK, and New York: Routledge.
Hubert A. (ed.) (2010). Empowering People, Driving Change: Social Innovation in the European Union. Brussels: BEPA – Bureau of European Policy Advisers.
Kleinert S., Horton R. (2013). Health in Europe – Successes, Failures, and New Challenges. The Lancet, 381: 1073–1074.
Mulgan G., Tucker S., Rushanara A., Sanders B. (2007). Social Innovation. What it is, why it matters and how it can be accelerated. London: The Young Foundation.
Mulgan G. (2019) Social Innovation: how societies find the power to change, Bristol, Policy Press
Murray R., Caulier-Grice J., Mulgan G. (2010). The Open Book of Social Innovation. London: The Young Foundation and Nesta.
Stott, Neil; Fava, Michelle; Tracey, Paul; Claus, Laura (2018). Leading urgent acts of categorisation: the construction of 'community anchor organizations'. Leading Social Innovation Symposium, Academy of Management Annual Meeting, 10–14 August 2018, Chicago, IL, USA.
Stott, Neil; Fava, Michelle; Tracey, Paul; Claus, Laura (2018). Playing well with others? Community cross-sector work in poor places. Re-thinking Cross-Sector Social Innovation Conference, 6–7 April 2018, Social Innovation and Change Initiative, Harvard Kennedy School, Cambridge, MA, USA.
Westley, Frances; Patton, Michael Quinn; Zimmerman, Brenda (2006). Getting to Maybe. Random House Canada. ISBN0-679-31443-1.
Westley, F.; McGowan, K.; Tjörnbo, O. (2017). The Evolution of Social Innovation: Building Resilience Through Transitions. Edward Elgar Publishing. ISBN978-1-78643-114-1.
Related Research Articles
Corporate social responsibility (CSR) or corporate social impact is a form of international private business self-regulation which aims to contribute to societal goals of a philanthropic, activist, or charitable nature by engaging in, with, or supporting professional service volunteering through pro bono programs, community development, administering monetary grants to non-profit organizations for the public benefit, or to conduct ethically oriented business and investment practices. While once it was possible to describe CSR as an internal organizational policy or a corporate ethic strategy similar to what is now known today as Environmental, Social, Governance (ESG); that time has passed as various companies have pledged to go beyond that or have been mandated or incentivized by governments to have a better impact on the surrounding community. In addition, national and international standards, laws, and business models have been developed to facilitate and incentivize this phenomenon. Various organizations have used their authority to push it beyond individual or industry-wide initiatives. In contrast, it has been considered a form of corporate self-regulation for some time, over the last decade or so it has moved considerably from voluntary decisions at the level of individual organizations to mandatory schemes at regional, national, and international levels. Moreover, scholars and firms are using the term "creating shared value", an extension of corporate social responsibility, to explain ways of doing business in a socially responsible way while making profits.
A social enterprise is an organization that applies commercial strategies to maximize improvements in financial, social and environmental well-being. This may include maximizing social impact alongside profits for co-owners.
The social economy is formed by a rich diversity of enterprises and organisations, such as cooperatives, mutuals, associations, foundations, social enterprises and paritarian institutions, sharing common values and features:
Social entrepreneurship is an approach by individuals, groups, start-up companies or entrepreneurs, in which they develop, fund and implement solutions to social, cultural, or environmental issues. This concept may be applied to a wide range of organizations, which vary in size, aims, and beliefs. For-profit entrepreneurs typically measure performance using business metrics like profit, revenues and increases in stock prices. Social entrepreneurs, however, are either non-profits, or they blend for-profit goals with generating a positive "return to society". Therefore, they use different metrics. Social entrepreneurship typically attempts to further broad social, cultural and environmental goals often associated with the voluntary sector in areas such as poverty alleviation, health care and community development.
Open innovation is a term used to promote an Information Age mindset toward innovation that runs counter to the secrecy and silo mentality of traditional corporate research labs. The benefits and driving forces behind increased openness have been noted and discussed as far back as the 1960s, especially as it pertains to interfirm cooperation in R&D. Use of the term 'open innovation' in reference to the increasing embrace of external cooperation in a complex world has been promoted in particular by Henry Chesbrough, adjunct professor and faculty director of the Center for Open Innovation of the Haas School of Business at the University of California, and Maire Tecnimont Chair of Open Innovation at Luiss.
Social finance is a category of financial services that aims to leverage private capital to address challenges in areas of social and environmental need. Having gained popularity in the aftermath of the 2007–2008 financial crisis, it is notable for its public benefit focus. Mechanisms of creating shared social value are not new; however, social finance is conceptually unique as an approach to solving social problems while simultaneously creating economic value. Unlike philanthropy, which has a similar mission-motive, social finance secures its own sustainability by being profitable for investors. Capital providers lend to social enterprises, who in turn, by investing borrowed funds in socially beneficial initiatives, deliver investors measurable social returns in addition to traditional financial returns on their investment.
Global Entrepreneurship Week (GEW) is an international initiative that introduces entrepreneurship to young people in six continents. GEW emerged in 2008 as a result of Enterprise Week UK and Entrepreneurship Week USA 2007. Since its creation, more than 10 million people from roughly 170 countries have participated in entrepreneurship-related events, activities and competitions during GEW.
Entrepreneurship is the creation or extraction of economic value in ways that generally entail beyond the minimal amount of risk, and potentially involving values besides simply economic ones.
The Office of Social Innovation and Civic Participation was an office new to the Obama Administration, created within the White House, to catalyze new and innovative ways of encouraging government to do business differently. Its first director was the economist Sonal Shah. The final director was David Wilkinson.
A socially responsible business (SRB) is a generally for-profit venture that seeks to leverage business for a more just and sustainable world. The objective of the SRBs involves more than just maximizing profits for the shareholders; it is also about creating positive changes and making valuable contributions to the stakeholders such as the local community, customers, and staff. In other words, the SRB is both profit-oriented and socially responsible as these companies seek to make financial gains, and at the same time, aim to improve the well being of the community. In doing so, the businesses engage in the voluntary initiatives with the aims of improving in various areas ranging from the social to environmental aspects of the society.
Paul Kim is currently a Korean-American Chief Technology Officer and Associate Dean at the Stanford Graduate School of Education and has held this position since 2001.
Innovation districts are urban geographies of innovation where R&D strong institutions, companies, and other private actors develop integrated strategies and solutions to develop thriving innovation ecosystems–areas that attract entrepreneurs, startups, and business incubators. Unlike science parks, innovation districts are physically compact, leverage density and high levels of accessibility, and provide a “mash up” of activities including housing, office, and neighborhood-serving amenities. Districts signify the collapse back of innovation into cities and is increasingly used as a way to revitalize the economies of cities and their broader regions. As of 2019, there are more than 100 districts worldwide.
The Minister of Small Business Development is a Minister in the Cabinet of South Africa.
Ashoka is an American-based nonprofit organization that promotes social entrepreneurship by connecting and supporting individual social entrepreneurs. Ashoka operates almost as a bank. The company loans money to help individuals achieve their financial goals and ideas. These individuals in turn become the people that others will try to follow by example. Ashoka invests in over 3,800 social entrepreneurs in over 90 countries worldwide. There is a growing world-wide demand for social services. Social entrepreneurs who have had some experience with activism will benefit more in the short term but will find difficulties in the long run. Social entrepreneurship also supports teens and gives them a way to flourish, to grow independently, while continuning to find support from those around them. An example of this independence is the way that young Asian teens, whose ultimate goal is to attend and eventually graduate from college use the business skills that they have learned will go a long way to meeting this ultimate goal. It is this change making experience that Ashoka offers everyone. globalization of social entrepreneurship benefits many. When jobs are created; not only does the economy benefit but society benefits as well from this entrepreneurship. But making sure that everyone involved receives the same number of benefits is a challenge. Not only is there a wealth discrepancy but exploitation has to be curbed in order for the positive benefits to increase. There are some benefits to an organization that helps young people experience their dreams but there is also a lot of hard work involved. The bank does not loan money without sufficient evidence that the money would be put to good use, either back into the community or given to those individuals who promote social entrepreneurship. Those interested in making a change for the better will be able to achieve their dreams with the help of Ashoka. Ashoka uses open communication and the public platform to get ideas from the public. These ideas could change the way people solve difficult problems. It is these ideas that form the basis of the social entrepreneurship concept.
Ester Barinaga is a professor of Social Entrepreneurship at Lund University (Sweden) and a professor in the Department of Management, Politics and Philosophy (MPP) at Copenhagen Business School (CBS), Copenhagen (Denmark). She works primarily in the areas of social innovation and social entrepreneurship, with a particular emphasis on those initiatives aiming to build more inclusive and sustainable cities. Ester Barinaga was born in Spain, naturalized Swedish in 2004 and currently lives in Malmö, Sweden.
SEED is a global partnership for action on sustainable development and the green economy. It was initiated in 2001 by the German Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation, Building and Nuclear Safety (BMUB). Under the name SEED Initiative it was presented as an “Example of Excellence” partnership inter alia by UNEP and BMUB at the Johannesburg World Summit on Sustainable Development in 2002 where it was also registered by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), and the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) as a Type II Partnership. SEED was originally conceived as an acronym for Supporting Entrepreneurs for Environment and Development.
Social entrepreneurship in South Asia involves business activities that have a social benefit, often for people at the bottom of the pyramid. It is an emerging area of entrepreneurship that is supported by both the public sector and the private sector.
Dame Fiona Elizabeth Murray is the Associate Dean for Innovation at the MIT Sloan School of Management. She is a member of the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom's Council for Science and Technology and Vice-Chair of the Board of Directors of the NATO Innovation Fund.
Jürgen Howaldt is a German sociologist. He is professor of Social Innovation and Work at the Faculty of Social Science, TU Dortmund University. and director of Social Research Centre Dortmund, TU Dortmund University. Jürgen Howaldt is mainly known for his conceptual work on social innovation.
↑ Milosevic N, Gok A, Nenadic G (June 2018). "Classification of Intangible Social Innovation Concepts". Natural Language Processing and Information Systems. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Vol.10859. Cham: Springer. pp.407–418. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-91947-8_42. ISBN978-3-319-91946-1. S2CID43955397.
↑ see for example Gavron, Dench e ds Young at 80, Carcanet Press, London, 1995 for a comprehensive overview of one of the world's most successful social innovators
↑ Chambon, J.L.; David, A.; Devevey, J.M. (1982). Les innovations sociales. Que sais - je?: Collection encyclopedique (in French). Presses universitaires de France. ISBN978-2-13-037388-9.
↑ Riper, Tom Van (2006-05-08). "Designing Companies". Forbes. article by Forbes magazine about how companies are innovating in the way they offer services
↑ "Home". The Australian Centre for Social Innovation. Retrieved 2021-06-14.
1 2 Lin, Carol Yeh-Yun; Chen, Jeffrey (2016-08-17). The impact of societal and social innovation: a case-based approach. Singapore: Springer. ISBN978-981-10-1766-7. OCLC956953682.
↑ Laville, J.-L., ed. (1994). L'économie solidaire, une perspective internationale, Desclée de Brouwer, Paris.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply. Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.
