https://gofreshwiki.nl/wiki/api.php?action=feedcontributions&feedformat=atom&user=KimBoes 2026-06-28T01:40:57Z Gebruikersbijdragen MediaWiki 1.27.7 https://gofreshwiki.nl/wiki/index.php?title=ZHDSM_Social_innovation&diff=52348 2018-07-18T13:09:20Z

<p>KimBoes: </p> <hr /> <div>== Introduction ==<br /> tekst <br /> === Definitions ===<br /> tekst <br /> {| class=&quot;wikitable&quot;<br /> |Mumford (2002)<br /> |The generation and implementation of new ideas about how people should organise interpersonal activities, or social interactions, to meet one or more common goals.<br /> |-<br /> |Nilsson (2003)<br /> |A significant, creative and sustainable shift in the way a given society dealt with a profound and previously intractable social problem such as poverty, disease, violence or environmental deterioration.<br /> |-<br /> |Gerometta, Haussermann &amp; Longo (2005)<br /> |Three core dimensions: the satisfaction of human needs (content dimension); changes in social relations especially with regard to governance (process dimension); and an increase in the socio-political capability and access to resources (empowerment dimension).<br /> |-<br /> |Mulgan (2006)<br /> |Innovation 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.”<br /> |-<br /> |Marcy &amp; Mumford (2007) following on Mumford (2002)<br /> |New ideas about social systems and social interactions, while rare, can have a tremendous impact on our lives and world.<br /> |-<br /> |Mulgan et al. (2007)<br /> |Social innovation are usually new combinations of hybrids of existing elements, rather than being wholly new in themselves and putting them into practise involved cutting across organisational, sectoral or disciplinary boundaries and they leave behind compelling new social relationships between previously separate individuals and groups which matter greatly to the people involved, contribute to the diffusion and embedding of the innovation, and fuel a cumulative dynamic whereby each innovation opens up the possibility of further innovations.<br /> |-<br /> |Phills et al. (2008)<br /> |Social innovation refers to a novel solution to a social problem that is more effective, efficient, sustainable, or just than actual solutions and for which the value created accrues primarily to society as a whole rather than private individuals.<br /> |-<br /> |Ville &amp; Ol (2008, p. 881)<br /> |‘Social innovation’ is a term that almost everyone likes, but nobody is quite sure of what it means. Some academics would like to abandon the notion of social innovation altogether, arguing that it adds nothing to what we know about innovation and is too vague ever to be useful.<br /> |-<br /> |Westley (2008)<br /> |Social innovation is an initiative, product or process or program that profoundly changes the basic routines, resources and authority flows or beliefs of any social system.<br /> |-<br /> |Mac Callum et al. (2009, p.2)<br /> |This concept rejects the traditional, technology-focused application of the term 'innovation', whcih has been central to recent European development policy, in favour of a more nuanced reading which valorizes the knowledge and cultural assets of communities and which foregrounds the creative reconfiguration of social relations p.2<br /> |-<br /> |Moulaert (2009, p.2)<br /> |It defines social innovation as the satisfaction of alienated human needs through the transformation of social relations: transformations which ‘improve’ the governance systems that guide and regulate the allocation of goods and services meant to satisfy those needs, and which establish new governance structures and organizations (discussion fora, political decision-making systems, firms, interfaces, allocation systems, and so on). Territorially speaking, this means that social innovation involves, among others, the transformation of social relations in space, the reproduction of place-bound and spatially exchanged identities and culture, and the establishment of place-based and scale-related governance structures. This also means that social innovation is quite often either locally or regionally specific, or/and spatially negotiated between agents and institutions that have a strong territorial affiliation. p.11 (in MacCullum et al 2009)<br /> |-<br /> |Sotarauta (2009, p. 623).<br /> |Perhaps it [social innovation] is one of those concepts that can only be framed and used as an alaytical tool as well as one can but nog exhaustively defined. It goes without saying that the concept of social innovation provides not only a seductively topical, but also a positively wholesome counterweight to more technologically orientated literature. The problem, however, is that when one presses harder to pin down the idea, its inherent appeal and the seach for conceptual clarity and precision is tested by theoretical complexity, ambiguity and frustrating conceptual flexibility.<br /> |-<br /> |European Commission Innovation Union (2010)<br /> |Social innovation is about tapping into the ingenuity of charities, associations and social entrepreneurs to find new ways of meeting social needs which are not adequately met by the market or the public sector. It can help bring about the behavioural changes needed to tackle the major societal challenges, such as climate change. Social innovations empower people and create new social relationships and models of collaboration. They are thus innovative in themselves and good for society’s capacity to innovate.<br /> |-<br /> |Goldberg (2010)<br /> |Simply put, social innovation is all about new ideas and solutions, and new ways of thinking, working, and doing things, in order to address social challenges. Social innovation can be as complex and large-scale as fighting poverty or addressing global climate change, or as simple and small-scale as creating a community garden.It is characterized by a holistic, non-silo approach that cuts across boundaries between sectors (health, work and employment, education, the environment, etc.) and between jurisdictions and different levels of government. Social innovation involves “transformative” or “big” change rather than just “tweaking the system.” It may not always succeed, but that is what is being sought. This focus on transformative change through a holistic approach is driven by recognition of the complexity, inter-relatedness, and intractability of today’s social problems—the term “wicked problems” is heard again and again—which go beyond any one sector and beyond the capacity of government or other entities to address alone. Social innovation is often community-based and community-led, using local knowledge and networks.<br /> |-<br /> |Murray et al. (2010)<br /> |New ideas (products, services and models) that simultaneously meet social needs and create new social relationships or collaborations. In other words, they are innovations that are both good for society and enhance society’s capacity to act.<br /> |-<br /> |Westley and Antadze (2010, p.2)<br /> |Social innovation is a complex process of introducing new products, processes or programs that profoundly change the basic routines, resource and authority flows, or beliefs of the social system in which the innovation occurs. Such successful social innovations have durability and broad impact.<br /> |-<br /> |Cajaiba-Santana (2014)<br /> |Social innovations are new social practices created from collective, intentional, and goal-oriented actions aimed at prompting social change through the reconfiguration of how social goals are accomplished.<br /> |-<br /> |Manzini (2014)<br /> |Social innovation is a process of change emerging from the creative re-combination of existing assets (from social capital to historical heritage, from traditional craftsmanship to accessible advanced technology), the aim of which is to achieve socially recognized goals in a new way.<br /> |-<br /> |Benneworth and Cunha (2015)<br /> |An attempt to capture and describe bottom-up phenomena where new ideas, approaches, techniques and organisational forms grew from humble roots into substantive new social capacities.<br /> |-<br /> |O'Byrne et al. (2015)<br /> |Social innovation in this study is defined as the successful implementation of activities, such as ideas, practices, or objects, through new collaborations and partnerships, in ways that positively impact society by improving the delivery of public services.<br /> |-<br /> |Centre for Social Innovation, Toronto<br /> |Social innovation refers to new ideas that resolve existing social, cultural, economic and environmental challenges for the benefit of people and planet. A true social innovation is system-chaning - it permanently alters the perception, behaviours and structures that previously gave rise to those challenges... Even more simply, a social innovation is an idea that works for the public good.<br /> |-<br /> |<br /> |<br /> |} <br /> == Process ==<br /> tekst<br /> {{InfKrt Concept<br /> |Context=ZHDSM context<br /> |prefLabel=Social Innovation<br /> |definition=Description of the literature field of social innovation<br /> |inScheme=ZHDSM scheme<br /> }}</div>

KimBoes https://gofreshwiki.nl/wiki/index.php?title=ZHDSM_Social_innovation&diff=52347 2018-07-18T13:02:56Z

<p>KimBoes: </p> <hr /> <div>== Introduction ==<br /> tekst <br /> === Definitions ===<br /> tekst <br /> {| class=&quot;wikitable&quot;<br /> |Mumford (2002)<br /> |The generation and implementation of new ideas about how people should organise interpersonal activities, or social interactions, to meet one or more common goals.<br /> |-<br /> |Nilsson (2003)<br /> |A significant, creative and sustainable shift in the way a given society dealt with a profound and previously intractable social problem such as poverty, disease, violence or environmental deterioration.<br /> |-<br /> |Gerometta, Haussermann &amp; Longo (2005)<br /> |Three core dimensions: the satisfaction of human needs (content dimension); changes in social relations especially with regard to governance (process dimension); and an increase in the socio-political capability and access to resources (empowerment dimension).<br /> |-<br /> |Mulgan (2006)<br /> |Innovation 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.”<br /> |-<br /> |Marcy &amp; Mumford (2007) following on Mumford (2002)<br /> |New ideas about social systems and social interactions, while rare, can have a tremendous impact on our lives and world.<br /> |-<br /> |Phills et al. (2008)<br /> |Social innovation refers to a novel solution to a social problem that is more effective, efficient, sustainable, or just than actual solutions and for which the value created accrues primarily to society as a whole rather than private individuals.<br /> |-<br /> |Ville &amp; Ol (2008, p. 881)<br /> |‘Social innovation’ is a term that almost everyone likes, but nobody is quite sure of what it means. Some academics would like to abandon the notion of social innovation altogether, arguing that it adds nothing to what we know about innovation and is too vague ever to be useful.<br /> |-<br /> |Westley (2008)<br /> |Social innovation is an initiative, product or process or program that profoundly changes the basic routines, resources and authority flows or beliefs of any social system.<br /> |-<br /> |Sotarauta (2009, p. 623).<br /> |Perhaps it [social innovation] is one of those concepts that can only be framed and used as an alaytical tool as well as one can but nog exhaustively defined. It goes without saying that the concept of social innovation provides not only a seductively topical, but also a positively wholesome counterweight to more technologically orientated literature. The problem, however, is that when one presses harder to pin down the idea, its inherent appeal and the seach for conceptual clarity and precision is tested by theoretical complexity, ambiguity and frustrating conceptual flexibility.<br /> |-<br /> |European Commission Innovation Union (2010)<br /> |Social innovation is about tapping into the ingenuity of charities, associations and social entrepreneurs to find new ways of meeting social needs which are not adequately met by the market or the public sector. It can help bring about the behavioural changes needed to tackle the major societal challenges, such as climate change. Social innovations empower people and create new social relationships and models of collaboration. They are thus innovative in themselves and good for society’s capacity to innovate.<br /> |-<br /> |Goldberg (2010)<br /> |Simply put, social innovation is all about new ideas and solutions, and new ways of thinking, working, and doing things, in order to address social challenges. Social innovation can be as complex and large-scale as fighting poverty or addressing global climate change, or as simple and small-scale as creating a community garden.It is characterized by a holistic, non-silo approach that cuts across boundaries between sectors (health, work and employment, education, the environment, etc.) and between jurisdictions and different levels of government. Social innovation involves “transformative” or “big” change rather than just “tweaking the system.” It may not always succeed, but that is what is being sought. This focus on transformative change through a holistic approach is driven by recognition of the complexity, inter-relatedness, and intractability of today’s social problems—the term “wicked problems” is heard again and again—which go beyond any one sector and beyond the capacity of government or other entities to address alone. Social innovation is often community-based and community-led, using local knowledge and networks.<br /> |-<br /> |Murray et al. (2010)<br /> |New ideas (products, services and models) that simultaneously meet social needs and create new social relationships or collaborations. In other words, they are innovations that are both good for society and enhance society’s capacity to act.<br /> |-<br /> |Westley and Antadze (2010)<br /> |Social innovation is a complex process of introducing new products, processes or programs that profoundly change the basic routines, resource and authority flows, or beliefs of the social system in which the innovation occurs. Such successful social innovations have durability and broad impact.<br /> |-<br /> |Cajaiba-Santana (2014)<br /> |Social innovations are new social practices created from collective, intentional, and goal-oriented actions aimed at prompting social change through the reconfiguration of how social goals are accomplished.<br /> |-<br /> |Benneworth and Cunha (2015)<br /> |An attempt to capture and describe bottom-up phenomena where new ideas, approaches, techniques and organisational forms grew from humble roots into substantive new social capacities.<br /> |-<br /> |O'Byrne et al. (2015)<br /> |Social innovation in this study is defined as the successful implementation of activities, such as ideas, practices, or objects, through new collaborations and partnerships, in ways that positively impact society by improving the delivery of public services.<br /> |-<br /> |Centre for Social Innovation, Toronto<br /> |Social innovation refers to new ideas that resolve existing social, cultural, economic and environmental challenges for the benefit of people and planet. A true social innovation is system-chaning - it permanently alters the perception, behaviours and structures that previously gave rise to those challenges... Even more simply, a social innovation is an idea that works for the public good.<br /> |-<br /> |<br /> |<br /> |} <br /> == Process ==<br /> tekst<br /> {{InfKrt Concept<br /> |Context=ZHDSM context<br /> |prefLabel=Social Innovation<br /> |definition=Description of the literature field of social innovation<br /> |inScheme=ZHDSM scheme<br /> }}</div>

KimBoes https://gofreshwiki.nl/wiki/index.php?title=ZHDSM_Social_innovation&diff=52346 2018-07-18T13:01:06Z

<p>KimBoes: </p> <hr /> <div>== Introduction ==<br /> tekst <br /> === Definitions ===<br /> tekst <br /> {| class=&quot;wikitable&quot;<br /> |Mumford (2002)<br /> |The generation and implementation of new ideas about how people should organise interpersonal activities, or social interactions, to meet one or more common goals.<br /> |-<br /> |Nilsson (2003)<br /> |A significant, creative and sustainable shift in the way a given society dealt with a profound and previously intractable social problem such as poverty, disease, violence or environmental deterioration.<br /> |-<br /> |Gerometta, Haussermann &amp; Longo (2005)<br /> |Three core dimensions: the satisfaction of human needs (content dimension); changes in social relations especially with regard to governance (process dimension); and an increase in the socio-political capability and access to resources (empowerment dimension).<br /> |-<br /> |Mulgan (2006)<br /> |Innovation 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.”<br /> |-<br /> |Marcy &amp; Mumford (2007) following on Mumford (2002)<br /> |New ideas about social systems and social interactions, while rare, can have a tremendous impact on our lives and world.<br /> |-<br /> |Phills et al. (2008)<br /> |Social innovation refers to a novel solution to a social problem that is more effective, efficient, sustainable, or just than actual solutions and for which the value created accrues primarily to society as a whole rather than private individuals.<br /> |-<br /> |Ville &amp; Ol (2008, p. 881)<br /> |‘Social innovation’ is a term that almost everyone likes, but nobody is quite sure of what it means. Some academics would like to abandon the notion of social innovation altogether, arguing that it adds nothing to what we know about innovation and is too vague ever to be useful.<br /> |-<br /> |Westley (2008)<br /> |Social innovation is an initiative, product or process or program that profoundly changes the basic routines, resources and authority flows or beliefs of any social system.<br /> |-<br /> |Sotarauta (2009, p. 623).<br /> |Perhaps it [social innovation] is one of those concepts that can only be framed and used as an alaytical tool as well as one can but nog exhaustively defined. It goes without saying that the concept of social innovation provides not only a seductively topical, but also a positively wholesome counterweight to more technologically orientated literature. The problem, however, is that when one presses harder to pin down the idea, its inherent appeal and the seach for conceptual clarity and precision is tested by theoretical complexity, ambiguity and frustrating conceptual flexibility.<br /> |-<br /> |European Commission Innovation Union (2010)<br /> |Social innovation is about tapping into the ingenuity of charities, associations and social entrepreneurs to find new ways of meeting social needs which are not adequately met by the market or the public sector. It can help bring about the behavioural changes needed to tackle the major societal challenges, such as climate change. Social innovations empower people and create new social relationships and models of collaboration. They are thus innovative in themselves and good for society’s capacity to innovate.<br /> |-<br /> |Goldberg (2010)<br /> |Simply put, social innovation is all about new ideas and solutions, and new ways of thinking, working, and doing things, in order to address social challenges. Social innovation can be as complex and large-scale as fighting poverty or addressing global climate change, or as simple and small-scale as creating a community garden.It is characterized by a holistic, non-silo approach that cuts across boundaries between sectors (health, work and employment, education, the environment, etc.) and between jurisdictions and different levels of government. Social innovation involves “transformative” or “big” change rather than just “tweaking the system.” It may not always succeed, but that is what is being sought. This focus on transformative change through a holistic approach is driven by recognition of the complexity, inter-relatedness, and intractability of today’s social problems—the term “wicked problems” is heard again and again—which go beyond any one sector and beyond the capacity of government or other entities to address alone. Social innovation is often community-based and community-led, using local knowledge and networks.<br /> |-<br /> |Murray et al. (2010)<br /> |New ideas (products, services and models) that simultaneously meet social needs and create new social relationships or collaborations. In other words, they are innovations that are both good for society and enhance society’s capacity to act.<br /> |-<br /> |Westley and Antadze (2010)<br /> |Social innovation is a complex process of introducing new products, processes or programs that profoundly change the basic routines, resource and authority flows, or beliefs of the social system in which the innovation occurs. Such successful social innovations have durability and broad impact.<br /> |-<br /> |Cajaiba-Santana (2014)<br /> |Social innovations are new social practices created from collective, intentional, and goal-oriented actions aimed at prompting social change through the reconfiguration of how social goals are accomplished.<br /> |-<br /> |Benneworth and Cunha (2015)<br /> |An attempt to capture and describe bottom-up phenomena where new ideas, approaches, techniques and organisational forms grew from humble roots into substantive new social capacities.<br /> |-<br /> |Centre for Social Innovation, Toronto<br /> |Social innovation refers to new ideas that resolve existing social, cultural, economic and environmental challenges for the benefit of people and planet. A true social innovation is system-chaning - it permanently alters the perception, behaviours and structures that previously gave rise to those challenges... Even more simply, a social innovation is an idea that works for the public good.<br /> |-<br /> |<br /> |<br /> |} <br /> == Process ==<br /> tekst<br /> {{InfKrt Concept<br /> |Context=ZHDSM context<br /> |prefLabel=Social Innovation<br /> |definition=Description of the literature field of social innovation<br /> |inScheme=ZHDSM scheme<br /> }}</div>

KimBoes https://gofreshwiki.nl/wiki/index.php?title=LC_00764&diff=51452 2018-03-23T10:16:45Z

<p>KimBoes: </p> <hr /> <div><br /> Social innovation is about people. <br /> <br /> People come together. Interaction --&gt; in-between --&gt; the encounter<br /> <br /> Interesting to look at social innovation from an social geography perspective and the concept of the encounter<br /> <br /> === Research questions ===<br /> Deze onderzoeksvragen zijn van belang voor dit paper <br /> * What is the role of the encounter for social innovation?<br /> * Encounter as in-between to grapple with the quality of social innovation <br /> Research does not pay enough attention to the process through which public professionals and citizens communicate (in-between) (p.21). <br /> <br /> Despite the growing body of literature on public encounters, up to now, the encounter itself has not yet been adequately understood. Capturing this relational process of &quot;knowing-in-interaction&quot; can help to grapple with the quality of participatory democracy (p.22). <br /> <br /> One particular outcomes of this thesis that would deserve more exploration is the concept of &quot;process&quot;. The analysis demonstrated that participatory practise is best understood as process, or composition of processes, with distinct and &quot;unowned&quot; qualities. Communicative capacity was found to be an emergent property of these processes, in the sense that is resides in the &quot;in-between&quot;, i.e. the interactions that local actors have with each ohter and the situation at hand. Accordingly, the thesis argues that capturing the processes through which public professionals and residents communicate is crucial to grappling the quality of participatory democracy. The concept of process has for long been the focal point of process philosophy (Rescher, 1996) and has recently entered debates in public administration and public policy (Cook &amp; Wagenaar, 2011; Stout &amp; Staton, 2011; Wagenaar &amp; Cook, 2011). The application of the concept of process in both methodology and empirical analysis is still relatively young, and this thesis hopefully makes a contribution to developing it. Still, a central challenge for future research on participatory democracy, as well as policy making and politics more in general, remains the design and application of “methods that enable the analyst to register ... [the] give-and-take between the initial expectations and preconceptions of the individual subject and the way the world talks back to him” (Wagenaar, 2011, p. 62), together with a deeper understanding of the implications of process for social reality and our knowledge of it (p.247). <br /> <br /> === Reasoning ===<br /> <br /> ==== Participatory democracy ====<br /> Structuring forces of social innovation - complex interplay of factors: <br /> * complex webs of organisations <br /> * rules and regulations<br /> * finances and budget<br /> * political power<br /> * power inequalities <br /> * antagonism <br /> The quality of participatory democracy depends largely on the capacity of public professionals and citizens to recognise and break through dominant communicative patterns. (p.21)<br /> <br /> How do people act upon them? (VWS) <br /> <br /> Participatory democracy: The influence of non-elected individuals and organisations on public decision making and implementation is the norm for democracy, rather than a deviations from it (p.17). <br /> <br /> The Netherlands: &quot;Room to develop initiatives.... and take responsibility without interference of public professionals&quot; (Ministerie van Binnenlandse Zaken, 2009, p.1 in Bartels, 2012, p.18). <br /> <br /> Bartels (2010) argues the importance of communicative capacity for participatory practises in which (public) professionals and citizens navigate this complex interplay. <br /> <br /> Making participatory democracy work on all levels proved to be really difficult (p. 18) <br /> <br /> Communicative capacity is an end result rather than a starting point (p.19) <br /> <br /> ==== Social Innovation ====<br /> Social innovation definitions are focussed on stressing the importance of meeting a social need and bring about social change (Cajaiba-Santana 2014).<br /> <br /> Social innovation is mainly concerned with creating a positive impact on society and focusses on improving the quality of life of individuals and communities (OECD 2001; Moulaert 2009).<br /> <br /> Westley et al. (2014) postulate social innovation is a ''complex set of processes and methodologies''.<br /> <br /> The definition of Baker and Mehmood (2015, p.321) suggests social innovation ''“can be understood as extraordinary measures taken by ordinary people and is closely tied to the notion of social capital.”'' In this vein, Benneworth and Cunha (2015, p.510) define social innovations as ''“bottom-up phenomena”''<br /> <br /> Scholars have recognised that enabling and strengthening collaboration, creating new social relationships and taking collective actions towards social challenges are increasingly becoming generally implied and sought for practises in social innovation (Murray et al. 2010; Grimm et al. 2013; Cajaiba-Santana 2014; Schweitzer et al. 2015). While the previous discussion indicates social innovation is a process which is goal-oriented and concerned with value creation for society at large, the process of incorporating for instance collective practises, bottom-up initiatives and cross sectional and interdisciplinary collaboration is an end in itself in social innovation. This is best captured by the definition of Grimm et al. (2013, p.450) stating<br /> <br /> ''“social innovation is not purely target-oriented. The process – cooperation, coproduction, interaction, sharing of resources, etc. – of delivery is an important outcome of the innovation itself. In other words, social innovation is a means to an end and an end in itself. In stressing the significance of social processes, social innovation emphasizes the value of social capital for building sustainable and resilient societies that have the capacity to act in an environment of permanent change.”''<br /> <br /> Grimm et al. (2013, p.440) posit: <br /> <br /> ''“There seems to be a general consensus that the social is neither a passive receiver of policy interventions or of global economic forces but, importantly, that social networks and processes themselves are important resources to anticipate change and to make societies more cohesive and resilient.”''<br /> <br /> Scholars perceive the strains on today’s society as the cause of the proliferation of research on social innovation (Cajaiba-Santana 2014; Phillips et al. 2015). From a general perspective global dilemmas, such as the economic crisis, climate change, energy and resource scarcity, and demographic imbalances, have been recognised as factors negatively affecting society (Moulaert 2009). A less utopian view identifies for instance social exclusion, cultural and environmental deterioration, congestion, accessibility and empowerment as topics of interest for social innovation (Caragliu et al. 2011; Malek and Costa 2015). Thus, the growing challenges in society as well as the need for transition towards sustainability are proliferating the focus on social innovation. Especially urban environments are increasingly experiencing such problems, which are decreasing the quality of life of citizens and tourists as well as limiting sustainable development (Sauer 2012; Dameri 2013).<br /> <br /> &quot;...presenting social innovation based on such instrumental view is a teleological mistake: the assumption that because we see a particular outcome to a process we conclude that the process must always have that specific result. This paper argues that this kind of instrumental definition leads to a too narrow view of social innovation. First, because an answer to a social problem is not necessarily a social innovation, even technical innovations might be aimed at solving social problems. Second, because it proposes a material dimension of social innovation (product), what is incoherent with the ontological immateriality of the phenomenon as highlighted by Neumeier [10]: ‘Social innovations are non-material: their material outcomes are solely a supplementary result and they focus not on needs but on asset building’ (p. 55). Hence, '''social innovations are manifested in changes of attitudes, behaviour, or perceptions''', resulting in new social practices. Third, and this is a central aspect stressed in this article, social innovation is about '''social change''' and this should be the main characteristic to be put in evidence [10,18]. '''We are not only talking about changes in the way social agents act and interact with each other, but also changes in the social context in which these actions take place through the creation of new institutions and new social systems&quot;''' (Cajaiba-Santana, 2014, p.44)<br /> <br /> ==== Quotes different studies ====<br /> &lt;u&gt;Bartels (2012)&lt;/u&gt;<br /> <br /> The communicative capacity of public professionals and citizens is imperative to the quality of participatory democracy p.15 <br /> <br /> --&gt; Communicative capacity - the ability the adjust communication to the situation at hand - is of importance to the quality of participatory democracy <br /> <br /> --&gt; Quality participatory democracy depends on the process of the communication between professionals and citizens <br /> <br /> --&gt; The communicative &quot;in-between&quot;, i.e. interaction, encounter, I-Thou, is an ongoing, dynamic and relational process <br /> <br /> The research reveals that participatory practise comes down to ongoing processes which draw the communication between public professionals and citizens into dominant patters and limit their ability to the needs of the situation at hand and solve public problems (p.21). <br /> <br /> The encounter: That what happens in-between public professionals and citizens (between people) p.22 <br /> <br /> What public professionals and citizens are able to do and achieve is an emergent product of the relational, situated process through which they interact with each other (Campbell Rawlings &amp; Catlaw, 2011; Stout &amp; Staton, 2011) and the &quot;push ad pull&quot; of concrete situations at hand (Wagenaar &amp; Cook, 2011; Cook &amp; Wagenaar, 2012) p.22 <br /> <br /> The research concentrated on community participation - the institutions and practises through which residents and pubic professionals are involved in activities and decisions at the neighbourhood level - because policies are usually wide-ranging and ambitious while the actual possibilities for living up to these are heavily dependent on the local socio-political context and everyday practises (p.23) <br /> <br /> &lt;u&gt;Theology&lt;/u&gt; <br /> <br /> About Karl Barth: &quot;For Barth, it is non-human to strive to be on one’s own, apart from others. Experiencing oneself as an “I” in relation to the “thou” constitutes the very human condition. To be human in Barth’s vision, that is, to appropriate in whatever incomplete way the “true man,” is to be in relation with other humans. This insight provides Barth with the foundation for the specifically anthropological side of his theological anthropology. To say “I am human,” for Barth, is to say “I am-in-encounter.” Barth sets up what he calls “encounter” as the basic predicate of human existence. For Barth, encounter is the next conceptual step beyond maintaining that humans, simply by being humans, relate to one another; encounter is the way humans relate to one another as true humanity (Durheim, 2011, p.7-8) <br /> <br /> === Method ===<br /> Bartles (2012) Practise illuminating theory (Hummel, 1998): open-ended exploration of a phenomenon in practise to enrich our theoretical understanding (p.23)<br /> <br /> '''Text conference paper 2015 Smart Destination''' <br /> <br /> &quot;In order to explore the factors influencing the smartness of a Smart Tourism Destinations, this paper has been conceived with an exploratory research nature based on case studies. Case studies are here utilised to identify which factors contribute to the development of a Smart City and Smart Tourism Destination. <br /> <br /> The case study methodology is often implemented when research is still in its early, formative stage (Benbasat, Goldstein, &amp; Mead, 1987). The Smart City field of research is particularly multidisciplinary and even though scholars have focused on this topic, this field is still rather young. In addition, this area of research is typically characterised by the constant change in innovation and technology. Hence, the case study methodology enables to gain knowledge, and to explore how three established Smart Cities develop their smartness. This study conducts a multiple-case study research as it allows for cross-case analysis and a more general overview of the research results (Bonoma, 1985). <br /> <br /> The case studies presented are based on secondary research of existing government, academic, and Internet sources (see table 1). For the analysis of these documents, this study conducts a content analysis for the separate case studies. A coding scheme is developed based on the analysis of secondary research on Smart Cities (Caragliu et al., 2011; Cocchia, 2014; European Parliament, 2014; Lombardi et al., 2012; Nam &amp; Pardo, 2011). The collected data has been summarised for the individual documents and subsequently coded using the coding scheme. This is followed by cross-case examination and within-case examination along with literature review to develop coding clusters and to support external validity.&quot; <br /> <br /> '''Article International Journal of Tourism Cities 2016''' <br /> <br /> &quot;Smart tourism is an emerging research topic and needs to be developed by exploring some of the forefront destinations. Therefore, given the exploratory nature of this paper and the contemporary character of the research topic, a case study approach was adopted (Yin, 2009). This approach has frequently been implemented in tourism (Beeton, 2005) when research is still in its early, formative stage (Benbasat et al., 1987). Smartness has only recently gained momentum in different disciplines and is still rather young (Albino et al., 2015; Carvalho, 2015; Meijer and Bolívar, 2015). Adopting the case study approach offers holistic insights regarding the core components of smartness, through the analysis of reports, studies, news articles and other text sensitive documentation. A comprehensive coverage of complementary material is required to explore all aspect of smartness.<br /> <br /> &lt;u&gt;Case selection&lt;/u&gt;<br /> <br /> Smart cities initiated the notion of smart tourism destinations (Buhalis and Amaranggana, 2014). Cities have to deal with a large number of interconnected organisations and technologies to serve citizens and other stakeholders at a large scale. Hence, they are more mature in implementing smartness and thus provide the context for this research. Currently a variety of cities have developed smartness and innovation by developing comprehensive initiatives. To justify the selection of the cases, two international ranking schemes were used. First, the smart city classification by Cohen (2014b) was used to inform case selection since this classification syndicates a variety of global and regional rankings. This selection identified a list of the top ten smart cities. In order to narrow down these cases, the study on smart cities undertaken by the European Union (2014) was also taken into account. This particular study, “Mapping Smart Cities in the EU”, conducted an in-depth analysis of the cities within the EU28 with at least 100,000 residents. A selection of 240 cities was identified as “smart”. After a quantitative analysis of the characteristics and contributions of these cities, six top performing cities where identified, namely: Amsterdam, Barcelona, Copenhagen, Helsinki, Manchester and Vienna. Out of these six, Barcelona, Amsterdam and Helsinki were ranked as the three cities yielding the most innovative smart solutions in Europe and were selected as cases for this research.<br /> <br /> &lt;u&gt;Data collection&lt;/u&gt;<br /> <br /> To collect information about the selected cases, three main databases/research strategies were used to search for relevant documents (i.e. Google, Google Scholar and EBSCO) following a five steps methodology (Denyer and Neely, 2004): key phrase identification; document identification; quality assessment; data extraction; and data analysis. Each step is described in more detail in the following sections.<br /> <br /> Within the first step of this systematic process key phrases were identified for the document identification carried out in the second step. The key phrases identified were “Barcelona smart city case study”, “Barcelona smartness concept”, “Barcelona smart city analysis”, “Barcelona smart city strategy”, and “Barcelona smart city initiative”, respectively. The same key phrases were utilised for Amsterdam and Helsinki.<br /> <br /> In the second step, the described key phrases were used to identify documents on the selected cases. The identification took place over a three-week period between 24 September and 15 October 2014. Google was used to query the key phrases and the documents presented on the first three result pages were chosen for further selection. Search results from Google, Google Scholar and the EBSCO database were also used to identify further academic sources. The document identification resulted in a wide data collection stemming from existing government reports, academic case studies, online news articles, and smart city project descriptions and presentations. Although the analysis of any case study cannot be fully exhaustive, the majority of the in-depth published documents on the cases researched were included in this study.<br /> The third step focused on the quality assessment of the selected documents. Three academic articles were included due to their peer-review assessment. The European Union report, used for the selection of the cases for this research, was the most comprehensive document identified, with an in-depth analysis of Barcelona, Amsterdam and Helsinki. In addition, four smart city projects were included as well as one presentation document, a presentation transcript and one online news article. Commercial documents or reports delivered by technology companies have been excluded to avoid bias. An overview of the various sources used for the empirical research of this study is depicted in Table II.<br /> <br /> The fourth step of the data collection concentrated on the data extraction. An iterative thematic content analysis was carried out in which a bottom-up coding scheme was adopted. The identified codes were deduced from the analysed content (Yin, 2009). A three-level coding scheme was used (Bryman and Bell, 2011) and the three selected cases were separately coded. In the first level, a very basic coding was applied in which paragraphs were analysed for the research. Within this phase content describing, for example, the demographics of the cities was excluded from further analysis. The second level comprised a more in-depth approach in which codes such as “innovation”, “collaboration”, “work together” and “human skills” were used to characterise the units of text. After this level 58 codes were deduced from the content on Barcelona, 44 on Amsterdam and 52 on Helsinki.<br /> <br /> Data extraction and data analysis were the two intertwined steps within the context of this research. Consequently, the data analysis initiated in the data extraction phase. The third level of coding took a more analytic approach. A cross-case examination (Yin, 2009) of the codes identified in the separate cases on the second level was conducted. Interconnections and differences were identified which provided more compelling and robust outcomes (Gillham, 2000) and consequently 28 codes have been deduced from the analysis. Further engagement with the content and codes identified four main themes, which have been selected as the core components of smartness. The results of this analysis are presented in the following section.&quot; {{Light Context<br /> |Supercontext=PR SSM 00129<br /> |Topcontext=PR SSM 00128<br /> |Toppage=Process<br /> |Sequence number=1<br /> |Context type=Situation<br /> |Heading=Paper 1 - Aanpak<br /> |Start date=2017/10/03<br /> |Summary=Al het materiaal dat nodig is om het eerste paper te schrijven<br /> |Show referred by=Nee<br /> }}</div>

KimBoes https://gofreshwiki.nl/wiki/index.php?title=LC_00764&diff=51142 2018-03-02T13:53:39Z

<p>KimBoes: </p> <hr /> <div><br /> Social innovation is about people. <br /> <br /> People come together. Interaction --&gt; in-between --&gt; the encounter<br /> <br /> Interesting to look at social innovation from an social geography perspective and the concept of the encounter<br /> <br /> === Research questions ===<br /> Deze onderzoeksvragen zijn van belang voor dit paper <br /> * What is the role of the encounter for social innovation?<br /> * Encounter as in-between to grapple with the quality of social innovation <br /> Research does not pay enough attention to the process through which public professionals and citizens communicate (in-between) (p.21). <br /> <br /> Despite the growing body of literature on public encounters, up to now, the encounter itself has not yet been adequately understood. Capturing this relational process of &quot;knowing-in-interaction&quot; can help to grapple with the quality of participatory democracy (p.22). <br /> <br /> One particular outcomes of this thesis that would deserve more exploration is the concept of &quot;process&quot;. The analysis demonstrated that participatory practise is best understood as process, or composition of processes, with distinct and &quot;unowned&quot; qualities. Communicative capacity was found to be an emergent property of these processes, in the sense that is resides in the &quot;in-between&quot;, i.e. the interactions that local actors have with each ohter and the situation at hand. Accordingly, the thesis argues that capturing the processes through which public professionals and residents communicate is crucial to grappling the quality of participatory democracy. The concept of process has for long been the focal point of process philosophy (Rescher, 1996) and has recently entered debates in public administration and public policy (Cook &amp; Wagenaar, 2011; Stout &amp; Staton, 2011; Wagenaar &amp; Cook, 2011). The application of the concept of process in both methodology and empirical analysis is still relatively young, and this thesis hopefully makes a contribution to developing it. Still, a central challenge for future research on participatory democracy, as well as policy making and politics more in general, remains the design and application of “methods that enable the analyst to register ... [the] give-and-take between the initial expectations and preconceptions of the individual subject and the way the world talks back to him” (Wagenaar, 2011, p. 62), together with a deeper understanding of the implications of process for social reality and our knowledge of it (p.247). <br /> <br /> === Reasoning ===<br /> <br /> ==== Participatory democracy ====<br /> Structuring forces of social innovation - complex interplay of factors: <br /> * complex webs of organisations <br /> * rules and regulations<br /> * finances and budget<br /> * political power<br /> * power inequalities <br /> * antagonism <br /> The quality of participatory democracy depends largely on the capacity of public professionals and citizens to recognise and break through dominant communicative patterns. (p.21)<br /> <br /> How do people act upon them? (VWS) <br /> <br /> Participatory democracy: The influence of non-elected individuals and organisations on public decision making and implementation is the norm for democracy, rather than a deviations from it (p.17). <br /> <br /> The Netherlands: &quot;Room to develop initiatives.... and take responsibility without interference of public professionals&quot; (Ministerie van Binnenlandse Zaken, 2009, p.1 in Bartels, 2012, p.18). <br /> <br /> Bartels (2010) argues the importance of communicative capacity for participatory practises in which (public) professionals and citizens navigate this complex interplay. <br /> <br /> Making participatory democracy work on all levels proved to be really difficult (p. 18) <br /> <br /> Communicative capacity is an end result rather than a starting point (p.19) <br /> <br /> ==== Social Innovation ====<br /> Social innovation definitions are focussed on stressing the importance of meeting a social need and bring about social change (Cajaiba-Santana 2014).<br /> <br /> Social innovation is mainly concerned with creating a positive impact on society and focusses on improving the quality of life of individuals and communities (OECD 2001; Moulaert 2009).<br /> <br /> Westley et al. (2014) postulate social innovation is a ''complex set of processes and methodologies''.<br /> <br /> The definition of Baker and Mehmood (2015, p.321) suggests social innovation ''“can be understood as extraordinary measures taken by ordinary people and is closely tied to the notion of social capital.”'' In this vein, Benneworth and Cunha (2015, p.510) define social innovations as ''“bottom-up phenomena”''<br /> <br /> Scholars have recognised that enabling and strengthening collaboration, creating new social relationships and taking collective actions towards social challenges are increasingly becoming generally implied and sought for practises in social innovation (Murray et al. 2010; Grimm et al. 2013; Cajaiba-Santana 2014; Schweitzer et al. 2015). While the previous discussion indicates social innovation is a process which is goal-oriented and concerned with value creation for society at large, the process of incorporating for instance collective practises, bottom-up initiatives and cross sectional and interdisciplinary collaboration is an end in itself in social innovation. This is best captured by the definition of Grimm et al. (2013, p.450) stating<br /> <br /> ''“social innovation is not purely target-oriented. The process – cooperation, coproduction, interaction, sharing of resources, etc. – of delivery is an important outcome of the innovation itself. In other words, social innovation is a means to an end and an end in itself. In stressing the significance of social processes, social innovation emphasizes the value of social capital for building sustainable and resilient societies that have the capacity to act in an environment of permanent change.”''<br /> <br /> Grimm et al. (2013, p.440) posit: <br /> <br /> ''“There seems to be a general consensus that the social is neither a passive receiver of policy interventions or of global economic forces but, importantly, that social networks and processes themselves are important resources to anticipate change and to make societies more cohesive and resilient.”''<br /> <br /> Scholars perceive the strains on today’s society as the cause of the proliferation of research on social innovation (Cajaiba-Santana 2014; Phillips et al. 2015). From a general perspective global dilemmas, such as the economic crisis, climate change, energy and resource scarcity, and demographic imbalances, have been recognised as factors negatively affecting society (Moulaert 2009). A less utopian view identifies for instance social exclusion, cultural and environmental deterioration, congestion, accessibility and empowerment as topics of interest for social innovation (Caragliu et al. 2011; Malek and Costa 2015). Thus, the growing challenges in society as well as the need for transition towards sustainability are proliferating the focus on social innovation. Especially urban environments are increasingly experiencing such problems, which are decreasing the quality of life of citizens and tourists as well as limiting sustainable development (Sauer 2012; Dameri 2013).<br /> <br /> ==== Quotes different studies ====<br /> &lt;u&gt;Bartels (2012)&lt;/u&gt;<br /> <br /> The communicative capacity of public professionals and citizens is imperative to the quality of participatory democracy p.15 <br /> <br /> --&gt; Communicative capacity - the ability the adjust communication to the situation at hand - is of importance to the quality of participatory democracy <br /> <br /> --&gt; Quality participatory democracy depends on the process of the communication between professionals and citizens <br /> <br /> --&gt; The communicative &quot;in-between&quot;, i.e. interaction, encounter, I-Thou, is an ongoing, dynamic and relational process <br /> <br /> The research reveals that participatory practise comes down to ongoing processes which draw the communication between public professionals and citizens into dominant patters and limit their ability to the needs of the situation at hand and solve public problems (p.21). <br /> <br /> The encounter: That what happens in-between public professionals and citizens (between people) p.22 <br /> <br /> What public professionals and citizens are able to do and achieve is an emergent product of the relational, situated process through which they interact with each other (Campbell Rawlings &amp; Catlaw, 2011; Stout &amp; Staton, 2011) and the &quot;push ad pull&quot; of concrete situations at hand (Wagenaar &amp; Cook, 2011; Cook &amp; Wagenaar, 2012) p.22 <br /> <br /> The research concentrated on community participation - the institutions and practises through which residents and pubic professionals are involved in activities and decisions at the neighbourhood level - because policies are usually wide-ranging and ambitious while the actual possibilities for living up to these are heavily dependent on the local socio-political context and everyday practises (p.23) <br /> <br /> &lt;u&gt;Theology&lt;/u&gt; <br /> <br /> About Karl Barth: &quot;For Barth, it is non-human to strive to be on one’s own, apart from others. Experiencing oneself as an “I” in relation to the “thou” constitutes the very human condition. To be human in Barth’s vision, that is, to appropriate in whatever incomplete way the “true man,” is to be in relation with other humans. This insight provides Barth with the foundation for the specifically anthropological side of his theological anthropology. To say “I am human,” for Barth, is to say “I am-in-encounter.” Barth sets up what he calls “encounter” as the basic predicate of human existence. For Barth, encounter is the next conceptual step beyond maintaining that humans, simply by being humans, relate to one another; encounter is the way humans relate to one another as true humanity (Durheim, 2011, p.7-8) <br /> <br /> === Method ===<br /> Bartles (2012) Practise illuminating theory (Hummel, 1998): open-ended exploration of a phenomenon in practise to enrich our theoretical understanding (p.23)<br /> <br /> '''Text conference paper 2015 Smart Destination''' <br /> <br /> &quot;In order to explore the factors influencing the smartness of a Smart Tourism Destinations, this paper has been conceived with an exploratory research nature based on case studies. Case studies are here utilised to identify which factors contribute to the development of a Smart City and Smart Tourism Destination. <br /> <br /> The case study methodology is often implemented when research is still in its early, formative stage (Benbasat, Goldstein, &amp; Mead, 1987). The Smart City field of research is particularly multidisciplinary and even though scholars have focused on this topic, this field is still rather young. In addition, this area of research is typically characterised by the constant change in innovation and technology. Hence, the case study methodology enables to gain knowledge, and to explore how three established Smart Cities develop their smartness. This study conducts a multiple-case study research as it allows for cross-case analysis and a more general overview of the research results (Bonoma, 1985). <br /> <br /> The case studies presented are based on secondary research of existing government, academic, and Internet sources (see table 1). For the analysis of these documents, this study conducts a content analysis for the separate case studies. A coding scheme is developed based on the analysis of secondary research on Smart Cities (Caragliu et al., 2011; Cocchia, 2014; European Parliament, 2014; Lombardi et al., 2012; Nam &amp; Pardo, 2011). The collected data has been summarised for the individual documents and subsequently coded using the coding scheme. This is followed by cross-case examination and within-case examination along with literature review to develop coding clusters and to support external validity.&quot; <br /> <br /> '''Article International Journal of Tourism Cities 2016''' <br /> <br /> &quot;Smart tourism is an emerging research topic and needs to be developed by exploring some of the forefront destinations. Therefore, given the exploratory nature of this paper and the contemporary character of the research topic, a case study approach was adopted (Yin, 2009). This approach has frequently been implemented in tourism (Beeton, 2005) when research is still in its early, formative stage (Benbasat et al., 1987). Smartness has only recently gained momentum in different disciplines and is still rather young (Albino et al., 2015; Carvalho, 2015; Meijer and Bolívar, 2015). Adopting the case study approach offers holistic insights regarding the core components of smartness, through the analysis of reports, studies, news articles and other text sensitive documentation. A comprehensive coverage of complementary material is required to explore all aspect of smartness.<br /> <br /> &lt;u&gt;Case selection&lt;/u&gt;<br /> <br /> Smart cities initiated the notion of smart tourism destinations (Buhalis and Amaranggana, 2014). Cities have to deal with a large number of interconnected organisations and technologies to serve citizens and other stakeholders at a large scale. Hence, they are more mature in implementing smartness and thus provide the context for this research. Currently a variety of cities have developed smartness and innovation by developing comprehensive initiatives. To justify the selection of the cases, two international ranking schemes were used. First, the smart city classification by Cohen (2014b) was used to inform case selection since this classification syndicates a variety of global and regional rankings. This selection identified a list of the top ten smart cities. In order to narrow down these cases, the study on smart cities undertaken by the European Union (2014) was also taken into account. This particular study, “Mapping Smart Cities in the EU”, conducted an in-depth analysis of the cities within the EU28 with at least 100,000 residents. A selection of 240 cities was identified as “smart”. After a quantitative analysis of the characteristics and contributions of these cities, six top performing cities where identified, namely: Amsterdam, Barcelona, Copenhagen, Helsinki, Manchester and Vienna. Out of these six, Barcelona, Amsterdam and Helsinki were ranked as the three cities yielding the most innovative smart solutions in Europe and were selected as cases for this research.<br /> <br /> &lt;u&gt;Data collection&lt;/u&gt;<br /> <br /> To collect information about the selected cases, three main databases/research strategies were used to search for relevant documents (i.e. Google, Google Scholar and EBSCO) following a five steps methodology (Denyer and Neely, 2004): key phrase identification; document identification; quality assessment; data extraction; and data analysis. Each step is described in more detail in the following sections.<br /> <br /> Within the first step of this systematic process key phrases were identified for the document identification carried out in the second step. The key phrases identified were “Barcelona smart city case study”, “Barcelona smartness concept”, “Barcelona smart city analysis”, “Barcelona smart city strategy”, and “Barcelona smart city initiative”, respectively. The same key phrases were utilised for Amsterdam and Helsinki.<br /> <br /> In the second step, the described key phrases were used to identify documents on the selected cases. The identification took place over a three-week period between 24 September and 15 October 2014. Google was used to query the key phrases and the documents presented on the first three result pages were chosen for further selection. Search results from Google, Google Scholar and the EBSCO database were also used to identify further academic sources. The document identification resulted in a wide data collection stemming from existing government reports, academic case studies, online news articles, and smart city project descriptions and presentations. Although the analysis of any case study cannot be fully exhaustive, the majority of the in-depth published documents on the cases researched were included in this study.<br /> The third step focused on the quality assessment of the selected documents. Three academic articles were included due to their peer-review assessment. The European Union report, used for the selection of the cases for this research, was the most comprehensive document identified, with an in-depth analysis of Barcelona, Amsterdam and Helsinki. In addition, four smart city projects were included as well as one presentation document, a presentation transcript and one online news article. Commercial documents or reports delivered by technology companies have been excluded to avoid bias. An overview of the various sources used for the empirical research of this study is depicted in Table II.<br /> <br /> The fourth step of the data collection concentrated on the data extraction. An iterative thematic content analysis was carried out in which a bottom-up coding scheme was adopted. The identified codes were deduced from the analysed content (Yin, 2009). A three-level coding scheme was used (Bryman and Bell, 2011) and the three selected cases were separately coded. In the first level, a very basic coding was applied in which paragraphs were analysed for the research. Within this phase content describing, for example, the demographics of the cities was excluded from further analysis. The second level comprised a more in-depth approach in which codes such as “innovation”, “collaboration”, “work together” and “human skills” were used to characterise the units of text. After this level 58 codes were deduced from the content on Barcelona, 44 on Amsterdam and 52 on Helsinki.<br /> <br /> Data extraction and data analysis were the two intertwined steps within the context of this research. Consequently, the data analysis initiated in the data extraction phase. The third level of coding took a more analytic approach. A cross-case examination (Yin, 2009) of the codes identified in the separate cases on the second level was conducted. Interconnections and differences were identified which provided more compelling and robust outcomes (Gillham, 2000) and consequently 28 codes have been deduced from the analysis. Further engagement with the content and codes identified four main themes, which have been selected as the core components of smartness. The results of this analysis are presented in the following section.&quot; {{Light Context<br /> |Supercontext=PR SSM 00129<br /> |Topcontext=PR SSM 00128<br /> |Toppage=Process<br /> |Sequence number=1<br /> |Context type=Situation<br /> |Heading=Paper 1 - Aanpak<br /> |Start date=2017/10/03<br /> |Summary=Al het materiaal dat nodig is om het eerste paper te schrijven<br /> |Show referred by=Nee<br /> }}</div>

KimBoes https://gofreshwiki.nl/wiki/index.php?title=LC_00764&diff=51141 2018-03-02T11:47:42Z

<p>KimBoes: </p> <hr /> <div><br /> <br /> N.B. Deze pagina mag je naar eigen inzicht en voorkeur (anders) indelen, wijzigen en opmaken. Tips voor het bewerken van deze pagina staan in de &lt;u&gt;{{Internal link|link=Portfoliohandleiding|name=handleiding|dialog=process-linkpage-dialog}}&lt;/u&gt;.<br /> <br /> === Research questions ===<br /> Deze onderzoeksvragen zijn van belang voor dit paper <br /> * What is the role of the encounter for social innovation?<br /> * Encounter as in-between to grapple with the quality of social innovation <br /> Research does not pay enough attention to the process through which public professionals and citizens communicate (in-between) (p.21). <br /> <br /> Despite the growing body of literature on public encounters, up to now, the encounter itself has not yet been adequately understood. Capturing this relational process of &quot;knowing-in-interaction&quot; can help to grapple with the quality of participatory democracy (p.22). <br /> <br /> One particular outcomes of this thesis that would deserve more exploration is the concept of &quot;process&quot;. The analysis demonstrated that participatory practise is best understood as process, or composition of processes, with distinct and &quot;unowned&quot; qualities. Communicative capacity was found to be an emergent property of these processes, in the sense that is resides in the &quot;in-between&quot;, i.e. the interactions that local actors have with each ohter and the situation at hand. Accordingly, the thesis argues that capturing the processes through which public professionals and residents communicate is crucial to grappling the quality of participatory democracy. The concept of process has for long been the focal point of process philosophy (Rescher, 1996) and has recently entered debates in public administration and public policy (Cook &amp; Wagenaar, 2011; Stout &amp; Staton, 2011; Wagenaar &amp; Cook, 2011). The application of the concept of process in both methodology and empirical analysis is still relatively young, and this thesis hopefully makes a contribution to developing it. Still, a central challenge for future research on participatory democracy, as well as policy making and politics more in general, remains the design and application of “methods that enable the analyst to register ... [the] give-and-take between the initial expectations and preconceptions of the individual subject and the way the world talks back to him” (Wagenaar, 2011, p. 62), together with a deeper understanding of the implications of process for social reality and our knowledge of it (p.247). <br /> <br /> === Reasoning ===<br /> <br /> ==== Participatory democracy ====<br /> Structuring forces of social innovation - complex interplay of factors: <br /> * complex webs of organisations <br /> * rules and regulations<br /> * finances and budget<br /> * political power<br /> * power inequalities <br /> * antagonism <br /> The quality of participatory democracy depends largely on the capacity of public professionals and citizens to recognise and break through dominant communicative patterns. (p.21)<br /> <br /> How do people act upon them? (VWS) <br /> <br /> Participatory democracy: The influence of non-elected individuals and organisations on public decision making and implementation is the norm for democracy, rather than a deviations from it (p.17). <br /> <br /> The Netherlands: &quot;Room to develop initiatives.... and take responsibility without interference of public professionals&quot; (Ministerie van Binnenlandse Zaken, 2009, p.1 in Bartels, 2012, p.18). <br /> <br /> Bartels (2010) argues the importance of communicative capacity for participatory practises in which (public) professionals and citizens navigate this complex interplay. <br /> <br /> Making participatory democracy work on all levels proved to be really difficult (p. 18) <br /> <br /> Communicative capacity is an end result rather than a starting point (p.19) <br /> <br /> ==== Social Innovation ====<br /> Social innovation definitions are focussed on stressing the importance of meeting a social need and bring about social change (Cajaiba-Santana 2014).<br /> <br /> Social innovation is mainly concerned with creating a positive impact on society and focusses on improving the quality of life of individuals and communities (OECD 2001; Moulaert 2009).<br /> <br /> Westley et al. (2014) postulate social innovation is a ''complex set of processes and methodologies''.<br /> <br /> The definition of Baker and Mehmood (2015, p.321) suggests social innovation ''“can be understood as extraordinary measures taken by ordinary people and is closely tied to the notion of social capital.”'' In this vein, Benneworth and Cunha (2015, p.510) define social innovations as ''“bottom-up phenomena”''<br /> <br /> Scholars have recognised that enabling and strengthening collaboration, creating new social relationships and taking collective actions towards social challenges are increasingly becoming generally implied and sought for practises in social innovation (Murray et al. 2010; Grimm et al. 2013; Cajaiba-Santana 2014; Schweitzer et al. 2015). While the previous discussion indicates social innovation is a process which is goal-oriented and concerned with value creation for society at large, the process of incorporating for instance collective practises, bottom-up initiatives and cross sectional and interdisciplinary collaboration is an end in itself in social innovation. This is best captured by the definition of Grimm et al. (2013, p.450) stating<br /> <br /> ''“social innovation is not purely target-oriented. The process – cooperation, coproduction, interaction, sharing of resources, etc. – of delivery is an important outcome of the innovation itself. In other words, social innovation is a means to an end and an end in itself. In stressing the significance of social processes, social innovation emphasizes the value of social capital for building sustainable and resilient societies that have the capacity to act in an environment of permanent change.”''<br /> <br /> Grimm et al. (2013, p.440) posit: <br /> <br /> ''“There seems to be a general consensus that the social is neither a passive receiver of policy interventions or of global economic forces but, importantly, that social networks and processes themselves are important resources to anticipate change and to make societies more cohesive and resilient.”''<br /> <br /> Scholars perceive the strains on today’s society as the cause of the proliferation of research on social innovation (Cajaiba-Santana 2014; Phillips et al. 2015). From a general perspective global dilemmas, such as the economic crisis, climate change, energy and resource scarcity, and demographic imbalances, have been recognised as factors negatively affecting society (Moulaert 2009). A less utopian view identifies for instance social exclusion, cultural and environmental deterioration, congestion, accessibility and empowerment as topics of interest for social innovation (Caragliu et al. 2011; Malek and Costa 2015). Thus, the growing challenges in society as well as the need for transition towards sustainability are proliferating the focus on social innovation. Especially urban environments are increasingly experiencing such problems, which are decreasing the quality of life of citizens and tourists as well as limiting sustainable development (Sauer 2012; Dameri 2013).<br /> <br /> ==== Quotes different studies ====<br /> &lt;u&gt;Bartels (2012)&lt;/u&gt;<br /> <br /> The communicative capacity of public professionals and citizens is imperative to the quality of participatory democracy p.15 <br /> <br /> --&gt; Communicative capacity - the ability the adjust communication to the situation at hand - is of importance to the quality of participatory democracy <br /> <br /> --&gt; Quality participatory democracy depends on the process of the communication between professionals and citizens <br /> <br /> --&gt; The communicative &quot;in-between&quot;, i.e. interaction, encounter, I-Thou, is an ongoing, dynamic and relational process <br /> <br /> The research reveals that participatory practise comes down to ongoing processes which draw the communication between public professionals and citizens into dominant patters and limit their ability to the needs of the situation at hand and solve public problems (p.21). <br /> <br /> The encounter: That what happens in-between public professionals and citizens (between people) p.22 <br /> <br /> What public professionals and citizens are able to do and achieve is an emergent product of the relational, situated process through which they interact with each other (Campbell Rawlings &amp; Catlaw, 2011; Stout &amp; Staton, 2011) and the &quot;push ad pull&quot; of concrete situations at hand (Wagenaar &amp; Cook, 2011; Cook &amp; Wagenaar, 2012) p.22 <br /> <br /> The research concentrated on community participation - the institutions and practises through which residents and pubic professionals are involved in activities and decisions at the neighbourhood level - because policies are usually wide-ranging and ambitious while the actual possibilities for living up to these are heavily dependent on the local socio-political context and everyday practises (p.23) <br /> <br /> &lt;u&gt;Theology&lt;/u&gt; <br /> <br /> About Karl Barth: &quot;For Barth, it is non-human to strive to be on one’s own, apart from others. Experiencing oneself as an “I” in relation to the “thou” constitutes the very human condition. To be human in Barth’s vision, that is, to appropriate in whatever incomplete way the “true man,” is to be in relation with other humans. This insight provides Barth with the foundation for the specifically anthropological side of his theological anthropology. To say “I am human,” for Barth, is to say “I am-in-encounter.” Barth sets up what he calls “encounter” as the basic predicate of human existence. For Barth, encounter is the next conceptual step beyond maintaining that humans, simply by being humans, relate to one another; encounter is the way humans relate to one another as true humanity (Durheim, 2011, p.7-8) <br /> <br /> === Method ===<br /> Bartles (2012) Practise illuminating theory (Hummel, 1998): open-ended exploration of a phenomenon in practise to enrich our theoretical understanding (p.23)<br /> <br /> '''Text conference paper 2015 Smart Destination''' <br /> <br /> &quot;In order to explore the factors influencing the smartness of a Smart Tourism Destinations, this paper has been conceived with an exploratory research nature based on case studies. Case studies are here utilised to identify which factors contribute to the development of a Smart City and Smart Tourism Destination. <br /> <br /> The case study methodology is often implemented when research is still in its early, formative stage (Benbasat, Goldstein, &amp; Mead, 1987). The Smart City field of research is particularly multidisciplinary and even though scholars have focused on this topic, this field is still rather young. In addition, this area of research is typically characterised by the constant change in innovation and technology. Hence, the case study methodology enables to gain knowledge, and to explore how three established Smart Cities develop their smartness. This study conducts a multiple-case study research as it allows for cross-case analysis and a more general overview of the research results (Bonoma, 1985). <br /> <br /> The case studies presented are based on secondary research of existing government, academic, and Internet sources (see table 1). For the analysis of these documents, this study conducts a content analysis for the separate case studies. A coding scheme is developed based on the analysis of secondary research on Smart Cities (Caragliu et al., 2011; Cocchia, 2014; European Parliament, 2014; Lombardi et al., 2012; Nam &amp; Pardo, 2011). The collected data has been summarised for the individual documents and subsequently coded using the coding scheme. This is followed by cross-case examination and within-case examination along with literature review to develop coding clusters and to support external validity.&quot; <br /> <br /> '''Article International Journal of Tourism Cities 2016''' <br /> <br /> &quot;Smart tourism is an emerging research topic and needs to be developed by exploring some of the forefront destinations. Therefore, given the exploratory nature of this paper and the contemporary character of the research topic, a case study approach was adopted (Yin, 2009). This approach has frequently been implemented in tourism (Beeton, 2005) when research is still in its early, formative stage (Benbasat et al., 1987). Smartness has only recently gained momentum in different disciplines and is still rather young (Albino et al., 2015; Carvalho, 2015; Meijer and Bolívar, 2015). Adopting the case study approach offers holistic insights regarding the core components of smartness, through the analysis of reports, studies, news articles and other text sensitive documentation. A comprehensive coverage of complementary material is required to explore all aspect of smartness.<br /> <br /> &lt;u&gt;Case selection&lt;/u&gt;<br /> <br /> Smart cities initiated the notion of smart tourism destinations (Buhalis and Amaranggana, 2014). Cities have to deal with a large number of interconnected organisations and technologies to serve citizens and other stakeholders at a large scale. Hence, they are more mature in implementing smartness and thus provide the context for this research. Currently a variety of cities have developed smartness and innovation by developing comprehensive initiatives. To justify the selection of the cases, two international ranking schemes were used. First, the smart city classification by Cohen (2014b) was used to inform case selection since this classification syndicates a variety of global and regional rankings. This selection identified a list of the top ten smart cities. In order to narrow down these cases, the study on smart cities undertaken by the European Union (2014) was also taken into account. This particular study, “Mapping Smart Cities in the EU”, conducted an in-depth analysis of the cities within the EU28 with at least 100,000 residents. A selection of 240 cities was identified as “smart”. After a quantitative analysis of the characteristics and contributions of these cities, six top performing cities where identified, namely: Amsterdam, Barcelona, Copenhagen, Helsinki, Manchester and Vienna. Out of these six, Barcelona, Amsterdam and Helsinki were ranked as the three cities yielding the most innovative smart solutions in Europe and were selected as cases for this research.<br /> <br /> &lt;u&gt;Data collection&lt;/u&gt;<br /> <br /> To collect information about the selected cases, three main databases/research strategies were used to search for relevant documents (i.e. Google, Google Scholar and EBSCO) following a five steps methodology (Denyer and Neely, 2004): key phrase identification; document identification; quality assessment; data extraction; and data analysis. Each step is described in more detail in the following sections.<br /> <br /> Within the first step of this systematic process key phrases were identified for the document identification carried out in the second step. The key phrases identified were “Barcelona smart city case study”, “Barcelona smartness concept”, “Barcelona smart city analysis”, “Barcelona smart city strategy”, and “Barcelona smart city initiative”, respectively. The same key phrases were utilised for Amsterdam and Helsinki.<br /> <br /> In the second step, the described key phrases were used to identify documents on the selected cases. The identification took place over a three-week period between 24 September and 15 October 2014. Google was used to query the key phrases and the documents presented on the first three result pages were chosen for further selection. Search results from Google, Google Scholar and the EBSCO database were also used to identify further academic sources. The document identification resulted in a wide data collection stemming from existing government reports, academic case studies, online news articles, and smart city project descriptions and presentations. Although the analysis of any case study cannot be fully exhaustive, the majority of the in-depth published documents on the cases researched were included in this study.<br /> The third step focused on the quality assessment of the selected documents. Three academic articles were included due to their peer-review assessment. The European Union report, used for the selection of the cases for this research, was the most comprehensive document identified, with an in-depth analysis of Barcelona, Amsterdam and Helsinki. In addition, four smart city projects were included as well as one presentation document, a presentation transcript and one online news article. Commercial documents or reports delivered by technology companies have been excluded to avoid bias. An overview of the various sources used for the empirical research of this study is depicted in Table II.<br /> <br /> The fourth step of the data collection concentrated on the data extraction. An iterative thematic content analysis was carried out in which a bottom-up coding scheme was adopted. The identified codes were deduced from the analysed content (Yin, 2009). A three-level coding scheme was used (Bryman and Bell, 2011) and the three selected cases were separately coded. In the first level, a very basic coding was applied in which paragraphs were analysed for the research. Within this phase content describing, for example, the demographics of the cities was excluded from further analysis. The second level comprised a more in-depth approach in which codes such as “innovation”, “collaboration”, “work together” and “human skills” were used to characterise the units of text. After this level 58 codes were deduced from the content on Barcelona, 44 on Amsterdam and 52 on Helsinki.<br /> <br /> Data extraction and data analysis were the two intertwined steps within the context of this research. Consequently, the data analysis initiated in the data extraction phase. The third level of coding took a more analytic approach. A cross-case examination (Yin, 2009) of the codes identified in the separate cases on the second level was conducted. Interconnections and differences were identified which provided more compelling and robust outcomes (Gillham, 2000) and consequently 28 codes have been deduced from the analysis. Further engagement with the content and codes identified four main themes, which have been selected as the core components of smartness. The results of this analysis are presented in the following section.&quot; {{Light Context<br /> |Supercontext=PR SSM 00129<br /> |Topcontext=PR SSM 00128<br /> |Toppage=Process<br /> |Sequence number=1<br /> |Context type=Situation<br /> |Heading=Paper 1 - Aanpak<br /> |Start date=2017/10/03<br /> |Summary=Al het materiaal dat nodig is om het eerste paper te schrijven<br /> |Show referred by=Nee<br /> }}</div>

KimBoes https://gofreshwiki.nl/wiki/index.php?title=LC_00764&diff=51137 2018-02-28T16:30:53Z

<p>KimBoes: </p> <hr /> <div><br /> <br /> N.B. Deze pagina mag je naar eigen inzicht en voorkeur (anders) indelen, wijzigen en opmaken. Tips voor het bewerken van deze pagina staan in de &lt;u&gt;{{Internal link|link=Portfoliohandleiding|name=handleiding|dialog=process-linkpage-dialog}}&lt;/u&gt;.<br /> <br /> === Research questions ===<br /> Deze onderzoeksvragen zijn van belang voor dit paper <br /> * What is the role of the encounter for social innovation?<br /> * Encounter as in-between to grapple with the quality of social innovation <br /> Research does not pay enough attention to the process through which public professionals and citizens communicate (in-between) (p.21). <br /> <br /> Despite the growing body of literature on public encounters, up to now, the encounter itself has not yet been adequately understood. Capturing this relational process of &quot;knowing-in-interaction&quot; can help to grapple with the quality of participatory democracy (p.22). <br /> <br /> One particular outcomes of this thesis that would deserve more exploration is the concept of &quot;process&quot;. The analysis demonstrated that participatory practise is best understood as process, or composition of processes, with distinct and &quot;unowned&quot; qualities. Communicative capacity was found to be an emergent property of these processes, in the sense that is resides in the &quot;in-between&quot;, i.e. the interactions that local actors have with each ohter and the situation at hand. Accordingly, the thesis argues that capturing the processes through which public professionals and residents communicate is crucial to grappling the quality of participatory democracy. The concept of process has for long been the focal point of process philosophy (Rescher, 1996) and has recently entered debates in public administration and public policy (Cook &amp; Wagenaar, 2011; Stout &amp; Staton, 2011; Wagenaar &amp; Cook, 2011). The application of the concept of process in both methodology and empirical analysis is still relatively young, and this thesis hopefully makes a contribution to developing it. Still, a central challenge for future research on participatory democracy, as well as policy making and politics more in general, remains the design and application of “methods that enable the analyst to register ... [the] give-and-take between the initial expectations and preconceptions of the individual subject and the way the world talks back to him” (Wagenaar, 2011, p. 62), together with a deeper understanding of the implications of process for social reality and our knowledge of it (p.247). <br /> <br /> === Reasoning ===<br /> <br /> ==== Participatory democracy ====<br /> Structuring forces of social innovation - complex interplay of factors: <br /> * complex webs of organisations <br /> * rules and regulations<br /> * finances and budget<br /> * political power<br /> * power inequalities <br /> * antagonism <br /> The quality of participatory democracy depends largely on the capacity of public professionals and citizens to recognise and break through dominant communicative patterns. (p.21)<br /> <br /> How do people act upon them? (VWS) <br /> <br /> Participatory democracy: The influence of non-elected individuals and organisations on public decision making and implementation is the norm for democracy, rather than a deviations from it (p.17). <br /> <br /> The Netherlands: &quot;Room to develop initiatives.... and take responsibility without interference of public professionals&quot; (Ministerie van Binnenlandse Zaken, 2009, p.1 in Bartels, 2012, p.18). <br /> <br /> Bartels (2010) argues the importance of communicative capacity for participatory practises in which (public) professionals and citizens navigate this complex interplay. <br /> <br /> Making participatory democracy work on all levels proved to be really difficult (p. 18) <br /> <br /> Communicative capacity is an end result rather than a starting point (p.19) <br /> <br /> ==== Social Innovation ====<br /> Social innovation definitions are focussed on stressing the importance of meeting a social need and bring about social change (Cajaiba-Santana 2014).<br /> <br /> Social innovation is mainly concerned with creating a positive impact on society and focusses on improving the quality of life of individuals and communities (OECD 2001; Moulaert 2009).<br /> <br /> Westley et al. (2014) postulate social innovation is a ''complex set of processes and methodologies''.<br /> <br /> The definition of Baker and Mehmood (2015, p.321) suggests social innovation ''“can be understood as extraordinary measures taken by ordinary people and is closely tied to the notion of social capital.”'' In this vein, Benneworth and Cunha (2015, p.510) define social innovations as ''“bottom-up phenomena”''<br /> <br /> Scholars have recognised that enabling and strengthening collaboration, creating new social relationships and taking collective actions towards social challenges are increasingly becoming generally implied and sought for practises in social innovation (Murray et al. 2010; Grimm et al. 2013; Cajaiba-Santana 2014; Schweitzer et al. 2015). While the previous discussion indicates social innovation is a process which is goal-oriented and concerned with value creation for society at large, the process of incorporating for instance collective practises, bottom-up initiatives and cross sectional and interdisciplinary collaboration is an end in itself in social innovation. This is best captured by the definition of Grimm et al. (2013, p.450) stating<br /> <br /> ''“social innovation is not purely target-oriented. The process – cooperation, coproduction, interaction, sharing of resources, etc. – of delivery is an important outcome of the innovation itself. In other words, social innovation is a means to an end and an end in itself. In stressing the significance of social processes, social innovation emphasizes the value of social capital for building sustainable and resilient societies that have the capacity to act in an environment of permanent change.”''<br /> <br /> Grimm et al. (2013, p.440) posit: <br /> <br /> ''“There seems to be a general consensus that the social is neither a passive receiver of policy interventions or of global economic forces but, importantly, that social networks and processes themselves are important resources to anticipate change and to make societies more cohesive and resilient.”''<br /> <br /> Scholars perceive the strains on today’s society as the cause of the proliferation of research on social innovation (Cajaiba-Santana 2014; Phillips et al. 2015). From a general perspective global dilemmas, such as the economic crisis, climate change, energy and resource scarcity, and demographic imbalances, have been recognised as factors negatively affecting society (Moulaert 2009). A less utopian view identifies for instance social exclusion, cultural and environmental deterioration, congestion, accessibility and empowerment as topics of interest for social innovation (Caragliu et al. 2011; Malek and Costa 2015). Thus, the growing challenges in society as well as the need for transition towards sustainability are proliferating the focus on social innovation. Especially urban environments are increasingly experiencing such problems, which are decreasing the quality of life of citizens and tourists as well as limiting sustainable development (Sauer 2012; Dameri 2013).<br /> <br /> ==== Quotes different studies ====<br /> Bartels (2012)<br /> <br /> The communicative capacity of public professionals and citizens is imperative to the quality of participatory democracy p.15 <br /> <br /> --&gt; Communicative capacity - the ability the adjust communication to the situation at hand - is of importance to the quality of participatory democracy <br /> <br /> --&gt; Quality participatory democracy depends on the process of the communication between professionals and citizens <br /> <br /> --&gt; The communicative &quot;in-between&quot;, i.e. interaction, encounter, I-Thou, is an ongoing, dynamic and relational process <br /> <br /> The research reveals that participatory practise comes down to ongoing processes which draw the communication between public professionals and citizens into dominant patters and limit their ability to the needs of the situation at hand and solve public problems (p.21). <br /> <br /> The encounter: That what happens in-between public professionals and citizens (between people) p.22 <br /> <br /> What public professionals and citizens are able to do and achieve is an emergent product of the relational, situated process through which they interact with each other (Campbell Rawlings &amp; Catlaw, 2011; Stout &amp; Staton, 2011) and the &quot;push ad pull&quot; of concrete situations at hand (Wagenaar &amp; Cook, 2011; Cook &amp; Wagenaar, 2012) p.22 <br /> <br /> The research concentrated on community participation - the institutions and practises through which residents and pubic professionals are involved in activities and decisions at the neighbourhood level - because policies are usually wide-ranging and ambitious while the actual possibilities for living up to these are heavily dependent on the local socio-political context and everyday practises (p.23) <br /> <br /> === Method ===<br /> Bartles (2012) Practise illuminating theory (Hummel, 1998): open-ended exploration of a phenomenon in practise to enrich our theoretical understanding (p.23)<br /> <br /> '''Text conference paper 2015 Smart Destination''' <br /> <br /> &quot;In order to explore the factors influencing the smartness of a Smart Tourism Destinations, this paper has been conceived with an exploratory research nature based on case studies. Case studies are here utilised to identify which factors contribute to the development of a Smart City and Smart Tourism Destination. <br /> <br /> The case study methodology is often implemented when research is still in its early, formative stage (Benbasat, Goldstein, &amp; Mead, 1987). The Smart City field of research is particularly multidisciplinary and even though scholars have focused on this topic, this field is still rather young. In addition, this area of research is typically characterised by the constant change in innovation and technology. Hence, the case study methodology enables to gain knowledge, and to explore how three established Smart Cities develop their smartness. This study conducts a multiple-case study research as it allows for cross-case analysis and a more general overview of the research results (Bonoma, 1985). <br /> <br /> The case studies presented are based on secondary research of existing government, academic, and Internet sources (see table 1). For the analysis of these documents, this study conducts a content analysis for the separate case studies. A coding scheme is developed based on the analysis of secondary research on Smart Cities (Caragliu et al., 2011; Cocchia, 2014; European Parliament, 2014; Lombardi et al., 2012; Nam &amp; Pardo, 2011). The collected data has been summarised for the individual documents and subsequently coded using the coding scheme. This is followed by cross-case examination and within-case examination along with literature review to develop coding clusters and to support external validity.&quot; <br /> <br /> '''Article International Journal of Tourism Cities 2016''' <br /> <br /> &quot;Smart tourism is an emerging research topic and needs to be developed by exploring some of the forefront destinations. Therefore, given the exploratory nature of this paper and the contemporary character of the research topic, a case study approach was adopted (Yin, 2009). This approach has frequently been implemented in tourism (Beeton, 2005) when research is still in its early, formative stage (Benbasat et al., 1987). Smartness has only recently gained momentum in different disciplines and is still rather young (Albino et al., 2015; Carvalho, 2015; Meijer and Bolívar, 2015). Adopting the case study approach offers holistic insights regarding the core components of smartness, through the analysis of reports, studies, news articles and other text sensitive documentation. A comprehensive coverage of complementary material is required to explore all aspect of smartness.<br /> <br /> &lt;u&gt;Case selection&lt;/u&gt;<br /> <br /> Smart cities initiated the notion of smart tourism destinations (Buhalis and Amaranggana, 2014). Cities have to deal with a large number of interconnected organisations and technologies to serve citizens and other stakeholders at a large scale. Hence, they are more mature in implementing smartness and thus provide the context for this research. Currently a variety of cities have developed smartness and innovation by developing comprehensive initiatives. To justify the selection of the cases, two international ranking schemes were used. First, the smart city classification by Cohen (2014b) was used to inform case selection since this classification syndicates a variety of global and regional rankings. This selection identified a list of the top ten smart cities. In order to narrow down these cases, the study on smart cities undertaken by the European Union (2014) was also taken into account. This particular study, “Mapping Smart Cities in the EU”, conducted an in-depth analysis of the cities within the EU28 with at least 100,000 residents. A selection of 240 cities was identified as “smart”. After a quantitative analysis of the characteristics and contributions of these cities, six top performing cities where identified, namely: Amsterdam, Barcelona, Copenhagen, Helsinki, Manchester and Vienna. Out of these six, Barcelona, Amsterdam and Helsinki were ranked as the three cities yielding the most innovative smart solutions in Europe and were selected as cases for this research.<br /> <br /> &lt;u&gt;Data collection&lt;/u&gt;<br /> <br /> To collect information about the selected cases, three main databases/research strategies were used to search for relevant documents (i.e. Google, Google Scholar and EBSCO) following a five steps methodology (Denyer and Neely, 2004): key phrase identification; document identification; quality assessment; data extraction; and data analysis. Each step is described in more detail in the following sections.<br /> <br /> Within the first step of this systematic process key phrases were identified for the document identification carried out in the second step. The key phrases identified were “Barcelona smart city case study”, “Barcelona smartness concept”, “Barcelona smart city analysis”, “Barcelona smart city strategy”, and “Barcelona smart city initiative”, respectively. The same key phrases were utilised for Amsterdam and Helsinki.<br /> <br /> In the second step, the described key phrases were used to identify documents on the selected cases. The identification took place over a three-week period between 24 September and 15 October 2014. Google was used to query the key phrases and the documents presented on the first three result pages were chosen for further selection. Search results from Google, Google Scholar and the EBSCO database were also used to identify further academic sources. The document identification resulted in a wide data collection stemming from existing government reports, academic case studies, online news articles, and smart city project descriptions and presentations. Although the analysis of any case study cannot be fully exhaustive, the majority of the in-depth published documents on the cases researched were included in this study.<br /> The third step focused on the quality assessment of the selected documents. Three academic articles were included due to their peer-review assessment. The European Union report, used for the selection of the cases for this research, was the most comprehensive document identified, with an in-depth analysis of Barcelona, Amsterdam and Helsinki. In addition, four smart city projects were included as well as one presentation document, a presentation transcript and one online news article. Commercial documents or reports delivered by technology companies have been excluded to avoid bias. An overview of the various sources used for the empirical research of this study is depicted in Table II.<br /> <br /> The fourth step of the data collection concentrated on the data extraction. An iterative thematic content analysis was carried out in which a bottom-up coding scheme was adopted. The identified codes were deduced from the analysed content (Yin, 2009). A three-level coding scheme was used (Bryman and Bell, 2011) and the three selected cases were separately coded. In the first level, a very basic coding was applied in which paragraphs were analysed for the research. Within this phase content describing, for example, the demographics of the cities was excluded from further analysis. The second level comprised a more in-depth approach in which codes such as “innovation”, “collaboration”, “work together” and “human skills” were used to characterise the units of text. After this level 58 codes were deduced from the content on Barcelona, 44 on Amsterdam and 52 on Helsinki.<br /> <br /> Data extraction and data analysis were the two intertwined steps within the context of this research. Consequently, the data analysis initiated in the data extraction phase. The third level of coding took a more analytic approach. A cross-case examination (Yin, 2009) of the codes identified in the separate cases on the second level was conducted. Interconnections and differences were identified which provided more compelling and robust outcomes (Gillham, 2000) and consequently 28 codes have been deduced from the analysis. Further engagement with the content and codes identified four main themes, which have been selected as the core components of smartness. The results of this analysis are presented in the following section.&quot; {{Light Context<br /> |Supercontext=PR SSM 00129<br /> |Topcontext=PR SSM 00128<br /> |Toppage=Process<br /> |Sequence number=1<br /> |Context type=Situation<br /> |Heading=Paper 1 - Aanpak<br /> |Start date=2017/10/03<br /> |Summary=Al het materiaal dat nodig is om het eerste paper te schrijven<br /> |Show referred by=Nee<br /> }}</div>

KimBoes https://gofreshwiki.nl/wiki/index.php?title=LC_00764&diff=51136 2018-02-28T16:29:20Z

<p>KimBoes: </p> <hr /> <div><br /> <br /> N.B. Deze pagina mag je naar eigen inzicht en voorkeur (anders) indelen, wijzigen en opmaken. Tips voor het bewerken van deze pagina staan in de &lt;u&gt;{{Internal link|link=Portfoliohandleiding|name=handleiding|dialog=process-linkpage-dialog}}&lt;/u&gt;.<br /> <br /> === Research questions ===<br /> Deze onderzoeksvragen zijn van belang voor dit paper <br /> * What is the role of the encounter for social innovation?<br /> * Encounter as in-between to grapple with the quality of social innovation <br /> Research does not pay enough attention to the process through which public professionals and citizens communicate (in-between) (p.21). <br /> <br /> Despite the growing body of literature on public encounters, up to now, the encounter itself has not yet been adequately understood. Capturing this relational process of &quot;knowing-in-interaction&quot; can help to grapple with the quality of participatory democracy (p.22). <br /> <br /> One particular outcomes of this thesis that would deserve more exploration is the concept of &quot;process&quot;. The analysis demonstrated that participatory practise is best understood as process, or composition of processes, with distinct and &quot;unowned&quot; qualities. Communicative capacity was found to be an emergent property of these processes, in the sense that is resides in the &quot;in-between&quot;, i.e. the interactions that local actors have with each ohter and the situation at hand. Accordingly, the thesis argues that capturing the processes through which public professionals and residents communicate is crucial to grappling the quality of participatory democracy. The concept of process has for long been the focal point of process philosophy (Rescher, 1996) and has recently entered debates in public administration and public policy (Cook &amp; Wagenaar, 2011; Stout &amp; Staton, 2011; Wagenaar &amp; Cook, 2011). The application of the concept of process in both methodology and empirical analysis is still relatively young, and this thesis hopefully makes a contribution to developing it. Still, a central challenge for future research on participatory democracy, as well as policy making and politics more in general, remains the design and application of “methods that enable the analyst to register ... [the] give-and-take between the initial expectations and preconceptions of the individual subject and the way the world talks back to him” (Wagenaar, 2011, p. 62), together with a deeper understanding of the implications of process for social reality and our knowledge of it (p.247). <br /> <br /> === Reasoning ===<br /> <br /> ==== Participatory democracy ====<br /> Structuring forces of social innovation - complex interplay of factors: <br /> * complex webs of organisations <br /> * rules and regulations<br /> * finances and budget<br /> * political power<br /> * power inequalities <br /> * antagonism <br /> The quality of participatory democracy depends largely on the capacity of public professionals and citizens to recognise and break through dominant communicative patterns. (p.21)<br /> <br /> How do people act upon them? (VWS) <br /> <br /> Participatory democracy: The influence of non-elected individuals and organisations on public decision making and implementation is the norm for democracy, rather than a deviations from it (p.17). <br /> <br /> The Netherlands: &quot;Room to develop initiatives.... and take responsibility without interference of public professionals&quot; (Ministerie van Binnenlandse Zaken, 2009, p.1 in Bartels, 2012, p.18). <br /> <br /> Bartels (2010) argues the importance of communicative capacity for participatory practises in which (public) professionals and citizens navigate this complex interplay. <br /> <br /> Making participatory democracy work on all levels proved to be really difficult (p. 18) <br /> <br /> Communicative capacity is an end result rather than a starting point (p.19) <br /> <br /> ==== Social Innovation ====<br /> <br /> ==== Quotes different studies ====<br /> Bartels (2012)<br /> <br /> The communicative capacity of public professionals and citizens is imperative to the quality of participatory democracy p.15 <br /> <br /> --&gt; Communicative capacity - the ability the adjust communication to the situation at hand - is of importance to the quality of participatory democracy <br /> <br /> --&gt; Quality participatory democracy depends on the process of the communication between professionals and citizens <br /> <br /> --&gt; The communicative &quot;in-between&quot;, i.e. interaction, encounter, I-Thou, is an ongoing, dynamic and relational process <br /> <br /> The research reveals that participatory practise comes down to ongoing processes which draw the communication between public professionals and citizens into dominant patters and limit their ability to the needs of the situation at hand and solve public problems (p.21). <br /> <br /> The encounter: That what happens in-between public professionals and citizens (between people) p.22 <br /> <br /> What public professionals and citizens are able to do and achieve is an emergent product of the relational, situated process through which they interact with each other (Campbell Rawlings &amp; Catlaw, 2011; Stout &amp; Staton, 2011) and the &quot;push ad pull&quot; of concrete situations at hand (Wagenaar &amp; Cook, 2011; Cook &amp; Wagenaar, 2012) p.22 <br /> <br /> The research concentrated on community participation - the institutions and practises through which residents and pubic professionals are involved in activities and decisions at the neighbourhood level - because policies are usually wide-ranging and ambitious while the actual possibilities for living up to these are heavily dependent on the local socio-political context and everyday practises (p.23) <br /> <br /> === Method ===<br /> Bartles (2012) Practise illuminating theory (Hummel, 1998): open-ended exploration of a phenomenon in practise to enrich our theoretical understanding (p.23)<br /> <br /> '''Text conference paper 2015 Smart Destination''' <br /> <br /> &quot;In order to explore the factors influencing the smartness of a Smart Tourism Destinations, this paper has been conceived with an exploratory research nature based on case studies. Case studies are here utilised to identify which factors contribute to the development of a Smart City and Smart Tourism Destination. <br /> <br /> The case study methodology is often implemented when research is still in its early, formative stage (Benbasat, Goldstein, &amp; Mead, 1987). The Smart City field of research is particularly multidisciplinary and even though scholars have focused on this topic, this field is still rather young. In addition, this area of research is typically characterised by the constant change in innovation and technology. Hence, the case study methodology enables to gain knowledge, and to explore how three established Smart Cities develop their smartness. This study conducts a multiple-case study research as it allows for cross-case analysis and a more general overview of the research results (Bonoma, 1985). <br /> <br /> The case studies presented are based on secondary research of existing government, academic, and Internet sources (see table 1). For the analysis of these documents, this study conducts a content analysis for the separate case studies. A coding scheme is developed based on the analysis of secondary research on Smart Cities (Caragliu et al., 2011; Cocchia, 2014; European Parliament, 2014; Lombardi et al., 2012; Nam &amp; Pardo, 2011). The collected data has been summarised for the individual documents and subsequently coded using the coding scheme. This is followed by cross-case examination and within-case examination along with literature review to develop coding clusters and to support external validity.&quot; <br /> <br /> '''Article International Journal of Tourism Cities 2016''' <br /> <br /> &quot;Smart tourism is an emerging research topic and needs to be developed by exploring some of the forefront destinations. Therefore, given the exploratory nature of this paper and the contemporary character of the research topic, a case study approach was adopted (Yin, 2009). This approach has frequently been implemented in tourism (Beeton, 2005) when research is still in its early, formative stage (Benbasat et al., 1987). Smartness has only recently gained momentum in different disciplines and is still rather young (Albino et al., 2015; Carvalho, 2015; Meijer and Bolívar, 2015). Adopting the case study approach offers holistic insights regarding the core components of smartness, through the analysis of reports, studies, news articles and other text sensitive documentation. A comprehensive coverage of complementary material is required to explore all aspect of smartness.<br /> <br /> &lt;u&gt;Case selection&lt;/u&gt;<br /> <br /> Smart cities initiated the notion of smart tourism destinations (Buhalis and Amaranggana, 2014). Cities have to deal with a large number of interconnected organisations and technologies to serve citizens and other stakeholders at a large scale. Hence, they are more mature in implementing smartness and thus provide the context for this research. Currently a variety of cities have developed smartness and innovation by developing comprehensive initiatives. To justify the selection of the cases, two international ranking schemes were used. First, the smart city classification by Cohen (2014b) was used to inform case selection since this classification syndicates a variety of global and regional rankings. This selection identified a list of the top ten smart cities. In order to narrow down these cases, the study on smart cities undertaken by the European Union (2014) was also taken into account. This particular study, “Mapping Smart Cities in the EU”, conducted an in-depth analysis of the cities within the EU28 with at least 100,000 residents. A selection of 240 cities was identified as “smart”. After a quantitative analysis of the characteristics and contributions of these cities, six top performing cities where identified, namely: Amsterdam, Barcelona, Copenhagen, Helsinki, Manchester and Vienna. Out of these six, Barcelona, Amsterdam and Helsinki were ranked as the three cities yielding the most innovative smart solutions in Europe and were selected as cases for this research.<br /> <br /> &lt;u&gt;Data collection&lt;/u&gt;<br /> <br /> To collect information about the selected cases, three main databases/research strategies were used to search for relevant documents (i.e. Google, Google Scholar and EBSCO) following a five steps methodology (Denyer and Neely, 2004): key phrase identification; document identification; quality assessment; data extraction; and data analysis. Each step is described in more detail in the following sections.<br /> <br /> Within the first step of this systematic process key phrases were identified for the document identification carried out in the second step. The key phrases identified were “Barcelona smart city case study”, “Barcelona smartness concept”, “Barcelona smart city analysis”, “Barcelona smart city strategy”, and “Barcelona smart city initiative”, respectively. The same key phrases were utilised for Amsterdam and Helsinki.<br /> <br /> In the second step, the described key phrases were used to identify documents on the selected cases. The identification took place over a three-week period between 24 September and 15 October 2014. Google was used to query the key phrases and the documents presented on the first three result pages were chosen for further selection. Search results from Google, Google Scholar and the EBSCO database were also used to identify further academic sources. The document identification resulted in a wide data collection stemming from existing government reports, academic case studies, online news articles, and smart city project descriptions and presentations. Although the analysis of any case study cannot be fully exhaustive, the majority of the in-depth published documents on the cases researched were included in this study.<br /> The third step focused on the quality assessment of the selected documents. Three academic articles were included due to their peer-review assessment. The European Union report, used for the selection of the cases for this research, was the most comprehensive document identified, with an in-depth analysis of Barcelona, Amsterdam and Helsinki. In addition, four smart city projects were included as well as one presentation document, a presentation transcript and one online news article. Commercial documents or reports delivered by technology companies have been excluded to avoid bias. An overview of the various sources used for the empirical research of this study is depicted in Table II.<br /> <br /> The fourth step of the data collection concentrated on the data extraction. An iterative thematic content analysis was carried out in which a bottom-up coding scheme was adopted. The identified codes were deduced from the analysed content (Yin, 2009). A three-level coding scheme was used (Bryman and Bell, 2011) and the three selected cases were separately coded. In the first level, a very basic coding was applied in which paragraphs were analysed for the research. Within this phase content describing, for example, the demographics of the cities was excluded from further analysis. The second level comprised a more in-depth approach in which codes such as “innovation”, “collaboration”, “work together” and “human skills” were used to characterise the units of text. After this level 58 codes were deduced from the content on Barcelona, 44 on Amsterdam and 52 on Helsinki.<br /> <br /> Data extraction and data analysis were the two intertwined steps within the context of this research. Consequently, the data analysis initiated in the data extraction phase. The third level of coding took a more analytic approach. A cross-case examination (Yin, 2009) of the codes identified in the separate cases on the second level was conducted. Interconnections and differences were identified which provided more compelling and robust outcomes (Gillham, 2000) and consequently 28 codes have been deduced from the analysis. Further engagement with the content and codes identified four main themes, which have been selected as the core components of smartness. The results of this analysis are presented in the following section.&quot; {{Light Context<br /> |Supercontext=PR SSM 00129<br /> |Topcontext=PR SSM 00128<br /> |Toppage=Process<br /> |Sequence number=1<br /> |Context type=Situation<br /> |Heading=Paper 1 - Aanpak<br /> |Start date=2017/10/03<br /> |Summary=Al het materiaal dat nodig is om het eerste paper te schrijven<br /> |Show referred by=Nee<br /> }}</div>

KimBoes https://gofreshwiki.nl/wiki/index.php?title=LC_00764&diff=51108 2018-02-27T12:27:05Z

<p>KimBoes: </p> <hr /> <div><br /> <br /> N.B. Deze pagina mag je naar eigen inzicht en voorkeur (anders) indelen, wijzigen en opmaken. Tips voor het bewerken van deze pagina staan in de &lt;u&gt;{{Internal link|link=Portfoliohandleiding|name=handleiding|dialog=process-linkpage-dialog}}&lt;/u&gt;.<br /> <br /> === Research questions ===<br /> Deze onderzoeksvragen zijn van belang voor dit paper <br /> * What is the role of the encounter for social innovation?<br /> * Encounter as in-between to grapple with the quality of social innovation <br /> Research does not pay enough attention to the process through which public professionals and citizens communicate (in-between) (p.21). <br /> <br /> Despite the growing body of literature on public encounters, up to now, the encounter itself has not yet been adequately understood. Capturing this relational process of &quot;knowing-in-interaction&quot; can help to grapple with the quality of participatory democracy (p.22). <br /> <br /> One particular outcomes of this thesis that would deserve more exploration is the concept of &quot;process&quot;. The analysis demonstrated that participatory practise is best understood as process, or composition of processes, with distinct and &quot;unowned&quot; qualities. Communicative capacity was found to be an emergent property of these processes, in the sense that is resides in the &quot;in-between&quot;, i.e. the interactions that local actors have with each ohter and the situation at hand. Accordingly, the thesis argues that capturing the processes through which public professionals and residents communicate is crucial to grappling the quality of participatory democracy. The concept of process has for long been the focal point of process philosophy (Rescher, 1996) and has recently entered debates in public administration and public policy (Cook &amp; Wagenaar, 2011; Stout &amp; Staton, 2011; Wagenaar &amp; Cook, 2011). The application of the concept of process in both methodology and empirical analysis is still relatively young, and this thesis hopefully makes a contribution to developing it. Still, a central challenge for future research on participatory democracy, as well as policy making and politics more in general, remains the design and application of “methods that enable the analyst to register ... [the] give-and-take between the initial expectations and preconceptions of the individual subject and the way the world talks back to him” (Wagenaar, 2011, p. 62), together with a deeper understanding of the implications of process for social reality and our knowledge of it (p.247). <br /> <br /> === Reasoning ===<br /> Structuring forces of social innovation - complex interplay of factors: <br /> * complex webs of organisations <br /> * rules and regulations<br /> * finances and budget<br /> * political power<br /> * power inequalities <br /> * antagonism <br /> The quality of participatory democracy depends largely on the capacity of public professionals and citizens to recognise and break through dominant communicative patterns. (p.21)<br /> <br /> How do people act upon them? (VWS) <br /> <br /> Participatory democracy: The influence of non-elected individuals and organisations on public decision making and implementation is the norm for democracy, rather than a deviations from it (p.17). <br /> <br /> The Netherlands: &quot;Room to develop initiatives.... and take responsibility without interference of public professionals&quot; (Ministerie van Binnenlandse Zaken, 2009, p.1 in Bartels, 2012, p.18). <br /> <br /> Bartels (2010) argues the importance of communicative capacity for participatory practises in which (public) professionals and citizens navigate this complex interplay. <br /> <br /> Making participatory democracy work on all levels proved to be really difficult (p. 18) <br /> <br /> Communicative capacity is an end result rather than a starting point (p.19) <br /> <br /> ==== Quotes different studies ====<br /> Bartels (2012)<br /> <br /> The communicative capacity of public professionals and citizens is imperative to the quality of participatory democracy p.15 <br /> <br /> --&gt; Communicative capacity - the ability the adjust communication to the situation at hand - is of importance to the quality of participatory democracy <br /> <br /> --&gt; Quality participatory democracy depends on the process of the communication between professionals and citizens <br /> <br /> --&gt; The communicative &quot;in-between&quot;, i.e. interaction, encounter, I-Thou, is an ongoing, dynamic and relational process <br /> <br /> The research reveals that participatory practise comes down to ongoing processes which draw the communication between public professionals and citizens into dominant patters and limit their ability to the needs of the situation at hand and solve public problems (p.21). <br /> <br /> The encounter: That what happens in-between public professionals and citizens (between people) p.22 <br /> <br /> What public professionals and citizens are able to do and achieve is an emergent product of the relational, situated process through which they interact with each other (Campbell Rawlings &amp; Catlaw, 2011; Stout &amp; Staton, 2011) and the &quot;push ad pull&quot; of concrete situations at hand (Wagenaar &amp; Cook, 2011; Cook &amp; Wagenaar, 2012) p.22 <br /> <br /> The research concentrated on community participation - the institutions and practises through which residents and pubic professionals are involved in activities and decisions at the neighbourhood level - because policies are usually wide-ranging and ambitious while the actual possibilities for living up to these are heavily dependent on the local socio-political context and everyday practises (p.23) <br /> <br /> === Method ===<br /> Bartles (2012) Practise illuminating theory (Hummel, 1998): open-ended exploration of a phenomenon in practise to enrich our theoretical understanding (p.23)<br /> <br /> '''Text conference paper 2015 Smart Destination''' <br /> <br /> &quot;In order to explore the factors influencing the smartness of a Smart Tourism Destinations, this paper has been conceived with an exploratory research nature based on case studies. Case studies are here utilised to identify which factors contribute to the development of a Smart City and Smart Tourism Destination. <br /> <br /> The case study methodology is often implemented when research is still in its early, formative stage (Benbasat, Goldstein, &amp; Mead, 1987). The Smart City field of research is particularly multidisciplinary and even though scholars have focused on this topic, this field is still rather young. In addition, this area of research is typically characterised by the constant change in innovation and technology. Hence, the case study methodology enables to gain knowledge, and to explore how three established Smart Cities develop their smartness. This study conducts a multiple-case study research as it allows for cross-case analysis and a more general overview of the research results (Bonoma, 1985). <br /> <br /> The case studies presented are based on secondary research of existing government, academic, and Internet sources (see table 1). For the analysis of these documents, this study conducts a content analysis for the separate case studies. A coding scheme is developed based on the analysis of secondary research on Smart Cities (Caragliu et al., 2011; Cocchia, 2014; European Parliament, 2014; Lombardi et al., 2012; Nam &amp; Pardo, 2011). The collected data has been summarised for the individual documents and subsequently coded using the coding scheme. This is followed by cross-case examination and within-case examination along with literature review to develop coding clusters and to support external validity.&quot; <br /> <br /> '''Article International Journal of Tourism Cities 2016''' <br /> <br /> &quot;Smart tourism is an emerging research topic and needs to be developed by exploring some of the forefront destinations. Therefore, given the exploratory nature of this paper and the contemporary character of the research topic, a case study approach was adopted (Yin, 2009). This approach has frequently been implemented in tourism (Beeton, 2005) when research is still in its early, formative stage (Benbasat et al., 1987). Smartness has only recently gained momentum in different disciplines and is still rather young (Albino et al., 2015; Carvalho, 2015; Meijer and Bolívar, 2015). Adopting the case study approach offers holistic insights regarding the core components of smartness, through the analysis of reports, studies, news articles and other text sensitive documentation. A comprehensive coverage of complementary material is required to explore all aspect of smartness.<br /> <br /> &lt;u&gt;Case selection&lt;/u&gt;<br /> <br /> Smart cities initiated the notion of smart tourism destinations (Buhalis and Amaranggana, 2014). Cities have to deal with a large number of interconnected organisations and technologies to serve citizens and other stakeholders at a large scale. Hence, they are more mature in implementing smartness and thus provide the context for this research. Currently a variety of cities have developed smartness and innovation by developing comprehensive initiatives. To justify the selection of the cases, two international ranking schemes were used. First, the smart city classification by Cohen (2014b) was used to inform case selection since this classification syndicates a variety of global and regional rankings. This selection identified a list of the top ten smart cities. In order to narrow down these cases, the study on smart cities undertaken by the European Union (2014) was also taken into account. This particular study, “Mapping Smart Cities in the EU”, conducted an in-depth analysis of the cities within the EU28 with at least 100,000 residents. A selection of 240 cities was identified as “smart”. After a quantitative analysis of the characteristics and contributions of these cities, six top performing cities where identified, namely: Amsterdam, Barcelona, Copenhagen, Helsinki, Manchester and Vienna. Out of these six, Barcelona, Amsterdam and Helsinki were ranked as the three cities yielding the most innovative smart solutions in Europe and were selected as cases for this research.<br /> <br /> &lt;u&gt;Data collection&lt;/u&gt;<br /> <br /> To collect information about the selected cases, three main databases/research strategies were used to search for relevant documents (i.e. Google, Google Scholar and EBSCO) following a five steps methodology (Denyer and Neely, 2004): key phrase identification; document identification; quality assessment; data extraction; and data analysis. Each step is described in more detail in the following sections.<br /> <br /> Within the first step of this systematic process key phrases were identified for the document identification carried out in the second step. The key phrases identified were “Barcelona smart city case study”, “Barcelona smartness concept”, “Barcelona smart city analysis”, “Barcelona smart city strategy”, and “Barcelona smart city initiative”, respectively. The same key phrases were utilised for Amsterdam and Helsinki.<br /> <br /> In the second step, the described key phrases were used to identify documents on the selected cases. The identification took place over a three-week period between 24 September and 15 October 2014. Google was used to query the key phrases and the documents presented on the first three result pages were chosen for further selection. Search results from Google, Google Scholar and the EBSCO database were also used to identify further academic sources. The document identification resulted in a wide data collection stemming from existing government reports, academic case studies, online news articles, and smart city project descriptions and presentations. Although the analysis of any case study cannot be fully exhaustive, the majority of the in-depth published documents on the cases researched were included in this study.<br /> The third step focused on the quality assessment of the selected documents. Three academic articles were included due to their peer-review assessment. The European Union report, used for the selection of the cases for this research, was the most comprehensive document identified, with an in-depth analysis of Barcelona, Amsterdam and Helsinki. In addition, four smart city projects were included as well as one presentation document, a presentation transcript and one online news article. Commercial documents or reports delivered by technology companies have been excluded to avoid bias. An overview of the various sources used for the empirical research of this study is depicted in Table II.<br /> <br /> The fourth step of the data collection concentrated on the data extraction. An iterative thematic content analysis was carried out in which a bottom-up coding scheme was adopted. The identified codes were deduced from the analysed content (Yin, 2009). A three-level coding scheme was used (Bryman and Bell, 2011) and the three selected cases were separately coded. In the first level, a very basic coding was applied in which paragraphs were analysed for the research. Within this phase content describing, for example, the demographics of the cities was excluded from further analysis. The second level comprised a more in-depth approach in which codes such as “innovation”, “collaboration”, “work together” and “human skills” were used to characterise the units of text. After this level 58 codes were deduced from the content on Barcelona, 44 on Amsterdam and 52 on Helsinki.<br /> <br /> Data extraction and data analysis were the two intertwined steps within the context of this research. Consequently, the data analysis initiated in the data extraction phase. The third level of coding took a more analytic approach. A cross-case examination (Yin, 2009) of the codes identified in the separate cases on the second level was conducted. Interconnections and differences were identified which provided more compelling and robust outcomes (Gillham, 2000) and consequently 28 codes have been deduced from the analysis. Further engagement with the content and codes identified four main themes, which have been selected as the core components of smartness. The results of this analysis are presented in the following section.&quot; {{Light Context<br /> |Supercontext=PR SSM 00129<br /> |Topcontext=PR SSM 00128<br /> |Toppage=Process<br /> |Sequence number=1<br /> |Context type=Situation<br /> |Heading=Paper 1 - Aanpak<br /> |Start date=2017/10/03<br /> |Summary=Al het materiaal dat nodig is om het eerste paper te schrijven<br /> |Show referred by=Nee<br /> }}</div>

KimBoes https://gofreshwiki.nl/wiki/index.php?title=LC_00764&diff=51101 2018-02-27T09:01:12Z

<p>KimBoes: </p> <hr /> <div><br /> <br /> N.B. Deze pagina mag je naar eigen inzicht en voorkeur (anders) indelen, wijzigen en opmaken. Tips voor het bewerken van deze pagina staan in de &lt;u&gt;{{Internal link|link=Portfoliohandleiding|name=handleiding|dialog=process-linkpage-dialog}}&lt;/u&gt;.<br /> <br /> === Research questions ===<br /> Deze onderzoeksvragen zijn van belang voor dit paper <br /> * What is the role of the encounter for social innovation?<br /> * <br /> <br /> === Reasoning ===<br /> <br /> === Method ===<br /> <br /> '''Text conference paper 2015 Smart Destination''' <br /> <br /> &quot;In order to explore the factors influencing the smartness of a Smart Tourism Destinations, this paper has been conceived with an exploratory research nature based on case studies. Case studies are here utilised to identify which factors contribute to the development of a Smart City and Smart Tourism Destination. <br /> <br /> The case study methodology is often implemented when research is still in its early, formative stage (Benbasat, Goldstein, &amp; Mead, 1987). The Smart City field of research is particularly multidisciplinary and even though scholars have focused on this topic, this field is still rather young. In addition, this area of research is typically characterised by the constant change in innovation and technology. Hence, the case study methodology enables to gain knowledge, and to explore how three established Smart Cities develop their smartness. This study conducts a multiple-case study research as it allows for cross-case analysis and a more general overview of the research results (Bonoma, 1985). <br /> <br /> The case studies presented are based on secondary research of existing government, academic, and Internet sources (see table 1). For the analysis of these documents, this study conducts a content analysis for the separate case studies. A coding scheme is developed based on the analysis of secondary research on Smart Cities (Caragliu et al., 2011; Cocchia, 2014; European Parliament, 2014; Lombardi et al., 2012; Nam &amp; Pardo, 2011). The collected data has been summarised for the individual documents and subsequently coded using the coding scheme. This is followed by cross-case examination and within-case examination along with literature review to develop coding clusters and to support external validity.&quot; <br /> <br /> '''Article International Journal of Tourism Cities 2016''' <br /> <br /> &quot;Smart tourism is an emerging research topic and needs to be developed by exploring some of the forefront destinations. Therefore, given the exploratory nature of this paper and the contemporary character of the research topic, a case study approach was adopted (Yin, 2009). This approach has frequently been implemented in tourism (Beeton, 2005) when research is still in its early, formative stage (Benbasat et al., 1987). Smartness has only recently gained momentum in different disciplines and is still rather young (Albino et al., 2015; Carvalho, 2015; Meijer and Bolívar, 2015). Adopting the case study approach offers holistic insights regarding the core components of smartness, through the analysis of reports, studies, news articles and other text sensitive documentation. A comprehensive coverage of complementary material is required to explore all aspect of smartness.<br /> <br /> &lt;u&gt;Case selection&lt;/u&gt;<br /> <br /> Smart cities initiated the notion of smart tourism destinations (Buhalis and Amaranggana, 2014). Cities have to deal with a large number of interconnected organisations and technologies to serve citizens and other stakeholders at a large scale. Hence, they are more mature in implementing smartness and thus provide the context for this research. Currently a variety of cities have developed smartness and innovation by developing comprehensive initiatives. To justify the selection of the cases, two international ranking schemes were used. First, the smart city classification by Cohen (2014b) was used to inform case selection since this classification syndicates a variety of global and regional rankings. This selection identified a list of the top ten smart cities. In order to narrow down these cases, the study on smart cities undertaken by the European Union (2014) was also taken into account. This particular study, “Mapping Smart Cities in the EU”, conducted an in-depth analysis of the cities within the EU28 with at least 100,000 residents. A selection of 240 cities was identified as “smart”. After a quantitative analysis of the characteristics and contributions of these cities, six top performing cities where identified, namely: Amsterdam, Barcelona, Copenhagen, Helsinki, Manchester and Vienna. Out of these six, Barcelona, Amsterdam and Helsinki were ranked as the three cities yielding the most innovative smart solutions in Europe and were selected as cases for this research.<br /> <br /> &lt;u&gt;Data collection&lt;/u&gt;<br /> <br /> To collect information about the selected cases, three main databases/research strategies were used to search for relevant documents (i.e. Google, Google Scholar and EBSCO) following a five steps methodology (Denyer and Neely, 2004): key phrase identification; document identification; quality assessment; data extraction; and data analysis. Each step is described in more detail in the following sections.<br /> <br /> Within the first step of this systematic process key phrases were identified for the document identification carried out in the second step. The key phrases identified were “Barcelona smart city case study”, “Barcelona smartness concept”, “Barcelona smart city analysis”, “Barcelona smart city strategy”, and “Barcelona smart city initiative”, respectively. The same key phrases were utilised for Amsterdam and Helsinki.<br /> <br /> In the second step, the described key phrases were used to identify documents on the selected cases. The identification took place over a three-week period between 24 September and 15 October 2014. Google was used to query the key phrases and the documents presented on the first three result pages were chosen for further selection. Search results from Google, Google Scholar and the EBSCO database were also used to identify further academic sources. The document identification resulted in a wide data collection stemming from existing government reports, academic case studies, online news articles, and smart city project descriptions and presentations. Although the analysis of any case study cannot be fully exhaustive, the majority of the in-depth published documents on the cases researched were included in this study.<br /> The third step focused on the quality assessment of the selected documents. Three academic articles were included due to their peer-review assessment. The European Union report, used for the selection of the cases for this research, was the most comprehensive document identified, with an in-depth analysis of Barcelona, Amsterdam and Helsinki. In addition, four smart city projects were included as well as one presentation document, a presentation transcript and one online news article. Commercial documents or reports delivered by technology companies have been excluded to avoid bias. An overview of the various sources used for the empirical research of this study is depicted in Table II.<br /> <br /> The fourth step of the data collection concentrated on the data extraction. An iterative thematic content analysis was carried out in which a bottom-up coding scheme was adopted. The identified codes were deduced from the analysed content (Yin, 2009). A three-level coding scheme was used (Bryman and Bell, 2011) and the three selected cases were separately coded. In the first level, a very basic coding was applied in which paragraphs were analysed for the research. Within this phase content describing, for example, the demographics of the cities was excluded from further analysis. The second level comprised a more in-depth approach in which codes such as “innovation”, “collaboration”, “work together” and “human skills” were used to characterise the units of text. After this level 58 codes were deduced from the content on Barcelona, 44 on Amsterdam and 52 on Helsinki.<br /> <br /> Data extraction and data analysis were the two intertwined steps within the context of this research. Consequently, the data analysis initiated in the data extraction phase. The third level of coding took a more analytic approach. A cross-case examination (Yin, 2009) of the codes identified in the separate cases on the second level was conducted. Interconnections and differences were identified which provided more compelling and robust outcomes (Gillham, 2000) and consequently 28 codes have been deduced from the analysis. Further engagement with the content and codes identified four main themes, which have been selected as the core components of smartness. The results of this analysis are presented in the following section.&quot; {{Light Context<br /> |Supercontext=PR SSM 00129<br /> |Topcontext=PR SSM 00128<br /> |Toppage=Process<br /> |Sequence number=1<br /> |Context type=Situation<br /> |Heading=Paper 1 - Aanpak<br /> |Start date=2017/10/03<br /> |Summary=Al het materiaal dat nodig is om het eerste paper te schrijven<br /> |Show referred by=Nee<br /> }}</div>

KimBoes https://gofreshwiki.nl/wiki/index.php?title=LC_00765&diff=51100 2018-02-27T08:40:28Z

<p>KimBoes: </p> <hr /> <div>Title: <br /> <br /> === Abstract ===<br /> The social innovation process, as a method and a practise, is dynamic and includes a plethora of different actors. It derives from bringing together these different actors that usually do not maintain relationships or only in direct conflict. This paper aims at elucidating the level of the individual in socially innovative actions. It investigates how the relationships between different actors are (re)organised by drawing on the concept of '''the encounter''' frequently used in the human and social geography literature. Careful consideration is asked for the types of encounters sought for and avoided by individuals.<br /> <br /> Social innovation works towards social change through social actions and conscious awareness. Mutual learning plays an important role in this. The role of '''the narrative''' has often come to the forefront implicating its research significance as a method through narrative analyses for interpreting human meaning and experience. Yet, the role of the narrative in working practises in mutual learning, mobilising action, and bringing about change has received little to no attention in the public administration discipline.<br /> <br /> To explore the role of the encounter and the narrative in the social innovation process this study draws on a combination of qualitative data. Process documents from different projects are used to determine explicit points of encounter. In-depth interviews and a focus group enhance this data by elucidating inexplicit points of encounter and the role of the narrative within this.<br /> <br /> Against the background of decentralisation and the growing importance of investing in a public meeting culture, understanding the role of the encounter in socially innovative actions could support public administrators in facilitating alternative structures for societal change. Introducing the narrative, and hence ethnography in innovation, as a practise could provide policy makers an additional instrument for mutual learning and thus to gain a qualitative insight of the relationships between people and the topics of importance to enhance quality of life from a policy perspective.<br /> <br /> Keywords: <br /> <br /> === Introduction ===<br /> text<br /> <br /> === Chapters critical discussion current literature ===<br /> text <br /> <br /> === Method ===<br /> text <br /> <br /> === Results/Discussion ===<br /> text <br /> <br /> === Conclusion ===<br /> text <br /> <br /> === References ===<br /> text {{Light Context<br /> |Supercontext=PR SSM 00129<br /> |Topcontext=PR SSM 00128<br /> |Toppage=Content<br /> |Sequence number=2<br /> |Context type=Situation<br /> |Heading=Paper 1 - Het artikel<br /> |Start date=2017/10/03<br /> |Summary=Writing document for first paper<br /> |Show referred by=Nee<br /> }}</div>

KimBoes https://gofreshwiki.nl/wiki/index.php?title=ZHDSM_Zorgethiek&diff=51099 2018-02-26T10:25:59Z

<p>KimBoes: </p> <hr /> <div>den Hartogh, Jacobs &amp; van Willigenburg (2013) Wijsgerige ethiek - Zorgethiek (pp. 294-320)<br /> <br /> &quot;Morele bekommernis en morele verplichtingen berusten niet zozeer op algemene principes van weldoen en respect, maar op concrete intermenselijke relaties van wederzijdse betrokkenheid, zorg, liefde en compassie. Moreel juist handelen komt niet voort uit een onpartijdige afweging van redenen, maar uit een verbondenheid met een concrete ander en de gevoeligheid voor diens nood.&quot; (p. 295)<br /> <br /> {{InfKrt Concept<br /> |Context=ZHDSM context<br /> |prefLabel=Zorgethiek<br /> |inScheme=ZHDSM scheme<br /> }}</div>

KimBoes https://gofreshwiki.nl/wiki/index.php?title=ZHDSM_Zorgethiek&diff=51098 2018-02-26T09:44:10Z

<p>KimBoes: </p> <hr /> <div>den Hartogh, Jacobs &amp; van Willigenburg (2013) Wijsgerige ethiek - Zorgethiek (pp. 294-320)<br /> <br /> {{InfKrt Concept<br /> |Context=ZHDSM context<br /> |prefLabel=Zorgethiek<br /> |inScheme=ZHDSM scheme<br /> }}</div>

KimBoes https://gofreshwiki.nl/wiki/index.php?title=ZHDSM_Zorgethiek&diff=51097 2018-02-26T09:42:05Z

<p>KimBoes: Nieuwe pagina aangemaakt met ' {{InfKrt Concept |Context=ZHDSM context |prefLabel=Zorgethiek |inScheme=ZHDSM scheme }}'</p> <hr /> <div><br /> {{InfKrt Concept<br /> |Context=ZHDSM context<br /> |prefLabel=Zorgethiek<br /> |inScheme=ZHDSM scheme<br /> }}</div>

KimBoes https://gofreshwiki.nl/wiki/index.php?title=ZHDSM_The_encounter&diff=50860 2018-01-19T14:27:06Z

<p>KimBoes: </p> <hr /> <div>=== Authors on the encounter ===<br /> * Gill Valentine<br /> ** Living with difference: reflection on geographies of encounter (2008) <br /> ** Biographical narratives of encounter: The significance of mobility and emplacement in shaping attitudes towards difference (2014) <br /> ** Living with difference: proximity and encounter in urban life (2013) <br /> * Ash Amin (2012) <br /> * Gordon W. Allport (1954) The nature of prejudice <br /> * Gibson-Graham (2004) <br /> * Mandy de Wilde (2013) <br /> * Helen F. Wilson - Human Geography department Manchester Uni <br /> ** On geography and encounter: Bodies, borders and difference (2016) <br /> * Nick Schuermans - Department of Geography Vrije universiteit Brussel. Heeft ook papers met Stijn geschreven <br /> Kritisch kijken naar wat geschreven is en hoe wij dat kunnen plaatsen in onze praktijken. <br /> <br /> Wat is the encounter --&gt; Interactie. Effectief kijken naar de interventie + the encounter <br /> <br /> ==== Keywords ====<br /> Geographies of encounter; Geography of encounter; Encounter; Contact hypothesis; <br /> <br /> === Definition &amp; Concepts ===<br /> <br /> ==== The encounter ====<br /> verb (used with object)<br /> # to come upon or meet with, especially unexpectedly <br /> # to meet with or contend against (difficulties, opposition, etc.)<br /> # to meet (a person, military force, etc.) in conflict <br /> verb (used without object) <br /> # to meet, especially unexpectedly or in conflict <br /> noun<br /> # a meeting with a person or thing, especially a casual, unexpected, or brief meeting<br /> # a meeting of persons or groups that are in conflict or opposition: combat: battle <br /> Psychology<br /> # a meeting of two or more people, as the members of an encounter group or a number of married couples (marriage encounter) conducted to promote direct emotional confrontation among the participants, especially as a form of therapy (encounter therapy) <br /> <br /> ==== Equal-Status Contact ====<br /> An '''equal'''-'''status contact''' is a person or group who has a similar background, history, social role, and education. This is a concept of the '''contact''' hypothesis which is a theory regarding how best to improve relations between groups that display hostility towards each other.<br /> <br /> ==== The Contact Hypothesis ====<br /> <br /> === The Encounter ===<br /> * &quot;I begin by critiquing some of the work celebrating urban encounters through using empirical examples of where contact with difference leaves attitudes and values unmoved, and even hardened, before going on to consider debates about '''what kind of encounters produces what might be termed 'meaningful contact''''. By this I mean contact that actually changes values and translates beyond the specifics of the individual moment into a more general positieve respect for - rather than merely tolerance of - others. In doing so, I identify a paradoxical gap that emerges in geographies of encounter between values and practices.&quot; (Valentine, 2008, p.325). <br /> Argument for intervening with the encounter, setting up the encounter <br /> * &quot;Holland et al., 2007 found that, although their research sites were frequented by a range of different groups, this did not necessarily mean that there was any contact between the diverse inhabitants. Rather, their observation suggested that while different groups coexisted and even observed each other, none the less there was little actual mixing between different users who self-segregated within particular spaces carving out their own territory....... Likewise, Ash Amin (2002) has observed that city streets are spaces of transit that produce little actual connection or exchange between strangers. '''A process exacerbated by the emergence of a mobile phone culture''', which Deborah Cameron (2000) has observed, '''contributes to incivility in public space as individuals move in and through locations while locked in the private worlds of their conversations with remote others.'''&quot; (Valentine, 2008, p.326). <br /> Due to self-segragation in for example educational arrangements, places of worship, social and cultural networks, many communities operate on the basis of a series of parallel lives. Lives often do not seem to touch at any point, let alone overlap and promote and meaningful interchange (Valentine, 2008, p.326). <br /> <br /> Ash Amin (2002) argues for 'micro-publics of everyday social contact and encounter'. These are events and sites where people from different backgrounds are brought together on purpose. While the encounter often refers to unexpected, none planned, 'meetings' or 'contact', Ash Amin (2002) proposes a planned and organised meeting. <br /> <br /> === Types of encounter ===<br /> '''public encounter'''<br /> <br /> Start: Charles Goodsell (The Public Encounter: Where State and Citizen meet, 1981).<br /> <br /> Signaled: the pervasive influence of encounters with public professionals on the daily lives of citizens. <br /> <br /> Traditionally: Max Weber, main point of reference: regulated by formal responsabilities and moral obligations (Weber, 1922). <br /> <br /> Initially: studied as / focus on consequences of bureaucratization (field of organization studies. More recently: digital encounters. Antroplogy and political science: bureaucratization and corruption (Miller eta al., 2001).<br /> <br /> Alternative models: attacking the traditional model of bureaucracy. Not debate on public encounters per se.<br /> <br /> Lipsky (1980) study on street level democracy concrete situations and problems, coping mechanisms, became hallmark of many empirical analyses -&gt; ongoring debate on 'discretion'. First problematic (democratic control). But positive view (creative, deliberative and informed judgement (Wagenaar 2004) -&gt; inspired analyses of the narratives of front line professionals -&gt; public encounters not a mere matter of service delivery but vital element of democratic governance. In this view: public encounters: nurtering personal relationships and constructive communication. Equally empowered.<br /> <br /> No recent study uses the concept of public encounters.<br /> <br /> The understandings of public encounters seems to be locked in individualist ontology in which people are seen as separate beings and ‘public professionals’ and ‘citizens’ form fixed social positions (Stout &amp; Staton, 2011)<br /> <br /> Alternative: relational ontology: people are intrinsically connected in ongoing interactional processes in wchich they constantly and inescapably ‘interweave’ into something different by the very process of meeting (Follet, 1919, 1924).<br /> <br /> This renders it futile to look at an encounter in terms of “I” and “you”; <br /> <br /> it is the “I-Thou” (Buber, 1970), encounter (Anderson et. Al., 2004).<br /> <br /> Relational approach: “what public professionals and citizens are able to do is the product of the quality of the ongoing interactional process through which they encounter each other” (Stout &amp; Staton, 2011)<br /> <br /> Particular qualitative process:”…..with the particular texture of contextual interaction or contact and a kind of mutual learning through activity and interaction that such contact provides…which exists as a relational  possiblilty in concrete settings (Campbell Rawlings &amp; Catlaw, 2011, P. 51)<br /> <br /> From: Bartels, K. P. R. (2012). Communicative capacity: How public encounters affect the quality of participatory democracy. Glasgow: University of Glasgow http://theses.gla.ac.uk/3517/1/2012bartelsphd.pdf<br /> <br /> {{Cite|resource=File:Samenvatting_Bartels_Public_Encounter.pdf|name=Abstract|dialog=process-file-dialog}} (public encounter, democracy, participatory democracy, communicative capacity, process) <br /> <br /> === Spaces of encounter ===<br /> {{InfKrt Concept<br /> |Context=ZHDSM context<br /> |prefLabel=The Encounter<br /> |definition=Description of literature on the encounter<br /> |inScheme=ZHDSM scheme<br /> |related=ZHDSM Gill Valentine,<br /> }}</div>

KimBoes https://gofreshwiki.nl/wiki/index.php?title=Bestand:Samenvatting_Bartels_Public_Encounter.pdf&diff=50859 2018-01-19T14:26:53Z

<p>KimBoes: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Resource Light config}}<br /> {{Resource Description<br /> |file name=Samenvatting Bartels Public Encounter.pdf<br /> |created in page=ZHDSM The encounter<br /> |title=Samenvatting Bartels Public Encounter<br /> |creator=Petra de Braal<br /> |date=2018-01-19<br /> |subject=Samenvatting, Bartels, Public encounter<br /> }}</div>

KimBoes https://gofreshwiki.nl/wiki/index.php?title=Bestand:Samenvatting_Bartels_Public_Encounter.pdf&diff=50858 2018-01-19T14:26:49Z

<p>KimBoes: </p> <hr /> <div></div>

KimBoes https://gofreshwiki.nl/wiki/index.php?title=ZHDSM_The_encounter&diff=50857 2018-01-19T14:23:58Z

<p>KimBoes: </p> <hr /> <div>=== Authors on the encounter ===<br /> * Gill Valentine<br /> ** Living with difference: reflection on geographies of encounter (2008) <br /> ** Biographical narratives of encounter: The significance of mobility and emplacement in shaping attitudes towards difference (2014) <br /> ** Living with difference: proximity and encounter in urban life (2013) <br /> * Ash Amin (2012) <br /> * Gordon W. Allport (1954) The nature of prejudice <br /> * Gibson-Graham (2004) <br /> * Mandy de Wilde (2013) <br /> * Helen F. Wilson - Human Geography department Manchester Uni <br /> ** On geography and encounter: Bodies, borders and difference (2016) <br /> * Nick Schuermans - Department of Geography Vrije universiteit Brussel. Heeft ook papers met Stijn geschreven <br /> Kritisch kijken naar wat geschreven is en hoe wij dat kunnen plaatsen in onze praktijken. <br /> <br /> Wat is the encounter --&gt; Interactie. Effectief kijken naar de interventie + the encounter <br /> <br /> ==== Keywords ====<br /> Geographies of encounter; Geography of encounter; Encounter; Contact hypothesis; <br /> <br /> === Definition &amp; Concepts ===<br /> <br /> ==== The encounter ====<br /> verb (used with object)<br /> # to come upon or meet with, especially unexpectedly <br /> # to meet with or contend against (difficulties, opposition, etc.)<br /> # to meet (a person, military force, etc.) in conflict <br /> verb (used without object) <br /> # to meet, especially unexpectedly or in conflict <br /> noun<br /> # a meeting with a person or thing, especially a casual, unexpected, or brief meeting<br /> # a meeting of persons or groups that are in conflict or opposition: combat: battle <br /> Psychology<br /> # a meeting of two or more people, as the members of an encounter group or a number of married couples (marriage encounter) conducted to promote direct emotional confrontation among the participants, especially as a form of therapy (encounter therapy) <br /> <br /> ==== Equal-Status Contact ====<br /> An '''equal'''-'''status contact''' is a person or group who has a similar background, history, social role, and education. This is a concept of the '''contact''' hypothesis which is a theory regarding how best to improve relations between groups that display hostility towards each other.<br /> <br /> ==== The Contact Hypothesis ====<br /> <br /> === The Encounter ===<br /> * &quot;I begin by critiquing some of the work celebrating urban encounters through using empirical examples of where contact with difference leaves attitudes and values unmoved, and even hardened, before going on to consider debates about '''what kind of encounters produces what might be termed 'meaningful contact''''. By this I mean contact that actually changes values and translates beyond the specifics of the individual moment into a more general positieve respect for - rather than merely tolerance of - others. In doing so, I identify a paradoxical gap that emerges in geographies of encounter between values and practices.&quot; (Valentine, 2008, p.325). <br /> Argument for intervening with the encounter, setting up the encounter <br /> * &quot;Holland et al., 2007 found that, although their research sites were frequented by a range of different groups, this did not necessarily mean that there was any contact between the diverse inhabitants. Rather, their observation suggested that while different groups coexisted and even observed each other, none the less there was little actual mixing between different users who self-segregated within particular spaces carving out their own territory....... Likewise, Ash Amin (2002) has observed that city streets are spaces of transit that produce little actual connection or exchange between strangers. '''A process exacerbated by the emergence of a mobile phone culture''', which Deborah Cameron (2000) has observed, '''contributes to incivility in public space as individuals move in and through locations while locked in the private worlds of their conversations with remote others.'''&quot; (Valentine, 2008, p.326). <br /> Due to self-segragation in for example educational arrangements, places of worship, social and cultural networks, many communities operate on the basis of a series of parallel lives. Lives often do not seem to touch at any point, let alone overlap and promote and meaningful interchange (Valentine, 2008, p.326). <br /> <br /> Ash Amin (2002) argues for 'micro-publics of everyday social contact and encounter'. These are events and sites where people from different backgrounds are brought together on purpose. While the encounter often refers to unexpected, none planned, 'meetings' or 'contact', Ash Amin (2002) proposes a planned and organised meeting. <br /> <br /> === Types of encounter ===<br /> '''public encounter'''<br /> <br /> Start: Charles Goodsell (The Public Encounter: Where State and Citizen meet, 1981).<br /> <br /> Signaled: the pervasive influence of encounters with public professionals on the daily lives of citizens. <br /> <br /> Traditionally: Max Weber, main point of reference: regulated by formal responsabilities and moral obligations (Weber, 1922). <br /> <br /> Initially: studied as / focus on consequences of bureaucratization (field of organization studies. More recently: digital encounters. Antroplogy and political science: bureaucratization and corruption (Miller eta al., 2001).<br /> <br /> Alternative models: attacking the traditional model of bureaucracy. Not debate on public encounters per se.<br /> <br /> Lipsky (1980) study on street level democracy concrete situations and problems, coping mechanisms, became hallmark of many empirical analyses -&gt; ongoring debate on 'discretion'. First problematic (democratic control). But positive view (creative, deliberative and informed judgement (Wagenaar 2004) -&gt; inspired analyses of the narratives of front line professionals -&gt; public encounters not a mere matter of service delivery but vital element of democratic governance. In this view: public encounters: nurtering personal relationships and constructive communication. Equally empowered.<br /> <br /> No recent study uses the concept of public encounters.<br /> <br /> The understandings of public encounters seems to be locked in individualist ontology in which people are seen as separate beings and ‘public professionals’ and ‘citizens’ form fixed social positions (Stout &amp; Staton, 2011)<br /> <br /> Alternative: relational ontology: people are intrinsically connected in ongoing interactional processes in wchich they constantly and inescapably ‘interweave’ into something different by the very process of meeting (Follet, 1919, 1924).<br /> <br /> This renders it futile to look at an encounter in terms of “I” and “you”; <br /> <br /> it is the “I-Thou” (Buber, 1970), encounter (Anderson et. Al., 2004).<br /> <br /> Relational approach: “what public professionals and citizens are able to do is the product of the quality of the ongoing interactional process through which they encounter each other” (Stout &amp; Staton, 2011)<br /> <br /> Particular qualitative process:”…..with the particular texture of contextual interaction or contact and a kind of mutual learning through activity and interaction that such contact provides…which exists as a relational  possiblilty in concrete settings (Campbell Rawlings &amp; Catlaw, 2011, P. 51)<br /> <br /> From: Bartels, K. P. R. (2012). Communicative capacity: How public encounters affect the quality of participatory democracy. Glasgow: University of Glasgow http://theses.gla.ac.uk/3517/1/2012bartelsphd.pdf<br /> <br /> {{Cite|resource=File:Samenvatting_Bartels_Public_Encounter.doc|name=Abstract|dialog=process-file-dialog}} (public encounter, democracy, participatory democracy, communicative capacity, process) <br /> <br /> === Spaces of encounter ===<br /> {{InfKrt Concept<br /> |Context=ZHDSM context<br /> |prefLabel=The Encounter<br /> |definition=Description of literature on the encounter<br /> |inScheme=ZHDSM scheme<br /> |related=ZHDSM Gill Valentine,<br /> }}</div>

KimBoes https://gofreshwiki.nl/wiki/index.php?title=Bestand:Samenvatting_Bartels_Public_Encounter.doc&diff=50856 2018-01-19T14:23:44Z

<p>KimBoes: Nieuwe pagina aangemaakt met '{{Resource Light config}} {{Resource Description |file name=Samenvatting Bartels Public Encounter.doc |created in page=ZHDSM The encounter |title=Samenvatting Barte...'</p> <hr /> <div>{{Resource Light config}}<br /> {{Resource Description<br /> |file name=Samenvatting Bartels Public Encounter.doc<br /> |created in page=ZHDSM The encounter<br /> |title=Samenvatting Bartels Public Encounter<br /> |creator=Petra de Braal<br /> |date=2018-01-19<br /> |subject=Samenvatting, Bartels, public encounter<br /> }}</div>

KimBoes https://gofreshwiki.nl/wiki/index.php?title=ZHDSM_The_encounter&diff=50850 2018-01-19T14:06:09Z

<p>KimBoes: </p> <hr /> <div>=== Authors on the encounter ===<br /> * Gill Valentine<br /> ** Living with difference: reflection on geographies of encounter (2008) <br /> ** Biographical narratives of encounter: The significance of mobility and emplacement in shaping attitudes towards difference (2014) <br /> ** Living with difference: proximity and encounter in urban life (2013) <br /> * Ash Amin (2012) <br /> * Gordon W. Allport (1954) The nature of prejudice <br /> * Gibson-Graham (2004) <br /> * Mandy de Wilde (2013) <br /> * Helen F. Wilson - Human Geography department Manchester Uni <br /> ** On geography and encounter: Bodies, borders and difference (2016) <br /> * Nick Schuermans - Department of Geography Vrije universiteit Brussel. Heeft ook papers met Stijn geschreven <br /> Kritisch kijken naar wat geschreven is en hoe wij dat kunnen plaatsen in onze praktijken. <br /> <br /> Wat is the encounter --&gt; Interactie. Effectief kijken naar de interventie + the encounter <br /> <br /> ==== Keywords ====<br /> Geographies of encounter; Geography of encounter; Encounter; Contact hypothesis; <br /> <br /> === Definition &amp; Concepts ===<br /> <br /> ==== The encounter ====<br /> verb (used with object)<br /> # to come upon or meet with, especially unexpectedly <br /> # to meet with or contend against (difficulties, opposition, etc.)<br /> # to meet (a person, military force, etc.) in conflict <br /> verb (used without object) <br /> # to meet, especially unexpectedly or in conflict <br /> noun<br /> # a meeting with a person or thing, especially a casual, unexpected, or brief meeting<br /> # a meeting of persons or groups that are in conflict or opposition: combat: battle <br /> Psychology<br /> # a meeting of two or more people, as the members of an encounter group or a number of married couples (marriage encounter) conducted to promote direct emotional confrontation among the participants, especially as a form of therapy (encounter therapy) <br /> <br /> ==== Equal-Status Contact ====<br /> An '''equal'''-'''status contact''' is a person or group who has a similar background, history, social role, and education. This is a concept of the '''contact''' hypothesis which is a theory regarding how best to improve relations between groups that display hostility towards each other.<br /> <br /> ==== The Contact Hypothesis ====<br /> <br /> === The Encounter ===<br /> * &quot;I begin by critiquing some of the work celebrating urban encounters through using empirical examples of where contact with difference leaves attitudes and values unmoved, and even hardened, before going on to consider debates about '''what kind of encounters produces what might be termed 'meaningful contact''''. By this I mean contact that actually changes values and translates beyond the specifics of the individual moment into a more general positieve respect for - rather than merely tolerance of - others. In doing so, I identify a paradoxical gap that emerges in geographies of encounter between values and practices.&quot; (Valentine, 2008, p.325). <br /> Argument for intervening with the encounter, setting up the encounter <br /> * &quot;Holland et al., 2007 found that, although their research sites were frequented by a range of different groups, this did not necessarily mean that there was any contact between the diverse inhabitants. Rather, their observation suggested that while different groups coexisted and even observed each other, none the less there was little actual mixing between different users who self-segregated within particular spaces carving out their own territory....... Likewise, Ash Amin (2002) has observed that city streets are spaces of transit that produce little actual connection or exchange between strangers. '''A process exacerbated by the emergence of a mobile phone culture''', which Deborah Cameron (2000) has observed, '''contributes to incivility in public space as individuals move in and through locations while locked in the private worlds of their conversations with remote others.'''&quot; (Valentine, 2008, p.326). <br /> Due to self-segragation in for example educational arrangements, places of worship, social and cultural networks, many communities operate on the basis of a series of parallel lives. Lives often do not seem to touch at any point, let alone overlap and promote and meaningful interchange (Valentine, 2008, p.326). <br /> <br /> Ash Amin (2002) argues for 'micro-publics of everyday social contact and encounter'. These are events and sites where people from different backgrounds are brought together on purpose. While the encounter often refers to unexpected, none planned, 'meetings' or 'contact', Ash Amin (2002) proposes a planned and organised meeting. <br /> <br /> === Types of encounter ===<br /> '''public encounter'''<br /> <br /> Start: Charles Goodsell (The Public Encounter: Where State and Citizen meet, 1981).<br /> <br /> Signaled: the pervasive influence of encounters with public professionals on the daily lives of citizens. <br /> <br /> Traditionally: Max Weber, main point of reference: regulated by formal responsabilities and moral obligations (Weber, 1922). <br /> <br /> Initially: studied as / focus on consequences of bureaucratization (field of organization studies. More recently: digital encounters. Antroplogy and political science: bureaucratization and corruption (Miller eta al., 2001).<br /> <br /> Alternative models: attacking the traditional model of bureaucracy. Not debate on public encounters per se.<br /> <br /> Lipsky (1980) study on street level democracy concrete situations and problems, coping mechanisms, became hallmark of many empirical analyses -&gt; ongoring debate on 'discretion'. First problematic (democratic control). But positive view (creative, deliberative and informed judgement (Wagenaar 2004) -&gt; inspired analyses of the narratives of front line professionals -&gt; public encounters not a mere matter of service delivery but vital element of democratic governance. In this view: public encounters: nurtering personal relationships and constructive communication. Equally empowered.<br /> <br /> No recent study uses the concept of public encounters.<br /> <br /> The understandings of public encounters seems to be locked in individualist ontology in which people are seen as separate beings and ‘public professionals’ and ‘citizens’ form fixed social positions (Stout &amp; Staton, 2011)<br /> <br /> Alternative: relational ontology: people are intrinsically connected in ongoing interactional processes in wchich they constantly and inescapably ‘interweave’ into something different by the very process of meeting (Follet, 1919, 1924).<br /> <br /> This renders it futile to look at an encounter in terms of “I” and “you”; <br /> <br /> it is the “I-Thou” (Buber, 1970), encounter (Anderson et. Al., 2004).<br /> <br /> Relational approach: “what public professionals and citizens are able to do is the product of the quality of the ongoing interactional process through which they encounter each other” (Stout &amp; Staton, 2011)<br /> <br /> Particular qualitative process:”…..with the particular texture of contextual interaction or contact and a kind of mutual learning through activity and interaction that such contact provides…which exists as a relational  possiblilty in concrete settings (Campbell Rawlings &amp; Catlaw, 2011, P. 51)<br /> <br /> From: Bartels, K. P. R. (2012). Communicative capacity: How public encounters affect the quality of participatory democracy. Glasgow: University of Glasgow http://theses.gla.ac.uk/3517/1/2012bartelsphd.pdf<br /> <br /> Abstract (public encounter, democracy, participatory democracy, communicative capacity, process) <br /> <br /> === Spaces of encounter ===<br /> {{InfKrt Concept<br /> |Context=ZHDSM context<br /> |prefLabel=The Encounter<br /> |definition=Description of literature on the encounter<br /> |inScheme=ZHDSM scheme<br /> |related=ZHDSM Gill Valentine,<br /> }}</div>

KimBoes https://gofreshwiki.nl/wiki/index.php?title=ZHDSM_The_encounter&diff=50626 2018-01-12T11:32:50Z

<p>KimBoes: </p> <hr /> <div>=== Authors on the encounter ===<br /> * Gill Valentine<br /> ** Living with difference: reflection on geographies of encounter (2008) <br /> ** Biographical narratives of encounter: The significance of mobility and emplacement in shaping attitudes towards difference (2014) <br /> ** Living with difference: proximity and encounter in urban life (2013) <br /> * Ash Amin (2012) <br /> * Gordon W. Allport (1954) The nature of prejudice <br /> * Gibson-Graham (2004) <br /> * Mandy de Wilde (2013) <br /> * Helen F. Wilson - Human Geography department Manchester Uni <br /> ** On geography and encounter: Bodies, borders and difference (2016) <br /> * Nick Schuermans - Department of Geography Vrije universiteit Brussel. Heeft ook papers met Stijn geschreven <br /> Kritisch kijken naar wat geschreven is en hoe wij dat kunnen plaatsen in onze praktijken. <br /> <br /> Wat is the encounter --&gt; Interactie. Effectief kijken naar de interventie + the encounter <br /> <br /> ==== Keywords ====<br /> Geographies of encounter; Geography of encounter; Encounter; Contact hypothesis; <br /> <br /> === Definition &amp; Concepts ===<br /> <br /> ==== The encounter ====<br /> verb (used with object)<br /> # to come upon or meet with, especially unexpectedly <br /> # to meet with or contend against (difficulties, opposition, etc.)<br /> # to meet (a person, military force, etc.) in conflict <br /> verb (used without object) <br /> # to meet, especially unexpectedly or in conflict <br /> noun<br /> # a meeting with a person or thing, especially a casual, unexpected, or brief meeting<br /> # a meeting of persons or groups that are in conflict or opposition: combat: battle <br /> Psychology<br /> # a meeting of two or more people, as the members of an encounter group or a number of married couples (marriage encounter) conducted to promote direct emotional confrontation among the participants, especially as a form of therapy (encounter therapy) <br /> <br /> ==== Equal-Status Contact ====<br /> An '''equal'''-'''status contact''' is a person or group who has a similar background, history, social role, and education. This is a concept of the '''contact''' hypothesis which is a theory regarding how best to improve relations between groups that display hostility towards each other.<br /> <br /> ==== The Contact Hypothesis ====<br /> <br /> === The Encounter ===<br /> * &quot;I begin by critiquing some of the work celebrating urban encounters through using empirical examples of where contact with difference leaves attitudes and values unmoved, and even hardened, before going on to consider debates about '''what kind of encounters produces what might be termed 'meaningful contact''''. By this I mean contact that actually changes values and translates beyond the specifics of the individual moment into a more general positieve respect for - rather than merely tolerance of - others. In doing so, I identify a paradoxical gap that emerges in geographies of encounter between values and practices.&quot; (Valentine, 2008, p.325). <br /> Argument for intervening with the encounter, setting up the encounter <br /> * &quot;Holland et al., 2007 found that, although their research sites were frequented by a range of different groups, this did not necessarily mean that there was any contact between the diverse inhabitants. Rather, their observation suggested that while different groups coexisted and even observed each other, none the less there was little actual mixing between different users who self-segregated within particular spaces carving out their own territory....... Likewise, Ash Amin (2002) has observed that city streets are spaces of transit that produce little actual connection or exchange between strangers. '''A process exacerbated by the emergence of a mobile phone culture''', which Deborah Cameron (2000) has observed, '''contributes to incivility in public space as individuals move in and through locations while locked in the private worlds of their conversations with remote others.'''&quot; (Valentine, 2008, p.326). <br /> Due to self-segragation in for example educational arrangements, places of worship, social and cultural networks, many communities operate on the basis of a series of parallel lives. Lives often do not seem to touch at any point, let alone overlap and promote and meaningful interchange (Valentine, 2008, p.326). <br /> <br /> Ash Amin (2002) argues for 'micro-publics of everyday social contact and encounter'. These are events and sites where people from different backgrounds are brought together on purpose. While the encounter often refers to unexpected, none planned, 'meetings' or 'contact', Ash Amin (2002) proposes a planned and organised meeting. <br /> <br /> === Types of encounter ===<br /> <br /> === Spaces of encounter ===<br /> {{InfKrt Concept<br /> |Context=ZHDSM context<br /> |prefLabel=The Encounter<br /> |definition=Description of literature on the encounter<br /> |inScheme=ZHDSM scheme<br /> |related=ZHDSM Gill Valentine,<br /> }}</div>

KimBoes https://gofreshwiki.nl/wiki/index.php?title=ZHDSM_The_encounter&diff=50625 2018-01-12T11:07:33Z

<p>KimBoes: </p> <hr /> <div>=== Authors on the encounter ===<br /> * Gill Valentine<br /> ** Living with difference: reflection on geographies of encounter (2008) <br /> ** Biographical narratives of encounter: The significance of mobility and emplacement in shaping attitudes towards difference (2014) <br /> ** Living with difference: proximity and encounter in urban life (2013) <br /> * Ash Amin (2012) <br /> * Gordon W. Allport (1954) The nature of prejudice <br /> * Gibson-Graham (2004) <br /> * Mandy de Wilde (2013) <br /> * Helen F. Wilson - Human Geography department Manchester Uni <br /> ** On geography and encounter: Bodies, borders and difference (2016) <br /> * Nick Schuermans - Department of Geography Vrije universiteit Brussel. Heeft ook papers met Stijn geschreven <br /> Kritisch kijken naar wat geschreven is en hoe wij dat kunnen plaatsen in onze praktijken. <br /> <br /> Wat is the encounter --&gt; Interactie. Effectief kijken naar de interventie + the encounter <br /> <br /> ==== Keywords ====<br /> Geographies of encounter; Geography of encounter; Encounter; Contact hypothesis; <br /> <br /> === Definition &amp; Concepts ===<br /> <br /> ==== The encounter ====<br /> verb (used with object)<br /> # to come upon or meet with, especially unexpectedly <br /> # to meet with or contend against (difficulties, opposition, etc.)<br /> # to meet (a person, military force, etc.) in conflict <br /> verb (used without object) <br /> # to meet, especially unexpectedly or in conflict <br /> noun<br /> # a meeting with a person or thing, especially a casual, unexpected, or brief meeting<br /> # a meeting of persons or groups that are in conflict or opposition: combat: battle <br /> Psychology<br /> # a meeting of two or more people, as the members of an encounter group or a number of married couples (marriage encounter) conducted to promote direct emotional confrontation among the participants, especially as a form of therapy (encounter therapy) <br /> <br /> ==== Equal-Status Contact ====<br /> An '''equal'''-'''status contact''' is a person or group who has a similar background, history, social role, and education. This is a concept of the '''contact''' hypothesis which is a theory regarding how best to improve relations between groups that display hostility towards each other.<br /> <br /> ==== The Contact Hypothesis ====<br /> <br /> === The Encounter ===<br /> * &quot;I begin by critiquing some of the work celebrating urban encounters through using empirical examples of where contact with difference leaves attitudes and values unmoved, and even hardened, before going on to consider debates about '''what kind of encounters produces what might be termed 'meaningful contact''''. By this I mean contact that actually changes values and translates beyond the specifics of the individual moment into a more general positieve respect for - rather than merely tolerance of - others. In doing so, I identify a paradoxical gap that emerges in geographies of encounter between values and practices.&quot; (Valentine, 2008, p.325). <br /> Argument for intervening with the encounter, setting up the encounter <br /> * &quot;Holland et al., 2007 found that, although their research sites were frequented by a range of different groups, this did not necessarily mean that there was any contact between the diverse inhabitants. Rather, their observation suggested that while different groups coexisted and even observed each other, none the less there was little actual mixing between different users who self-segregated within particular spaces carving out their own territory....... Likewise, Ash Amin (2002) has observed that city streets are spaces of transit that produce little actual connection or exchange between strangers. '''A process exacerbated by the emergence of a mobile phone culture''', which Deborah Cameron (2000) has observed, '''contributes to incivility in public space as individuals move in and through locations while locked in the private worlds of their conversations with remote others.'''&quot; (Valentine, 2008, p.326). <br /> Due to self-segragation in for example educational arrangements, places of worship, social and cultural networks, many communities operate on the basis of a series of parallel lives. Lives often do not seem to touch at any point, let alone overlap and promote and meaningful interchange (Valentine, 2008, p.326). <br /> <br /> === Types of encounter ===<br /> <br /> === Spaces of encounter ===<br /> {{InfKrt Concept<br /> |Context=ZHDSM context<br /> |prefLabel=The Encounter<br /> |definition=Description of literature on the encounter<br /> |inScheme=ZHDSM scheme<br /> |related=ZHDSM Gill Valentine,<br /> }}</div>

KimBoes https://gofreshwiki.nl/wiki/index.php?title=ZHDSM_The_encounter&diff=50624 2018-01-12T11:02:39Z

<p>KimBoes: </p> <hr /> <div>=== Authors on the encounter ===<br /> * Gill Valentine<br /> ** Living with difference: reflection on geographies of encounter (2008) <br /> ** Biographical narratives of encounter: The significance of mobility and emplacement in shaping attitudes towards difference (2014) <br /> ** Living with difference: proximity and encounter in urban life (2013) <br /> * Ash Amin (2012) <br /> * Gordon W. Allport (1954) The nature of prejudice <br /> * Gibson-Graham (2004) <br /> * Mandy de Wilde (2013) <br /> * Helen F. Wilson - Human Geography department Manchester Uni <br /> ** On geography and encounter: Bodies, borders and difference (2016) <br /> * Nick Schuermans - Department of Geography Vrije universiteit Brussel. Heeft ook papers met Stijn geschreven <br /> Kritisch kijken naar wat geschreven is en hoe wij dat kunnen plaatsen in onze praktijken. <br /> <br /> Wat is the encounter --&gt; Interactie. Effectief kijken naar de interventie + the encounter <br /> <br /> ==== Keywords ====<br /> Geographies of encounter; Geography of encounter; Encounter; Contact hypothesis; <br /> <br /> === Definition &amp; Concepts ===<br /> <br /> ==== The encounter ====<br /> verb (used with object)<br /> # to come upon or meet with, especially unexpectedly <br /> # to meet with or contend against (difficulties, opposition, etc.)<br /> # to meet (a person, military force, etc.) in conflict <br /> verb (used without object) <br /> # to meet, especially unexpectedly or in conflict <br /> noun<br /> # a meeting with a person or thing, especially a casual, unexpected, or brief meeting<br /> # a meeting of persons or groups that are in conflict or opposition: combat: battle <br /> Psychology<br /> # a meeting of two or more people, as the members of an encounter group or a number of married couples (marriage encounter) conducted to promote direct emotional confrontation among the participants, especially as a form of therapy (encounter therapy) <br /> <br /> ==== Equal-Status Contact ====<br /> An '''equal'''-'''status contact''' is a person or group who has a similar background, history, social role, and education. This is a concept of the '''contact''' hypothesis which is a theory regarding how best to improve relations between groups that display hostility towards each other.<br /> <br /> ==== The Contact Hypothesis ====<br /> <br /> === The Encounter ===<br /> * &quot;I begin by critiquing some of the work celebrating urban encounters through using empirical examples of where contact with difference leaves attitudes and values unmoved, and even hardened, before going on to consider debates about '''what kind of encounters produces what might be termed 'meaningful contact''''. By this I mean contact that actually changes values and translates beyond the specifics of the individual moment into a more general positieve respect for - rather than merely tolerance of - others. In doing so, I identify a paradoxical gap that emerges in geographies of encounter between values and practices.&quot; (Valentine, 2008, p.325). <br /> Argument for intervening with the encounter, setting up the encounter <br /> * &quot;Holland et al., 2007 found that, although their research sites were frequented by a range of different groups, this did not necessarily mean that there was any contact between the diverse inhabitants. Rather, their observation suggested that while different groups coexisted and even observed each other, none the less there was little actual mixing between different users who self-segregated within particular spaces carving out their own territory....... Likewise, Ash Amin (2002) has observed that city streets are spaces of transit that produce little actual connection or exchange between strangers. '''A process exacerbated by the emergence of a mobile phone culture''', which Deborah Cameron (2000) has observed, '''contributes to incivility in public space as individuals move in and through locations while locked in the private worlds of their conversations with remote others.'''&quot; (Valentine, 2008, p.326). <br /> <br /> === Types of encounter ===<br /> <br /> === Spaces of encounter ===<br /> {{InfKrt Concept<br /> |Context=ZHDSM context<br /> |prefLabel=The Encounter<br /> |definition=Description of literature on the encounter<br /> |inScheme=ZHDSM scheme<br /> |related=ZHDSM Gill Valentine,<br /> }}</div>

KimBoes https://gofreshwiki.nl/wiki/index.php?title=ZHDSM_The_encounter&diff=50623 2018-01-12T10:51:43Z

<p>KimBoes: </p> <hr /> <div>=== Authors on the encounter ===<br /> * Gill Valentine<br /> ** Living with difference: reflection on geographies of encounter (2008) <br /> ** Biographical narratives of encounter: The significance of mobility and emplacement in shaping attitudes towards difference (2014) <br /> ** Living with difference: proximity and encounter in urban life (2013) <br /> * Ash Amin (2012) <br /> * Gordon W. Allport (1954) The nature of prejudice <br /> * Gibson-Graham (2004) <br /> * Mandy de Wilde (2013) <br /> * Helen F. Wilson - Human Geography department Manchester Uni <br /> ** On geography and encounter: Bodies, borders and difference (2016) <br /> * Nick Schuermans - Department of Geography Vrije universiteit Brussel. Heeft ook papers met Stijn geschreven <br /> Kritisch kijken naar wat geschreven is en hoe wij dat kunnen plaatsen in onze praktijken. <br /> <br /> Wat is the encounter --&gt; Interactie. Effectief kijken naar de interventie + the encounter <br /> <br /> ==== Keywords ====<br /> Geographies of encounter; Geography of encounter; Encounter; Contact hypothesis; <br /> <br /> === Definition &amp; Concepts ===<br /> <br /> ==== The encounter ====<br /> verb (used with object)<br /> # to come upon or meet with, especially unexpectedly <br /> # to meet with or contend against (difficulties, opposition, etc.)<br /> # to meet (a person, military force, etc.) in conflict <br /> verb (used without object) <br /> # to meet, especially unexpectedly or in conflict <br /> noun<br /> # a meeting with a person or thing, especially a casual, unexpected, or brief meeting<br /> # a meeting of persons or groups that are in conflict or opposition: combat: battle <br /> Psychology<br /> # a meeting of two or more people, as the members of an encounter group or a number of married couples (marriage encounter) conducted to promote direct emotional confrontation among the participants, especially as a form of therapy (encounter therapy) <br /> <br /> ==== Equal-Status Contact ====<br /> An '''equal'''-'''status contact''' is a person or group who has a similar background, history, social role, and education. This is a concept of the '''contact''' hypothesis which is a theory regarding how best to improve relations between groups that display hostility towards each other.<br /> <br /> ==== The Contact Hypothesis ====<br /> <br /> === The Encounter ===<br /> &quot;I begin by critiquing some of the work celebrating urban encounters through using empirical examples of where contact with difference leaves attitudes and values unmoved, and even hardened, before going on to consider debates about '''what kind of encounters produces what might be termed 'meaningful contact''''. By this I mean contact that actually changes values and translates beyond the specifics of the individual moment into a more general positieve respect for - rather than merely tolerance of - others. In doing so, I identify a paradoxical gap that emerges in geographies of encounter between values and practices.&quot; (Valentine, 2008). <br /> <br /> === Types of encounter ===<br /> <br /> === Spaces of encounter ===<br /> {{InfKrt Concept<br /> |Context=ZHDSM context<br /> |prefLabel=The Encounter<br /> |definition=Description of literature on the encounter<br /> |inScheme=ZHDSM scheme<br /> |related=ZHDSM Gill Valentine,<br /> }}</div>

KimBoes https://gofreshwiki.nl/wiki/index.php?title=ZHDSM_The_encounter&diff=50621 2018-01-12T10:30:46Z

<p>KimBoes: </p> <hr /> <div>=== Authors on the encounter ===<br /> * Gill Valentine<br /> ** Living with difference: reflection on geographies of encounter (2008) <br /> ** Biographical narratives of encounter: The significance of mobility and emplacement in shaping attitudes towards difference (2014) <br /> ** Living with difference: proximity and encounter in urban life (2013) <br /> * Ash Amin (2012) <br /> * Gordon W. Allport (1954) The nature of prejudice <br /> * Gibson-Graham (2004) <br /> * Mandy de Wilde (2013) <br /> * Helen F. Wilson<br /> ** On geography and encounter: Bodies, borders and difference (2016) <br /> Kritisch kijken naar wat geschreven is en hoe wij dat kunnen plaatsen in onze praktijken. <br /> <br /> Wat is the encounter --&gt; Interactie. Effectief kijken naar de interventie + the encounter <br /> <br /> === Definition &amp; Concepts ===<br /> <br /> ==== The encounter ====<br /> verb (used with object)<br /> # to come upon or meet with, especially unexpectedly <br /> # to meet with or contend against (difficulties, opposition, etc.)<br /> # to meet (a person, military force, etc.) in conflict <br /> verb (used without object) <br /> # to meet, especially unexpectedly or in conflict <br /> noun<br /> # a meeting with a person or thing, especially a casual, unexpected, or brief meeting<br /> # a meeting of persons or groups that are in conflict or opposition: combat: battle <br /> Psychology<br /> # a meeting of two or more people, as the members of an encounter group or a number of married couples (marriage encounter) conducted to promote direct emotional confrontation among the participants, especially as a form of therapy (encounter therapy) <br /> <br /> ==== Equal-Status Contact ====<br /> An '''equal'''-'''status contact''' is a person or group who has a similar background, history, social role, and education. This is a concept of the '''contact''' hypothesis which is a theory regarding how best to improve relations between groups that display hostility towards each other.<br /> <br /> ==== The Contact Hypothesis ====<br /> <br /> === The Encounter ===<br /> &quot;I begin by critiquing some of the work celebrating urban encounters through using empirical examples of where contact with difference leaves attitudes and values unmoved, and even hardened, before going on to consider debates about '''what kind of encounters produces what might be termed 'meaningful contact''''. By this I mean contact that actually changes values and translates beyond the specifics of the individual moment into a more general positieve respect for - rather than merely tolerance of - others. In doing so, I identify a paradoxical gap that emerges in geographies of encounter between values and practices.&quot; (Valentine, 2008). <br /> <br /> === Types of encounter ===<br /> <br /> === Spaces of encounter ===<br /> {{InfKrt Concept<br /> |Context=ZHDSM context<br /> |prefLabel=The Encounter<br /> |definition=Description of literature on the encounter<br /> |inScheme=ZHDSM scheme<br /> |related=ZHDSM Gill Valentine,<br /> }}</div>

KimBoes https://gofreshwiki.nl/wiki/index.php?title=ZHDSM_The_encounter&diff=50619 2018-01-12T10:26:27Z

<p>KimBoes: </p> <hr /> <div>=== Authors on the encounter ===<br /> * Gill Valentine<br /> ** Living with difference: reflection on geographies of encounter (2008) <br /> ** Biographical narratives of encounter: The significance of mobility and emplacement in shaping attitudes towards difference (2014) <br /> ** Living with difference: proximity and encounter in urban life (2013) <br /> * Ash Amin (2012) <br /> * Gordon W. Allport (1954) The nature of prejudice <br /> * Gibson-Graham (2004) <br /> * Mandy de Wilde (2013) <br /> Kritisch kijken naar wat geschreven is en hoe wij dat kunnen plaatsen in onze praktijken. <br /> <br /> Wat is the encounter --&gt; Interactie. Effectief kijken naar de interventie + the encounter <br /> <br /> === Definition &amp; Concepts ===<br /> <br /> ==== The encounter ====<br /> verb (used with object)<br /> # to come upon or meet with, especially unexpectedly <br /> # to meet with or contend against (difficulties, opposition, etc.)<br /> # to meet (a person, military force, etc.) in conflict <br /> verb (used without object) <br /> # to meet, especially unexpectedly or in conflict <br /> noun<br /> # a meeting with a person or thing, especially a casual, unexpected, or brief meeting<br /> # a meeting of persons or groups that are in conflict or opposition: combat: battle <br /> Psychology<br /> # a meeting of two or more people, as the members of an encounter group or a number of married couples (marriage encounter) conducted to promote direct emotional confrontation among the participants, especially as a form of therapy (encounter therapy) <br /> <br /> ==== Equal-Status Contact ====<br /> An '''equal'''-'''status contact''' is a person or group who has a similar background, history, social role, and education. This is a concept of the '''contact''' hypothesis which is a theory regarding how best to improve relations between groups that display hostility towards each other.<br /> <br /> ==== The Contact Hypothesis ====<br /> <br /> === The Encounter ===<br /> &quot;I begin by critiquing some of the work celebrating urban encounters through using empirical examples of where contact with difference leaves attitudes and values unmoved, and even hardened, before going on to consider debates about '''what kind of encounters produces what might be termed 'meaningful contact''''. By this I mean contact that actually changes values and translates beyond the specifics of the individual moment into a more general positieve respect for - rather than merely tolerance of - others. In doing so, I identify a paradoxical gap that emerges in geographies of encounter between values and practices.&quot; (Valentine, 2008). <br /> <br /> === Types of encounter ===<br /> <br /> === Spaces of encounter ===<br /> {{InfKrt Concept<br /> |Context=ZHDSM context<br /> |prefLabel=The Encounter<br /> |definition=Description of literature on the encounter<br /> |inScheme=ZHDSM scheme<br /> |related=ZHDSM Gill Valentine,<br /> }}</div>

KimBoes https://gofreshwiki.nl/wiki/index.php?title=ZHDSM_The_encounter&diff=50618 2018-01-12T10:22:38Z

<p>KimBoes: </p> <hr /> <div>=== Authors on the encounter ===<br /> * Gill Valentine<br /> ** Living with difference: reflection on geographies of encounter (2008) <br /> ** Biographical narratives of encounter: The significance of mobility and emplacement in shaping attitudes towards difference (2014) <br /> ** Living with difference: proximity and encounter in urban life (2013) <br /> * Ash Amin (2012) <br /> * Gordon W. Allport (1954) The nature of prejudice <br /> * Gibson-Graham (2004) <br /> * Mandy de Wilde (2013) <br /> Kritisch kijken naar wat geschreven is en hoe wij dat kunnen plaatsen in onze praktijken. <br /> <br /> Wat is the encounter --&gt; Interactie. Effectief kijken naar de interventie + the encounter <br /> <br /> === Definition ===<br /> verb (used with object)<br /> # to come upon or meet with, especially unexpectedly <br /> # to meet with or contend against (difficulties, opposition, etc.)<br /> # to meet (a person, military force, etc.) in conflict <br /> verb (used without object) <br /> # to meet, especially unexpectedly or in conflict <br /> noun<br /> # a meeting with a person or thing, especially a casual, unexpected, or brief meeting<br /> # a meeting of persons or groups that are in conflict or opposition: combat: battle <br /> Psychology<br /> # a meeting of two or more people, as the members of an encounter group or a number of married couples (marriage encounter) conducted to promote direct emotional confrontation among the participants, especially as a form of therapy (encounter therapy) <br /> <br /> === The Encounter ===<br /> &quot;I begin by critiquing some of the work celebrating urban encounters through using empirical examples of where contact with difference leaves attitudes and values unmoved, and even hardened, before going on to consider debates about '''what kind of encounters produces what might be termed 'meaningful contact''''. By this I mean contact that actually changes values and translates beyond the specifics of the individual moment into a more general positieve respect for - rather than merely tolerance of - others. In doing so, I identify a paradoxical gap that emerges in geographies of encounter between values and practices.&quot; (Valentine, 2008). <br /> <br /> === Types of encounter ===<br /> <br /> === Spaces of encounter ===<br /> {{InfKrt Concept<br /> |Context=ZHDSM context<br /> |prefLabel=The Encounter<br /> |definition=Description of literature on the encounter<br /> |inScheme=ZHDSM scheme<br /> |related=ZHDSM Gill Valentine,<br /> }}</div>

KimBoes https://gofreshwiki.nl/wiki/index.php?title=ZHDSM_The_encounter&diff=50612 2018-01-11T15:57:36Z

<p>KimBoes: </p> <hr /> <div>=== Authors on the encounter ===<br /> * Gill Valentine<br /> ** Living with difference: reflection on geographies of encounter (2008) <br /> ** Biographical narratives of encounter: The significance of mobility and emplacement in shaping attitudes towards difference (2014) <br /> ** Living with difference: proximity and encounter in urban life (2013) <br /> * Ash Amin (2012) <br /> * Gordon W. Allport (1954) The nature of prejudice <br /> * Gibson-Graham (2004) <br /> * Mandy de Wilde (2013) <br /> Kritisch kijken naar wat geschreven is en hoe wij dat kunnen plaatsen in onze praktijken. <br /> <br /> Wat is the encounter --&gt; Interactie. Effectief kijken naar de interventie + the encounter <br /> <br /> === Definition ===<br /> verb (used with object)<br /> # to come upon or meet with, especially unexpectedly <br /> # to meet with or contend against (difficulties, opposition, etc.)<br /> # to meet (a person, military force, etc.) in conflict <br /> verb (used without object) <br /> # to meet, especially unexpectedly or in conflict <br /> noun<br /> # a meeting with a person or thing, especially a casual, unexpected, or brief meeting<br /> # a meeting of persons or groups that are in conflict or opposition: combat: battle <br /> Psychology<br /> # a meeting of two or more people, as the members of an encounter group or a number of married couples (marriage encounter) conducted to promote direct emotional confrontation among the participants, especially as a form of therapy (encounter therapy) <br /> <br /> === Types of encounter ===<br /> <br /> === Spaces of encounter ===<br /> {{InfKrt Concept<br /> |Context=ZHDSM context<br /> |prefLabel=The Encounter<br /> |definition=Description of literature on the encounter<br /> |inScheme=ZHDSM scheme<br /> |related=ZHDSM Gill Valentine,<br /> }}</div>

KimBoes https://gofreshwiki.nl/wiki/index.php?title=ZHDSM_The_encounter&diff=50611 2018-01-11T15:46:23Z

<p>KimBoes: </p> <hr /> <div>=== Authors on the encounter ===<br /> * Gill Valentine<br /> ** Living with difference: reflection on geographies of encounter (2008) <br /> ** Biographical narratives of encounter: The significance of mobility and emplacement in shaping attitudes towards difference (2014) <br /> ** Living with difference: proximity and encounter in urban life (2013) <br /> * Ash Amin (2012) <br /> * Gordon W. Allport (1954) The nature of prejudice <br /> * Gibson-Graham (2004) <br /> * Mandy de Wilde (2013) <br /> Kritisch kijken naar wat geschreven is en hoe wij dat kunnen plaatsen in onze praktijken. <br /> <br /> Wat is the encounter --&gt; Interactie. Effectief kijken naar de interventie + the encounter <br /> <br /> === Types of encounter ===<br /> <br /> === Spaces of encounter ===<br /> {{InfKrt Concept<br /> |Context=ZHDSM context<br /> |prefLabel=The Encounter<br /> |definition=Description of literature on the encounter<br /> |inScheme=ZHDSM scheme<br /> |related=ZHDSM Gill Valentine,<br /> }}</div>

KimBoes https://gofreshwiki.nl/wiki/index.php?title=ZHDSM_The_encounter&diff=50610 2018-01-11T15:32:32Z

<p>KimBoes: </p> <hr /> <div>=== Authors on the encounter ===<br /> * Gill Valentine (2008) <br /> * Ash Amin (2012) <br /> * Gordon W. Allport (1954) The nature of prejudice <br /> * Gibson-Graham (2004) <br /> * Mandy de Wilde (2013) <br /> Kritisch kijken naar wat geschreven is en hoe wij dat kunnen plaatsen in onze praktijken. <br /> <br /> Wat is the encounter --&gt; Interactie. Effectief kijken naar de interventie + the encounter <br /> <br /> === Types of encounter ===<br /> <br /> === Spaces of encounter ===<br /> {{InfKrt Concept<br /> |Context=ZHDSM context<br /> |prefLabel=The Encounter<br /> |definition=Description of literature on the encounter<br /> |inScheme=ZHDSM scheme<br /> |related=ZHDSM Gill Valentine,<br /> }}</div>

KimBoes https://gofreshwiki.nl/wiki/index.php?title=PR_00144&diff=50609 2018-01-11T15:27:31Z

<p>KimBoes: </p> <hr /> <div>== Keywords to describe our research: ==<br /> * Cross-disciplinary approach to study social innovation<br /> <br /> == Abstracts ==<br /> Identify the purpose (motivation)<br /> * Why did you decide to do this study or project?<br /> * How did you conduct your research?<br /> * Why is this research and your findings important?<br /> * Why should someone read your entire essay?<br /> * This section should include the importance of your work, the difficulty of the area, and the impact it might have if successful.<br /> Explain the problem at hand (problem statement)<br /> * What problem is your research trying to better understand or solve?<br /> * What is the scope of your study - a general problem, or something specific?<br /> * What is your main claim or argument?<br /> Describe the method (approach)<br /> <br /> Give your conclusion<br /> * What are the implications of your work?<br /> * Are your results general or very specific?<br /> <br /> Outline --&gt; Introduction - Body - Conclusion. Two paragraphs up to one page of text. ~ 300 words. <br /> <br /> === Paper 1 - Social innovation and the role of the encounter  ===<br /> The social innovation process, as a method and a practise, is dynamic and includes a plethora of different actors. It derives from bringing together these different actors that usually do not maintain relationships or only in direct conflict. This paper aims at elucidating the level of the individual in socially innovative actions. It investigates how the relationships between different actors are (re)organised by drawing on the concept of '''the encounter''' frequently used in the human and social geography literature. Careful consideration is asked for the types of encounters sought for and avoided by individuals.    <br /> <br /> Social innovation works towards social change through social actions and conscious awareness. Mutual learning plays an important role in this. The role of '''the narrative''' has often come to the forefront implicating its research significance as a method through narrative analyses for interpreting human meaning and experience. Yet, the role of the narrative in working practises in mutual learning, mobilising action, and bringing about change has received little to no attention in the public administration discipline.    <br /> <br /> To explore the role of the encounter and the narrative in the social innovation process this study draws on a combination of qualitative data. Process documents from different projects are used to determine explicit points of encounter. In-depth interviews and a focus group enhance this data by elucidating inexplicit points of encounter and the role of the narrative within this. <br /> <br /> Against the background of decentralisation and the growing importance of investing in a public meeting culture, understanding the role of the encounter in socially innovative actions could support public administrators in facilitating alternative structures for societal change. Introducing the narrative, and hence ethnography in innovation, as a practise could provide policy makers an additional instrument for mutual learning and thus to gain a qualitative insight of the relationships between people and the topics of importance to enhance quality of life from a policy perspective.    <br /> * Borzaga, C., &amp; Bodini, R. (2012). What to make of social innovation? Towards a framework for policy development. ''Euricse Working Paper, N.036''(12)    <br /> * Grimm, R., Fox, C., Baines, S., &amp; Albertson, K. (2013). Social innovation, an answer to contemporary societal challenges? Locating the concept in theory and practice. ''Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research, 26''(4), 436-455.    <br /> * Moulaert, F., MacCallum, D., Mehmood, A., &amp; Hamdouch, A. (2013). ''The international handbook on social innovation: Collective action, social learning and transdisciplinary research''. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.    <br /> * Valentine, G. (2008). Living with difference: reflections on geographies of encounter. ''Progress in Human Geography, 32''(3), 323-337. <br /> <br /> === Paper 2 - Introducing the concept of place in socially innovative actions ===<br /> As the position of the nation state has weakened with decentralisation as result, local socially innovative actions have come to the attention of a plethora of actors. As a means to an end and an end in itself, social innovation has increasingly gained the interest of academics, practitioners and policy makers alike. Much has been said about the definition of social innovation and also the outcomes have been discussed at large. The process dimension of socially innovative actions is less explored. Especially the micro level with the individual as a central point of focus has gained little to no attention in the current discussion.    <br /> <br /> Consequently, this study focusses on what is happening on a micro level during the process of social innovation. More specifically, this first paper enhances the discussion by introducing the concept of '''place.''' Decentralisation has enhanced the position of place in organising society. As a location with a purpose it is perceived as something people take shared responsibility of. It presupposes a position of equivalence and pluralism. Place is where the development of new, or the transformation of, social relations between individuals takes place, being at the centre of socially innovative actions.    <br /> <br /> In order to explore the concept of place in the process of social innovation, this study takes on a cross-disciplinary approach and draws on the human and social geography literature. Instead of looking at shared norms and values and following a pre-given set, it focusses on altering the meaning of what it is to be social in the process. <br /> <br /> It draws on in-depth interviews with individuals involved in the different social innovation processes. Especially the project of the Zeeuwse Huiskamer is used as the case for this study. De Zeeuwse Huiskamer is a project that aims at bringing people together. Living longer at home independently in a pleasant way is of interest to a plethora of people. Questions such as “What is going well and what can be improved? Are there gaps between supply and demand, how does cooperation and contemporary society support living longer at home independently?” are explored in these projects. The aim is to jointly formulate solutions to questions around well-being, living and care. <br /> <br /> The results are relevant for researchers, practitioners and policy makers interested in the greater picture of social innovation.    <br /> * Amin, A. (2008). Collective culture and urban public space. ''City, 12''(1), 5-24. <br /> * Massey, D. (2004). Geography of responsibility. ''Geografiska Annaler, 86''(1), 5-18. <br /> * Moulaert, F., MacCallum, D., Mehmood, A., &amp; Hamdouch, A. (2013). ''The international handbook on social innovation: Collective action, social learning and transdisciplinary research''. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.    <br /> === Paper 3 - Ethics of care: Means to an end or end in itself? ===<br /> <br /> The previous two papers explored the role of place and encounter in the social innovation process. Social dynamics for the development of new or existing relationships between individuals is at the core of social innovation. The development of the capacity of collective action is what aimed for. Still, these social means are often solely perceived as a side effect of the social innovation process. Nevertheless, within the encounter between people, social dynamics are an inevitable factor.     <br /> <br /> A concept which could meaningfully explain the social dynamics in collective action is the concept of '''care.''' Care is at times used as a synonym for solidarity and could be understood as connections that are made between individuals on the basis of natural predispositions. Apart from natural predisposition, moral principles are also influencing the development of relationships in socially innovative actions. Hence, the theory of an '''ethics of care,''' in which interpersonal relationships and benevolence are a virtue to moral actions, could meaningfully address the social dynamics in the social innovation process. In short, this paper focusses in particular on how individuals take care of each other. This leads to the question if an ethics of care is a means to an end, or an end in itself in social innovation.     <br /> <br /> In order to explore the role of an ethics of care in the social innovation process this study draws on in-depth interviews.  <br /> <br /> The results of this research are relevant for public administrators to better understand the role of ethics of care in micro practises. It will enhance the understanding of how the choices of individuals effects societal change.     <br /> * Amin, A. (2012). ''Land of strangers''. Cambridge: Polity. <br /> * Cajaiba-Santana, G. (2014). Social innovation: Moving the field forward. A conceptual framework. ''Technological Forecasting &amp; Social Change, 82'', 42-51. <br /> * Gibson-Graham, J. K. (2003). An ethics of the local. ''Rethinking Marxism, 15''(1), 49-74.  <br /> <br /> === Paper 4 - Politics of care for social innovation ===<br /> The involvement of civil society to bring about social change while also renovating democracy has gained importance in public administration. Transparency, legitimacy and democracy need to be guaranteed with specific governance mechanisms. Apart from bringing about cultural change amongst civil society, this also depends on a cultural change in public administration. Social innovation aims at eliminating the long lines set by rules and regulations by bypassing existing welfare state institutions. Local socially innovative actions tend to highlight the need for recognition and representation and could hence help to improve conventional welfare state politics. Still, a sense of togetherness and pluralism does not rest alone on the idea of recognition and community, or i.e. the commons.    <br /> <br /> Instead of looking at the code or the principles, the norms and the values, this paper focusses on the cultivation of the political person. In particular, the self-formation as an ethical subject involving practices of forming the ethical political subject. It puts emphasis on the attitude of a divers set of policy makers rather than looking at the administrative perspective. Which attitudes and practices could enable ethically sensitive, negotiated settlements between different groups and individuals in the social innovation process and the construction of the commons. It looks at what a '''politics of care''' could be and how local politics participate in ethics of care and building new communities and collaboration. <br /> <br /> In-depth interviews with policy makers are used as method to explore this research. Aldermen and civil servants of different municipalities in the Netherlands are the sample in particular.    <br /> <br /> The aim is to explore the '''anthropology of policy makers''' to enable a more affective and informal perspective for the political subject. More so, to explore how anthropology, as a means, could change attitudes and enhance determination in mobilising action and leading change in an organisational setting. The paper looks at places where the commons exercise their responsibility in order to provide policy makers a closer look into micro political opportunities. Hence, the results are relevant for public administration and policy makers in particular.    <br /> * Grimm, R., Fox, C., Baines, S., &amp; Albertson, K. (2013). Social innovation, an answer to contemporary societal challenges? Locating the concept in theory and practice. ''Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research, 26''(4), 436-455. <br /> * Pinxten, H., &amp; Verstraete, G. (1998). ''Cultuur en Macht. Over identiteit en conflict in een multiculturele wereld''. Antwerpen: Uitgeverij Houtekiet.<br /> <br /> === Paper 5 - What happens when you become the best practise ===<br /> The up-scaling of local socially innovative actions is of paramount importance to a variety of actors included and excluded in the process. The so-called best practise should lead by example and practises should become transferrable to other cases and contexts. Yet, the local social innovation is oftentimes context-bound and running on bottom-up initiatives and practises. Transferring it to other places and context could therefore be problematic. In addition, gaining publicity as best-practise could work as an accelerator but may also act as a boundary for success.    <br /> <br /> Ulrum is a small village in the province of Groningen, The Netherlands. Due to population aging and dejuvination demographic changes are clearly felt and visible. In order to become a future-proof village, residents started working on changing their village in a place tailored to their needs. With a plethora of local, regional, national and international partners the residents have worked on finding a solution which fits the local needs of Ulrum. Instead of taking an external look, the project was set up from the inside, with the people who live and work in Ulrum. The official timeline of the project was three years, finishing in 2016. However, DEEL &amp; Ulrum continues till this day. <br /> <br /> In order to explore what happens when you become a best-practise, this research draws on a wide selection of data. All meeting minutes are used to develop a timeline of events. This information may also be used to analyse possible changes in the project due to these events. The documentary made of the Ulrum caused a lot of commotion in the village and the project. This documentary is also used in the analyses. In addition, interviews are conducted with various people involved in the project.    <br /> <br /> The aim of this study is to provide an insight of the dynamics taking place when a local project becomes a best-practise. Due to historical data, a retrospective view provides the opportunity to elucidate the process over time.     <br /> <br /> The results are of interest to people involved in social innovation projects. The greater field of social innovation and public administration in particular benefit from this research.     <br /> * Howaldt, J., Butzin, A., Domanski, D., &amp; Kaletka, C. (2014). ''Theoretical Approaches to Social Innovation – A Critical Literature Review.'' A deliverable of the project: “Social Innovation: Driving Force of Social Change” (SI-DRIVE). Dortmund: Sozialforschungsstelle.  <br /> * Moulaert, F., MacCallum, D., Mehmood, A., &amp; Hamdouch, A. (2013). ''The international handbook on social innovation: Collective action, social learning and transdisciplinary research''. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. <br /> <br /> === Paper 6 - Auto-Ethnography for social innovation ===<br /> The last paper focusses on the role of the intermediary, the facilitator, the professional in the process of social innovation. Concentrating on managing and creating innovative and productive contexts and to value each other’s strengths and avoid each other weaknesses is one of the tasks of the intermediary.<br /> <br /> The central supporting role of the professional and the public meeting culture is compelling in the social innovation process. It is of importance to explore this role if only to undermine the illusion of spontaneous care and direct solidarity. Place-bound and local forms of direct types of care are strongly interwoven with the indirect care of the welfare state through financing professionals and the meeting culture. The role of reflection and balancing power through perpetuating or imposing priorities from outside is what the professional needs to cope with. Within this the encounter with different kind of people is also challenge and furthermore a risk full process. Absorbing this risk is key to the process of socially innovative actions. Yet, for who is the professional absorbing this risk, the local community or political figures and bodies. Who is the object of care, of solidarity, is the question. Within the encounter the professional continuously takes on a different role, in which they themselves become a different person, a stranger. <br /> <br /> Through auto-ethnography this paper explores the field of tension between distance and involvement of alienation and appropriation, the self-evidence of the researcher and the informants in thinking, feeling and doing. It provides an insight of the dynamics in the case of Ulrum.<br /> <br /> The aim of this paper is presenting an alternative for making personal experiences relevant for people in similar positions and the pedagogy discipline in particular.<br /> * Ellis, Carolyn (2004). ''The ethnographic I: A methodological novel about autoethnography''. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press.<br /> * Ellis, Carolyn (2009). Telling tales on neighbors: Ethics in two voices. ''International Review of Qualitative Research'', ''2''(1), 3-28.<br /> {{Project config}}<br /> {{Project<br /> |Supercontext=PR SSM 00128<br /> |Project type=SSM, Standaard<br /> |Topcontext=PR SSM 00128<br /> |Name=Papers &amp; Articles<br /> |Start date=2017/07/06<br /> |Summary=Written papers and articles<br /> |Show summary=Ja<br /> |Show navigation tree=Ja<br /> |Create process and content pages=Nee<br /> |Show new page button=Nee<br /> |Show sub projects=Ja<br /> |Show participants=Nee<br /> |Show sources=Nee<br /> }}</div>

KimBoes https://gofreshwiki.nl/wiki/index.php?title=PR_00144&diff=50608 2018-01-11T15:27:11Z

<p>KimBoes: </p> <hr /> <div>== Keywords to describe our research: ==<br /> * Cross-disciplinary approach to study social innovation<br /> <br /> == Abstracts ==<br /> Identify the purpose (motivation)<br /> * Why did you decide to do this study or project?<br /> * How did you conduct your research?<br /> * Why is this research and your findings important?<br /> * Why should someone read your entire essay?<br /> * This section should include the importance of your work, the difficulty of the area, and the impact it might have if successful.<br /> Explain the problem at hand (problem statement)<br /> * What problem is your research trying to better understand or solve?<br /> * What is the scope of your study - a general problem, or something specific?<br /> * What is your main claim or argument?<br /> Describe the method (approach)<br /> <br /> Give your conclusion<br /> * What are the implications of your work?<br /> * Are your results general or very specific?<br /> <br /> Outline --&gt; Introduction - Body - Conclusion. Two paragraphs up to one page of text. ~ 300 words. <br /> <br /> === Paper 1 - Social innovation and the role of the encounter  ===<br /> The social innovation process, as a method and a practise, is dynamic and includes a plethora of different actors. It derives from bringing together these different actors that usually do not maintain relationships or only in direct conflict. This paper aims at elucidating the level of the individual in socially innovative actions. It investigates how the relationships between different actors are (re)organised by drawing on the concept of '''the encounter''' frequently used in the human and social geography literature. Careful consideration is asked for the types of encounters sought for and avoided by individuals.    <br /> <br /> Social innovation works towards social change through social actions and conscious awareness. Mutual learning plays an important role in this. The role of '''the narrative''' has often come to the forefront implicating its research significance as a method through narrative analyses for interpreting human meaning and experience. Yet, the role of the narrative in working practises in mutual learning, mobilising action, and bringing about change has received little to no attention in the public administration discipline.    <br /> <br /> To explore the role of the encounter and the narrative in the social innovation process this study draws on a combination of qualitative data. Process documents from different projects are used to determine explicit points of encounter. In-depth interviews and a focus group enhance this data by elucidating inexplicit points of encounter and the role of the narrative within this. <br /> <br /> Against the background of decentralisation and the growing importance of investing in a public meeting culture, understanding the role of the encounter in socially innovative actions could support public administrators in facilitating alternative structures for societal change. Introducing the narrative, and hence ethnography in innovation, as a practise could provide policy makers an additional instrument for mutual learning and thus to gain a qualitative insight of the relationships between people and the topics of importance to enhance quality of life from a policy perspective.    <br /> * Borzaga, C., &amp; Bodini, R. (2012). What to make of social innovation? Towards a framework for policy development. ''Euricse Working Paper, N.036''(12)    <br /> * Grimm, R., Fox, C., Baines, S., &amp; Albertson, K. (2013). Social innovation, an answer to contemporary societal challenges? Locating the concept in theory and practice. ''Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research, 26''(4), 436-455.    <br /> * Moulaert, F., MacCallum, D., Mehmood, A., &amp; Hamdouch, A. (2013). ''The international handbook on social innovation: Collective action, social learning and transdisciplinary research''. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.    <br /> * Valentine, G. (2008). Living with difference: reflections on geographies of encounter. ''Progress in Human Geography, 32''(3), 323-337. <br /> <br /> === Paper 2 - Introducing the concept of place in socially innovative actions ===<br /> As the position of the nation state has weakened with decentralisation as result, local socially innovative actions have come to the attention of a plethora of actors. As a means to an end and an end in itself, social innovation has increasingly gained the interest of academics, practitioners and policy makers alike. Much has been said about the definition of social innovation and also the outcomes have been discussed at large. The process dimension of socially innovative actions is less explored. Especially the micro level with the individual as a central point of focus has gained little to no attention in the current discussion.    <br /> <br /> Consequently, this study focusses on what is happening on a micro level during the process of social innovation. More specifically, this first paper enhances the discussion by introducing the concept of '''place.''' Decentralisation has enhanced the position of place in organising society. As a location with a purpose it is perceived as something people take shared responsibility of. It presupposes a position of equivalence and pluralism. Place is where the development of new, or the transformation of, social relations between individuals takes place, being at the centre of socially innovative actions.    <br /> <br /> In order to explore the concept of place in the process of social innovation, this study takes on a cross-disciplinary approach and draws on the human and social geography literature. Instead of looking at shared norms and values and following a pre-given set, it focusses on altering the meaning of what it is to be social in the process. <br /> <br /> It draws on in-depth interviews with individuals involved in the different social innovation processes. Especially the project of the Zeeuwse Huiskamer is used as the case for this study. De Zeeuwse Huiskamer is a project that aims at bringing people together. Living longer at home independently in a pleasant way is of interest to a plethora of people. Questions such as “What is going well and what can be improved? Are there gaps between supply and demand, how does cooperation and contemporary society support living longer at home independently?” are explored in these projects. The aim is to jointly formulate solutions to questions around well-being, living and care. <br /> <br /> The results are relevant for researchers, practitioners and policy makers interested in the greater picture of social innovation.    <br /> * Amin, A. (2008). Collective culture and urban public space. ''City, 12''(1), 5-24. <br /> * Massey, D. (2004). Geography of responsibility. ''Geografiska Annaler, 86''(1), 5-18. <br /> * Moulaert, F., MacCallum, D., Mehmood, A., &amp; Hamdouch, A. (2013). ''The international handbook on social innovation: Collective action, social learning and transdisciplinary research''. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.    <br /> === Paper 3 - Ethics of care: Means to an end or end in itself? ===<br /> <br /> The previous two papers explored the role of place and encounter in the social innovation process. Social dynamics for the development of new or existing relationships between individuals is at the core of social innovation. The development of the capacity of collective action is what aimed for. Still, these social means are often solely perceived as a side effect of the social innovation process. Nevertheless, within the encounter between people, social dynamics are an inevitable factor.     <br /> <br /> A concept which could meaningfully explain the social dynamics in collective action is the concept of '''care.''' Care is at times used as a synonym for solidarity and could be understood as connections that are made between individuals on the basis of natural predispositions. Apart from natural predisposition, moral principles are also influencing the development of relationships in socially innovative actions. Hence, the theory of an '''ethics of care,''' in which interpersonal relationships and benevolence are a virtue to moral actions, could meaningfully address the social dynamics in the social innovation process. In short, this paper focusses in particular on how individuals take care of each other. This leads to the question if an ethics of care is a means to an end, or an end in itself in social innovation.     <br /> <br /> In order to explore the role of an ethics of care in the social innovation process this study draws on in-depth interviews.  <br /> <br /> The results of this research are relevant for public administrators to better understand the role of ethics of care in micro practises. It will enhance the understanding of how the choices of individuals effects societal change.     <br /> * Amin, A. (2012). ''Land of strangers''. Cambridge: Polity. <br /> * Cajaiba-Santana, G. (2014). Social innovation: Moving the field forward. A conceptual framework. ''Technological Forecasting &amp; Social Change, 82'', 42-51. <br /> * Gibson-Graham, J. K. (2003). An ethics of the local. ''Rethinking Marxism, 15''(1), 49-74.  <br /> <br /> === Paper 4 - Politics of care for social innovation ===<br /> The involvement of civil society to bring about social change while also renovating democracy has gained importance in public administration. Transparency, legitimacy and democracy need to be guaranteed with specific governance mechanisms. Apart from bringing about cultural change amongst civil society, this also depends on a cultural change in public administration. Social innovation aims at eliminating the long lines set by rules and regulations by bypassing existing welfare state institutions. Local socially innovative actions tend to highlight the need for recognition and representation and could hence help to improve conventional welfare state politics. Still, a sense of togetherness and pluralism does not rest alone on the idea of recognition and community, or i.e. the commons.    <br /> <br /> Instead of looking at the code or the principles, the norms and the values, this paper focusses on the cultivation of the political person. In particular, the self-formation as an ethical subject involving practices of forming the ethical political subject. It puts emphasis on the attitude of a divers set of policy makers rather than looking at the administrative perspective. Which attitudes and practices could enable ethically sensitive, negotiated settlements between different groups and individuals in the social innovation process and the construction of the commons. It looks at what a '''politics of care''' could be and how local politics participate in ethics of care and building new communities and collaboration. <br /> <br /> In-depth interviews with policy makers are used as method to explore this research. Aldermen and civil servants of different municipalities in the Netherlands are the sample in particular.    <br /> <br /> The aim is to explore the '''anthropology of policy makers''' to enable a more affective and informal perspective for the political subject. More so, to explore how anthropology, as a means, could change attitudes and enhance determination in mobilising action and leading change in an organisational setting. The paper looks at places where the commons exercise their responsibility in order to provide policy makers a closer look into micro political opportunities. Hence, the results are relevant for public administration and policy makers in particular.    <br /> * Grimm, R., Fox, C., Baines, S., &amp; Albertson, K. (2013). Social innovation, an answer to contemporary societal challenges? Locating the concept in theory and practice. ''Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research, 26''(4), 436-455. <br /> * Pinxten, H., &amp; Verstraete, G. (1998). ''Cultuur en Macht. Over identiteit en conflict in een multiculturele wereld''. Antwerpen: Uitgeverij Houtekiet.<br /> <br /> === Paper 5 - What happens when you become the best practise ===<br /> The up-scaling of local socially innovative actions is of paramount importance to a variety of actors included and excluded in the process. The so-called best practise should lead by example and practises should become transferrable to other cases and contexts. Yet, the local social innovation is oftentimes context-bound and running on bottom-up initiatives and practises. Transferring it to other places and context could therefore be problematic. In addition, gaining publicity as best-practise could work as an accelerator but may also act as a boundary for success.    <br /> <br /> Ulrum is a small village in the province of Groningen, The Netherlands. Due to population aging and dejuvination demographic changes are clearly felt and visible. In order to become a future-proof village, residents started working on changing their village in a place tailored to their needs. With a plethora of local, regional, national and international partners the residents have worked on finding a solution which fits the local needs of Ulrum. Instead of taking an external look, the project was set up from the inside, with the people who live and work in Ulrum. The official timeline of the project was three years, finishing in 2016. However, DEEL &amp; Ulrum continues till this day. <br /> <br /> In order to explore what happens when you become a best-practise, this research draws on a wide selection of data. All meeting minutes are used to develop a timeline of events. This information may also be used to analyse possible changes in the project due to these events. The documentary made of the Ulrum caused a lot of commotion in the village and the project. This documentary is also used in the analyses. In addition, interviews are conducted with various people involved in the project.    <br /> <br /> The aim of this study is to provide an insight of the dynamics taking place when a local project becomes a best-practise. Due to historical data, a retrospective view provides the opportunity to elucidate the process over time.     <br /> <br /> The results are of interest to people involved in social innovation projects. The greater field of social innovation and public administration in particular benefit from this research.     <br /> * Howaldt, J., Butzin, A., Domanski, D., &amp; Kaletka, C. (2014). ''Theoretical Approaches to Social Innovation – A Critical Literature Review.'' A deliverable of the project: “Social Innovation: Driving Force of Social Change” (SI-DRIVE). Dortmund: Sozialforschungsstelle.  <br /> * Moulaert, F., MacCallum, D., Mehmood, A., &amp; Hamdouch, A. (2013). ''The international handbook on social innovation: Collective action, social learning and transdisciplinary research''. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. <br /> <br /> === Paper 6 - Auto-Ethnography for social innovation ===<br /> The last paper focusses on the role of the intermediary, the facilitator, the professional in the process of social innovation. Concentrating on managing and creating innovative and productive contexts and to value each other’s strengths and avoid each other weaknesses is one of the tasks of the intermediary.<br /> <br /> The central supporting role of the professional and the public meeting culture is compelling in the social innovation process. It is of importance to explore this role if only to undermine the illusion of spontaneous care and direct solidarity. Place-bound and local forms of direct types of care are strongly interwoven with the indirect care of the welfare state through financing professionals and the meeting culture. The role of reflection and balancing power through perpetuating or imposing priorities from outside is what the professional needs to cope with. Within this the encounter with different kind of people is also challenge and furthermore a risk full process. Absorbing this risk is key to the process of socially innovative actions. Yet, for who is the professional absorbing this risk, the local community or political figures and bodies. Who is the object of care, of solidarity, is the question. Within the encounter the professional continuously takes on a different role, in which they themselves become a different person, a stranger. <br /> <br /> Through auto-ethnography this paper explores the field of tension between distance and involvement of alienation and appropriation, the self-evidence of the researcher and the informants in thinking, feeling and doing. It provides an insight of the dynamics in the case of Ulrum.<br /> <br /> The aim of this paper is presenting an alternative for making personal experiences relevant for people in similar positions and the pedagogy discipline in particular.<br /> * Ellis, Carolyn (2004). ''The ethnographic I: A methodological novel about autoethnography''. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press.<br /> * Ellis, Carolyn (2009). Telling tales on neighbors: Ethics in two voices. ''International Review of Qualitative Research'', ''2''(1), 3-28.<br /> {{Project config}}<br /> {{Project<br /> |Supercontext=PR SSM 00128<br /> |Project type=SSM, Standaard<br /> |Topcontext=PR SSM 00128<br /> |Name=Papers &amp; Articles<br /> |Start date=2017/07/06<br /> |Summary=Written papers and articles<br /> |Show summary=Ja<br /> |Show navigation tree=Nee<br /> |Create process and content pages=Nee<br /> |Show new page button=Nee<br /> |Show sub projects=Ja<br /> |Show participants=Nee<br /> |Show sources=Nee<br /> }}</div>

KimBoes https://gofreshwiki.nl/wiki/index.php?title=PR_00176&diff=50607 2018-01-11T15:25:56Z

<p>KimBoes: </p> <hr /> <div><br /> {{Project config}}<br /> {{Project<br /> |Supercontext=PR 00144<br /> |Project type=SSM, Standaard<br /> |Topcontext=PR SSM 00128<br /> |Name=Paper 6<br /> |Start date=2018/10/01<br /> |Summary=Auto-ethnography for social innovation<br /> |Show summary=Ja<br /> |Show navigation tree=Nee<br /> |Create process and content pages=Nee<br /> |Show new page button=Nee<br /> |Show sub projects=Ja<br /> |Show participants=Nee<br /> |Show sources=Nee<br /> }}</div>

KimBoes https://gofreshwiki.nl/wiki/index.php?title=PR_00175&diff=50606 2018-01-11T15:25:21Z

<p>KimBoes: </p> <hr /> <div><br /> {{Project config}}<br /> {{Project<br /> |Supercontext=PR 00144<br /> |Project type=SSM, Standaard<br /> |Topcontext=PR SSM 00128<br /> |Name=Paper 5<br /> |Start date=2018/10/01<br /> |Summary=What happens when you become the best practise?<br /> |Show summary=Ja<br /> |Show navigation tree=Nee<br /> |Create process and content pages=Nee<br /> |Show new page button=Nee<br /> |Show sub projects=Ja<br /> |Show participants=Nee<br /> |Show sources=Nee<br /> }}</div>

KimBoes https://gofreshwiki.nl/wiki/index.php?title=PR_00155&diff=50605 2018-01-11T15:24:54Z

<p>KimBoes: </p> <hr /> <div><br /> {{Project config}}<br /> {{Project<br /> |Supercontext=PR 00144<br /> |Project type=SSM, Standaard<br /> |Topcontext=PR SSM 00128<br /> |Name=Paper 4<br /> |Start date=2018/10/01<br /> |Summary=Politics of care for social innovation<br /> |Show summary=Ja<br /> |Show navigation tree=Ja<br /> |Create process and content pages=Nee<br /> |Show new page button=Nee<br /> |Show sub projects=Ja<br /> |Show participants=Nee<br /> |Show sources=Nee<br /> }}</div>

KimBoes https://gofreshwiki.nl/wiki/index.php?title=PR_00147&diff=50604 2018-01-11T15:24:12Z

<p>KimBoes: </p> <hr /> <div><br /> {{Project config}}<br /> {{Project<br /> |Supercontext=PR 00144<br /> |Project type=SSM, Standaard<br /> |Topcontext=PR SSM 00128<br /> |Name=Paper 3<br /> |Start date=2018/10/01<br /> |Summary=Ethics of Care: Means to an end or end in itself?<br /> |Show summary=Ja<br /> |Show navigation tree=Ja<br /> |Create process and content pages=Nee<br /> |Show new page button=Nee<br /> |Show sub projects=Nee<br /> |Show participants=Nee<br /> |Show sources=Nee<br /> }}</div>

KimBoes https://gofreshwiki.nl/wiki/index.php?title=PR_SSM_00129&diff=50603 2018-01-11T15:23:25Z

<p>KimBoes: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Project SSM config}}<br /> {{Project<br /> |Supercontext=PR 00144<br /> |Project type=SSM, Standaard<br /> |Topcontext=PR SSM 00128<br /> |Name=Paper 1<br /> |Start date=2017/10/03<br /> |Summary=Social innovation and the role of the encounter<br /> |Show summary=Ja<br /> |Show navigation tree=Ja<br /> |Create process and content pages=Nee<br /> |Show new page button=Nee<br /> |Show sub projects=Nee<br /> |Show participants=Nee<br /> |Show sources=Nee<br /> }}</div>

KimBoes https://gofreshwiki.nl/wiki/index.php?title=PR_00146&diff=50602 2018-01-11T15:22:44Z

<p>KimBoes: </p> <hr /> <div><br /> {{Project config}}<br /> {{Project<br /> |Supercontext=PR 00144<br /> |Project type=SSM, Standaard<br /> |Topcontext=PR SSM 00128<br /> |Name=Paper 2<br /> |Start date=2018/10/01<br /> |Summary=Introducing the concept of place in socially innovative actions<br /> |Show summary=Ja<br /> |Show navigation tree=Ja<br /> |Create process and content pages=Nee<br /> |Show new page button=Nee<br /> |Show sub projects=Nee<br /> |Show participants=Nee<br /> |Show sources=Nee<br /> }}</div>

KimBoes https://gofreshwiki.nl/wiki/index.php?title=PR_00144&diff=50601 2018-01-11T15:21:05Z

<p>KimBoes: </p> <hr /> <div>== Keywords to describe our research: ==<br /> * Cross-disciplinary approach to study social innovation<br /> <br /> == Abstracts ==<br /> Identify the purpose (motivation)<br /> * Why did you decide to do this study or project?<br /> * How did you conduct your research?<br /> * Why is this research and your findings important?<br /> * Why should someone read your entire essay?<br /> * This section should include the importance of your work, the difficulty of the area, and the impact it might have if successful.<br /> Explain the problem at hand (problem statement)<br /> * What problem is your research trying to better understand or solve?<br /> * What is the scope of your study - a general problem, or something specific?<br /> * What is your main claim or argument?<br /> Describe the method (approach)<br /> <br /> Give your conclusion<br /> * What are the implications of your work?<br /> * Are your results general or very specific?<br /> <br /> Outline --&gt; Introduction - Body - Conclusion. Two paragraphs up to one page of text. ~ 300 words. <br /> <br /> === Paper 1 - Social innovation and the role of the encounter  ===<br /> The social innovation process, as a method and a practise, is dynamic and includes a plethora of different actors. It derives from bringing together these different actors that usually do not maintain relationships or only in direct conflict. This paper aims at elucidating the level of the individual in socially innovative actions. It investigates how the relationships between different actors are (re)organised by drawing on the concept of '''the encounter''' frequently used in the human and social geography literature. Careful consideration is asked for the types of encounters sought for and avoided by individuals.    <br /> <br /> Social innovation works towards social change through social actions and conscious awareness. Mutual learning plays an important role in this. The role of '''the narrative''' has often come to the forefront implicating its research significance as a method through narrative analyses for interpreting human meaning and experience. Yet, the role of the narrative in working practises in mutual learning, mobilising action, and bringing about change has received little to no attention in the public administration discipline.    <br /> <br /> To explore the role of the encounter and the narrative in the social innovation process this study draws on a combination of qualitative data. Process documents from different projects are used to determine explicit points of encounter. In-depth interviews and a focus group enhance this data by elucidating inexplicit points of encounter and the role of the narrative within this. <br /> <br /> Against the background of decentralisation and the growing importance of investing in a public meeting culture, understanding the role of the encounter in socially innovative actions could support public administrators in facilitating alternative structures for societal change. Introducing the narrative, and hence ethnography in innovation, as a practise could provide policy makers an additional instrument for mutual learning and thus to gain a qualitative insight of the relationships between people and the topics of importance to enhance quality of life from a policy perspective.    <br /> * Borzaga, C., &amp; Bodini, R. (2012). What to make of social innovation? Towards a framework for policy development. ''Euricse Working Paper, N.036''(12)    <br /> * Grimm, R., Fox, C., Baines, S., &amp; Albertson, K. (2013). Social innovation, an answer to contemporary societal challenges? Locating the concept in theory and practice. ''Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research, 26''(4), 436-455.    <br /> * Moulaert, F., MacCallum, D., Mehmood, A., &amp; Hamdouch, A. (2013). ''The international handbook on social innovation: Collective action, social learning and transdisciplinary research''. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.    <br /> * Valentine, G. (2008). Living with difference: reflections on geographies of encounter. ''Progress in Human Geography, 32''(3), 323-337. <br /> <br /> === Paper 2 - Introducing the concept of place in socially innovative actions ===<br /> As the position of the nation state has weakened with decentralisation as result, local socially innovative actions have come to the attention of a plethora of actors. As a means to an end and an end in itself, social innovation has increasingly gained the interest of academics, practitioners and policy makers alike. Much has been said about the definition of social innovation and also the outcomes have been discussed at large. The process dimension of socially innovative actions is less explored. Especially the micro level with the individual as a central point of focus has gained little to no attention in the current discussion.    <br /> <br /> Consequently, this study focusses on what is happening on a micro level during the process of social innovation. More specifically, this first paper enhances the discussion by introducing the concept of '''place.''' Decentralisation has enhanced the position of place in organising society. As a location with a purpose it is perceived as something people take shared responsibility of. It presupposes a position of equivalence and pluralism. Place is where the development of new, or the transformation of, social relations between individuals takes place, being at the centre of socially innovative actions.    <br /> <br /> In order to explore the concept of place in the process of social innovation, this study takes on a cross-disciplinary approach and draws on the human and social geography literature. Instead of looking at shared norms and values and following a pre-given set, it focusses on altering the meaning of what it is to be social in the process. <br /> <br /> It draws on in-depth interviews with individuals involved in the different social innovation processes. Especially the project of the Zeeuwse Huiskamer is used as the case for this study. De Zeeuwse Huiskamer is a project that aims at bringing people together. Living longer at home independently in a pleasant way is of interest to a plethora of people. Questions such as “What is going well and what can be improved? Are there gaps between supply and demand, how does cooperation and contemporary society support living longer at home independently?” are explored in these projects. The aim is to jointly formulate solutions to questions around well-being, living and care. <br /> <br /> The results are relevant for researchers, practitioners and policy makers interested in the greater picture of social innovation.    <br /> * Amin, A. (2008). Collective culture and urban public space. ''City, 12''(1), 5-24. <br /> * Massey, D. (2004). Geography of responsibility. ''Geografiska Annaler, 86''(1), 5-18. <br /> * Moulaert, F., MacCallum, D., Mehmood, A., &amp; Hamdouch, A. (2013). ''The international handbook on social innovation: Collective action, social learning and transdisciplinary research''. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.    <br /> === Paper 3 - Ethics of care: Means to an end or end in itself? ===<br /> <br /> The previous two papers explored the role of place and encounter in the social innovation process. Social dynamics for the development of new or existing relationships between individuals is at the core of social innovation. The development of the capacity of collective action is what aimed for. Still, these social means are often solely perceived as a side effect of the social innovation process. Nevertheless, within the encounter between people, social dynamics are an inevitable factor.     <br /> <br /> A concept which could meaningfully explain the social dynamics in collective action is the concept of '''care.''' Care is at times used as a synonym for solidarity and could be understood as connections that are made between individuals on the basis of natural predispositions. Apart from natural predisposition, moral principles are also influencing the development of relationships in socially innovative actions. Hence, the theory of an '''ethics of care,''' in which interpersonal relationships and benevolence are a virtue to moral actions, could meaningfully address the social dynamics in the social innovation process. In short, this paper focusses in particular on how individuals take care of each other. This leads to the question if an ethics of care is a means to an end, or an end in itself in social innovation.     <br /> <br /> In order to explore the role of an ethics of care in the social innovation process this study draws on in-depth interviews.  <br /> <br /> The results of this research are relevant for public administrators to better understand the role of ethics of care in micro practises. It will enhance the understanding of how the choices of individuals effects societal change.     <br /> * Amin, A. (2012). ''Land of strangers''. Cambridge: Polity. <br /> * Cajaiba-Santana, G. (2014). Social innovation: Moving the field forward. A conceptual framework. ''Technological Forecasting &amp; Social Change, 82'', 42-51. <br /> * Gibson-Graham, J. K. (2003). An ethics of the local. ''Rethinking Marxism, 15''(1), 49-74.  <br /> <br /> === Paper 4 - Politics of care for social innovation ===<br /> The involvement of civil society to bring about social change while also renovating democracy has gained importance in public administration. Transparency, legitimacy and democracy need to be guaranteed with specific governance mechanisms. Apart from bringing about cultural change amongst civil society, this also depends on a cultural change in public administration. Social innovation aims at eliminating the long lines set by rules and regulations by bypassing existing welfare state institutions. Local socially innovative actions tend to highlight the need for recognition and representation and could hence help to improve conventional welfare state politics. Still, a sense of togetherness and pluralism does not rest alone on the idea of recognition and community, or i.e. the commons.    <br /> <br /> Instead of looking at the code or the principles, the norms and the values, this paper focusses on the cultivation of the political person. In particular, the self-formation as an ethical subject involving practices of forming the ethical political subject. It puts emphasis on the attitude of a divers set of policy makers rather than looking at the administrative perspective. Which attitudes and practices could enable ethically sensitive, negotiated settlements between different groups and individuals in the social innovation process and the construction of the commons. It looks at what a '''politics of care''' could be and how local politics participate in ethics of care and building new communities and collaboration. <br /> <br /> In-depth interviews with policy makers are used as method to explore this research. Aldermen and civil servants of different municipalities in the Netherlands are the sample in particular.    <br /> <br /> The aim is to explore the '''anthropology of policy makers''' to enable a more affective and informal perspective for the political subject. More so, to explore how anthropology, as a means, could change attitudes and enhance determination in mobilising action and leading change in an organisational setting. The paper looks at places where the commons exercise their responsibility in order to provide policy makers a closer look into micro political opportunities. Hence, the results are relevant for public administration and policy makers in particular.    <br /> * Grimm, R., Fox, C., Baines, S., &amp; Albertson, K. (2013). Social innovation, an answer to contemporary societal challenges? Locating the concept in theory and practice. ''Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research, 26''(4), 436-455. <br /> * Pinxten, H., &amp; Verstraete, G. (1998). ''Cultuur en Macht. Over identiteit en conflict in een multiculturele wereld''. Antwerpen: Uitgeverij Houtekiet.<br /> <br /> === Paper 5 - What happens when you become the best practise ===<br /> The up-scaling of local socially innovative actions is of paramount importance to a variety of actors included and excluded in the process. The so-called best practise should lead by example and practises should become transferrable to other cases and contexts. Yet, the local social innovation is oftentimes context-bound and running on bottom-up initiatives and practises. Transferring it to other places and context could therefore be problematic. In addition, gaining publicity as best-practise could work as an accelerator but may also act as a boundary for success.    <br /> <br /> Ulrum is a small village in the province of Groningen, The Netherlands. Due to population aging and dejuvination demographic changes are clearly felt and visible. In order to become a future-proof village, residents started working on changing their village in a place tailored to their needs. With a plethora of local, regional, national and international partners the residents have worked on finding a solution which fits the local needs of Ulrum. Instead of taking an external look, the project was set up from the inside, with the people who live and work in Ulrum. The official timeline of the project was three years, finishing in 2016. However, DEEL &amp; Ulrum continues till this day. <br /> <br /> In order to explore what happens when you become a best-practise, this research draws on a wide selection of data. All meeting minutes are used to develop a timeline of events. This information may also be used to analyse possible changes in the project due to these events. The documentary made of the Ulrum caused a lot of commotion in the village and the project. This documentary is also used in the analyses. In addition, interviews are conducted with various people involved in the project.    <br /> <br /> The aim of this study is to provide an insight of the dynamics taking place when a local project becomes a best-practise. Due to historical data, a retrospective view provides the opportunity to elucidate the process over time.     <br /> <br /> The results are of interest to people involved in social innovation projects. The greater field of social innovation and public administration in particular benefit from this research.     <br /> * Howaldt, J., Butzin, A., Domanski, D., &amp; Kaletka, C. (2014). ''Theoretical Approaches to Social Innovation – A Critical Literature Review.'' A deliverable of the project: “Social Innovation: Driving Force of Social Change” (SI-DRIVE). Dortmund: Sozialforschungsstelle.  <br /> * Moulaert, F., MacCallum, D., Mehmood, A., &amp; Hamdouch, A. (2013). ''The international handbook on social innovation: Collective action, social learning and transdisciplinary research''. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. <br /> <br /> === Paper 6 - Auto-Ethnography for social innovation ===<br /> The last paper focusses on the role of the intermediary, the facilitator, the professional in the process of social innovation. Concentrating on managing and creating innovative and productive contexts and to value each other’s strengths and avoid each other weaknesses is one of the tasks of the intermediary.<br /> <br /> The central supporting role of the professional and the public meeting culture is compelling in the social innovation process. It is of importance to explore this role if only to undermine the illusion of spontaneous care and direct solidarity. Place-bound and local forms of direct types of care are strongly interwoven with the indirect care of the welfare state through financing professionals and the meeting culture. The role of reflection and balancing power through perpetuating or imposing priorities from outside is what the professional needs to cope with. Within this the encounter with different kind of people is also challenge and furthermore a risk full process. Absorbing this risk is key to the process of socially innovative actions. Yet, for who is the professional absorbing this risk, the local community or political figures and bodies. Who is the object of care, of solidarity, is the question. Within the encounter the professional continuously takes on a different role, in which they themselves become a different person, a stranger. <br /> <br /> Through auto-ethnography this paper explores the field of tension between distance and involvement of alienation and appropriation, the self-evidence of the researcher and the informants in thinking, feeling and doing. It provides an insight of the dynamics in the case of Ulrum.<br /> <br /> The aim of this paper is presenting an alternative for making personal experiences relevant for people in similar positions and the pedagogy discipline in particular.<br /> * Ellis, Carolyn (2004). ''The ethnographic I: A methodological novel about autoethnography''. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press.<br /> * Ellis, Carolyn (2009). Telling tales on neighbors: Ethics in two voices. ''International Review of Qualitative Research'', ''2''(1), 3-28.<br /> {{Project config}}<br /> {{Project<br /> |Supercontext=PR SSM 00128<br /> |Project type=SSM, Standaard<br /> |Topcontext=PR SSM 00128<br /> |Name=Papers &amp; Articles<br /> |Start date=2017/07/06<br /> |Summary=Written papers and articles<br /> |Show summary=Ja<br /> |Show navigation tree=Ja<br /> |Show sub projects=Ja<br /> |Show participants=Nee<br /> |Show sources=Nee<br /> }}</div>

KimBoes https://gofreshwiki.nl/wiki/index.php?title=PR_00144&diff=50600 2018-01-11T15:17:55Z

<p>KimBoes: </p> <hr /> <div>== Keywords to describe our research: ==<br /> * Cross-disciplinary approach to study social innovation<br /> <br /> == Abstracts ==<br /> Identify the purpose (motivation)<br /> * Why did you decide to do this study or project?<br /> * How did you conduct your research?<br /> * Why is this research and your findings important?<br /> * Why should someone read your entire essay?<br /> * This section should include the importance of your work, the difficulty of the area, and the impact it might have if successful.<br /> Explain the problem at hand (problem statement)<br /> * What problem is your research trying to better understand or solve?<br /> * What is the scope of your study - a general problem, or something specific?<br /> * What is your main claim or argument?<br /> Describe the method (approach)<br /> <br /> Give your conclusion<br /> * What are the implications of your work?<br /> * Are your results general or very specific?<br /> <br /> Outline --&gt; Introduction - Body - Conclusion. Two paragraphs up to one page of text. ~ 300 words. <br /> <br /> === Paper 1 - Introducing the concept of place in socially innovative actions  ===<br /> * De huidige discussie gaat vooral om de verschillende definities van SI (wat is de correcte definitie). Wel aangeven waar in het debat / welke traditie we ons bevinden (maximalistische / minimalistisch en transformative / radical opzoeken).<br /> ** Minimalist - Maximalist: &quot;A third type of radical innovation has been elaborated by Mangabeira Unger. He distinguishes between '''minimalist social innovations''' which give a human face to an otherwise unsupportable situation, and '''maximalist social innovations''' that aim at deep changes. ”<br /> ** Transformative - Radical <br /> * GAP: hoe het proces in zijn gang gaat is onvoldoende scherp. Zeker wat aan toe te voegen: microniveau. Een scherpere blik op SI.<br /> * Wat gebeurt er? Daar is niet veel naar gekeken.<br /> * Combinatie met Human and Social Geography<br /> * '''PLACE'''<br /> '''ABSTRACT'''<br /> <br /> As the position of the nation state has weakened with decentralisation as result, local socially innovative actions have come to the attention of a plethora of actors. As a means to an end and an end in itself, social innovation has increasingly gained the interest of academics, practitioners and policy makers alike. Much has been said about the definition of social innovation and also the outcomes have been discussed at large. The process dimension of socially innovative actions is less explored. Especially the micro level with the individual as a central point of focus has gained little to no attention in the current discussion. <br /> <br /> Consequently, this study focusses on what is happening on a micro level during the process of social innovation. More specifically, this first paper enhances the discussion by introducing the concept of '''place.''' Decentralisation has enhanced the position of place in organising society. As a location with a purpose it is perceived as something people take shared responsibility of. It presupposes a position of equivalence and pluralism. Place is where the development of new, or the transformation of, social relations between individuals takes place, being at the centre of socially innovative actions. <br /> <br /> In order to explore the concept of place in the process of social innovation, this study takes on a cross-disciplinary approach and draws on the human and social geography literature. Instead of looking at shared norms and values and following a pre-given set, it focusses on altering the meaning of what it is to be social in the process. The results are relevant for researchers, practitioners and policy makers interested in the greater picture of social innovation.<br /> <br /> ''Social innovation, as a means to an end and an end it itself, has increasingly gained the interest of academics, practisioners and policy makers alike. The discussion has largely focussed on the goals of social innovation as well as on finding common ground regarding the definition. Social innovation addresses local social needs and global societal challenges. It does so by using social means through the development of new, or the transformation of, social relations. These socially innovative actions are driven by different processes to enable groups to better satisfy their human needs and improve their living conditions.'' <br /> <br /> ''Instead of joining the greater discussion on the content, outcomes and definition of social innovation, this study focusses on the process dimension. More specifically, it aims at elucidating the processes of social learning, individual and collective awareness rising, and socio-political mobilisation. At a microlevel it explores the connections between the different actors partaking in socially innovative actions.''<br /> <br /> ''Place making: look at the potential of place-based forms of solidarity and care. Recent thinking about citizenship. Look at what people actually do. Who is active in the public space? Increased importance of place in our society. Making place becomes an important project.''<br /> <br /> === Paper 2 - Introducing the concept of place in socially innovative actions ===<br /> As the position of the nation state has weakened with decentralisation as result, local socially innovative actions have come to the attention of a plethora of actors. As a means to an end and an end in itself, social innovation has increasingly gained the interest of academics, practitioners and policy makers alike. Much has been said about the definition of social innovation and also the outcomes have been discussed at large. The process dimension of socially innovative actions is less explored. Especially the micro level with the individual as a central point of focus has gained little to no attention in the current discussion.    <br /> <br /> Consequently, this study focusses on what is happening on a micro level during the process of social innovation. More specifically, this first paper enhances the discussion by introducing the concept of '''place.''' Decentralisation has enhanced the position of place in organising society. As a location with a purpose it is perceived as something people take shared responsibility of. It presupposes a position of equivalence and pluralism. Place is where the development of new, or the transformation of, social relations between individuals takes place, being at the centre of socially innovative actions.    <br /> <br /> In order to explore the concept of place in the process of social innovation, this study takes on a cross-disciplinary approach and draws on the human and social geography literature. Instead of looking at shared norms and values and following a pre-given set, it focusses on altering the meaning of what it is to be social in the process. <br /> <br /> It draws on in-depth interviews with individuals involved in the different social innovation processes. Especially the project of the Zeeuwse Huiskamer is used as the case for this study. De Zeeuwse Huiskamer is a project that aims at bringing people together. Living longer at home independently in a pleasant way is of interest to a plethora of people. Questions such as “What is going well and what can be improved? Are there gaps between supply and demand, how does cooperation and contemporary society support living longer at home independently?” are explored in these projects. The aim is to jointly formulate solutions to questions around well-being, living and care. <br /> <br /> The results are relevant for researchers, practitioners and policy makers interested in the greater picture of social innovation.    <br /> * Amin, A. (2008). Collective culture and urban public space. ''City, 12''(1), 5-24. <br /> * Massey, D. (2004). Geography of responsibility. ''Geografiska Annaler, 86''(1), 5-18. <br /> * Moulaert, F., MacCallum, D., Mehmood, A., &amp; Hamdouch, A. (2013). ''The international handbook on social innovation: Collective action, social learning and transdisciplinary research''. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.    <br /> === Paper 3 - Ethics of care: Means to an end or end in itself? ===<br /> <br /> The previous two papers explored the role of place and encounter in the social innovation process. Social dynamics for the development of new or existing relationships between individuals is at the core of social innovation. The development of the capacity of collective action is what aimed for. Still, these social means are often solely perceived as a side effect of the social innovation process. Nevertheless, within the encounter between people, social dynamics are an inevitable factor.     <br /> <br /> A concept which could meaningfully explain the social dynamics in collective action is the concept of '''care.''' Care is at times used as a synonym for solidarity and could be understood as connections that are made between individuals on the basis of natural predispositions. Apart from natural predisposition, moral principles are also influencing the development of relationships in socially innovative actions. Hence, the theory of an '''ethics of care,''' in which interpersonal relationships and benevolence are a virtue to moral actions, could meaningfully address the social dynamics in the social innovation process. In short, this paper focusses in particular on how individuals take care of each other. This leads to the question if an ethics of care is a means to an end, or an end in itself in social innovation.     <br /> <br /> In order to explore the role of an ethics of care in the social innovation process this study draws on in-depth interviews.  <br /> <br /> The results of this research are relevant for public administrators to better understand the role of ethics of care in micro practises. It will enhance the understanding of how the choices of individuals effects societal change.     <br /> * Amin, A. (2012). ''Land of strangers''. Cambridge: Polity. <br /> * Cajaiba-Santana, G. (2014). Social innovation: Moving the field forward. A conceptual framework. ''Technological Forecasting &amp; Social Change, 82'', 42-51. <br /> * Gibson-Graham, J. K. (2003). An ethics of the local. ''Rethinking Marxism, 15''(1), 49-74.  <br /> <br /> === Paper 4 - Politics of care for social innovation ===<br /> The involvement of civil society to bring about social change while also renovating democracy has gained importance in public administration. Transparency, legitimacy and democracy need to be guaranteed with specific governance mechanisms. Apart from bringing about cultural change amongst civil society, this also depends on a cultural change in public administration. Social innovation aims at eliminating the long lines set by rules and regulations by bypassing existing welfare state institutions. Local socially innovative actions tend to highlight the need for recognition and representation and could hence help to improve conventional welfare state politics. Still, a sense of togetherness and pluralism does not rest alone on the idea of recognition and community, or i.e. the commons.    <br /> <br /> Instead of looking at the code or the principles, the norms and the values, this paper focusses on the cultivation of the political person. In particular, the self-formation as an ethical subject involving practices of forming the ethical political subject. It puts emphasis on the attitude of a divers set of policy makers rather than looking at the administrative perspective. Which attitudes and practices could enable ethically sensitive, negotiated settlements between different groups and individuals in the social innovation process and the construction of the commons. It looks at what a '''politics of care''' could be and how local politics participate in ethics of care and building new communities and collaboration. <br /> <br /> In-depth interviews with policy makers are used as method to explore this research. Aldermen and civil servants of different municipalities in the Netherlands are the sample in particular.    <br /> <br /> The aim is to explore the '''anthropology of policy makers''' to enable a more affective and informal perspective for the political subject. More so, to explore how anthropology, as a means, could change attitudes and enhance determination in mobilising action and leading change in an organisational setting. The paper looks at places where the commons exercise their responsibility in order to provide policy makers a closer look into micro political opportunities. Hence, the results are relevant for public administration and policy makers in particular.    <br /> * Grimm, R., Fox, C., Baines, S., &amp; Albertson, K. (2013). Social innovation, an answer to contemporary societal challenges? Locating the concept in theory and practice. ''Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research, 26''(4), 436-455. <br /> * Pinxten, H., &amp; Verstraete, G. (1998). ''Cultuur en Macht. Over identiteit en conflict in een multiculturele wereld''. Antwerpen: Uitgeverij Houtekiet.<br /> <br /> === Paper 5 - What happens when you become the best practise ===<br /> The up-scaling of local socially innovative actions is of paramount importance to a variety of actors included and excluded in the process. The so-called best practise should lead by example and practises should become transferrable to other cases and contexts. Yet, the local social innovation is oftentimes context-bound and running on bottom-up initiatives and practises. Transferring it to other places and context could therefore be problematic. In addition, gaining publicity as best-practise could work as an accelerator but may also act as a boundary for success.    <br /> <br /> Ulrum is a small village in the province of Groningen, The Netherlands. Due to population aging and dejuvination demographic changes are clearly felt and visible. In order to become a future-proof village, residents started working on changing their village in a place tailored to their needs. With a plethora of local, regional, national and international partners the residents have worked on finding a solution which fits the local needs of Ulrum. Instead of taking an external look, the project was set up from the inside, with the people who live and work in Ulrum. The official timeline of the project was three years, finishing in 2016. However, DEEL &amp; Ulrum continues till this day. <br /> <br /> In order to explore what happens when you become a best-practise, this research draws on a wide selection of data. All meeting minutes are used to develop a timeline of events. This information may also be used to analyse possible changes in the project due to these events. The documentary made of the Ulrum caused a lot of commotion in the village and the project. This documentary is also used in the analyses. In addition, interviews are conducted with various people involved in the project.    <br /> <br /> The aim of this study is to provide an insight of the dynamics taking place when a local project becomes a best-practise. Due to historical data, a retrospective view provides the opportunity to elucidate the process over time.     <br /> <br /> The results are of interest to people involved in social innovation projects. The greater field of social innovation and public administration in particular benefit from this research.     <br /> * Howaldt, J., Butzin, A., Domanski, D., &amp; Kaletka, C. (2014). ''Theoretical Approaches to Social Innovation – A Critical Literature Review.'' A deliverable of the project: “Social Innovation: Driving Force of Social Change” (SI-DRIVE). Dortmund: Sozialforschungsstelle.  <br /> * Moulaert, F., MacCallum, D., Mehmood, A., &amp; Hamdouch, A. (2013). ''The international handbook on social innovation: Collective action, social learning and transdisciplinary research''. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. <br /> <br /> === Paper 6 - Auto-Ethnography for social innovation ===<br /> The last paper focusses on the role of the intermediary, the facilitator, the professional in the process of social innovation. Concentrating on managing and creating innovative and productive contexts and to value each other’s strengths and avoid each other weaknesses is one of the tasks of the intermediary.<br /> <br /> The central supporting role of the professional and the public meeting culture is compelling in the social innovation process. It is of importance to explore this role if only to undermine the illusion of spontaneous care and direct solidarity. Place-bound and local forms of direct types of care are strongly interwoven with the indirect care of the welfare state through financing professionals and the meeting culture. The role of reflection and balancing power through perpetuating or imposing priorities from outside is what the professional needs to cope with. Within this the encounter with different kind of people is also challenge and furthermore a risk full process. Absorbing this risk is key to the process of socially innovative actions. Yet, for who is the professional absorbing this risk, the local community or political figures and bodies. Who is the object of care, of solidarity, is the question. Within the encounter the professional continuously takes on a different role, in which they themselves become a different person, a stranger. <br /> <br /> Through auto-ethnography this paper explores the field of tension between distance and involvement of alienation and appropriation, the self-evidence of the researcher and the informants in thinking, feeling and doing. It provides an insight of the dynamics in the case of Ulrum.<br /> <br /> The aim of this paper is presenting an alternative for making personal experiences relevant for people in similar positions and the pedagogy discipline in particular.<br /> * Ellis, Carolyn (2004). ''The ethnographic I: A methodological novel about autoethnography''. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press.<br /> * Ellis, Carolyn (2009). Telling tales on neighbors: Ethics in two voices. ''International Review of Qualitative Research'', ''2''(1), 3-28.<br /> {{Project config}}<br /> {{Project<br /> |Supercontext=PR SSM 00128<br /> |Project type=SSM, Standaard<br /> |Topcontext=PR SSM 00128<br /> |Name=Papers &amp; Articles<br /> |Start date=2017/07/06<br /> |Summary=Written papers and articles<br /> |Show summary=Ja<br /> |Show navigation tree=Ja<br /> |Show sub projects=Ja<br /> |Show participants=Nee<br /> |Show sources=Nee<br /> }}</div>

KimBoes https://gofreshwiki.nl/wiki/index.php?title=PR_00144&diff=50599 2018-01-11T15:14:38Z

<p>KimBoes: </p> <hr /> <div>== Keywords to describe our research: ==<br /> * Cross-disciplinary approach to study social innovation<br /> <br /> == Abstracts ==<br /> Identify the purpose (motivation)<br /> * Why did you decide to do this study or project?<br /> * How did you conduct your research?<br /> * Why is this research and your findings important?<br /> * Why should someone read your entire essay?<br /> * This section should include the importance of your work, the difficulty of the area, and the impact it might have if successful.<br /> Explain the problem at hand (problem statement)<br /> * What problem is your research trying to better understand or solve?<br /> * What is the scope of your study - a general problem, or something specific?<br /> * What is your main claim or argument?<br /> Describe the method (approach)<br /> <br /> Give your conclusion<br /> * What are the implications of your work?<br /> * Are your results general or very specific?<br /> <br /> Outline --&gt; Introduction - Body - Conclusion. Two paragraphs up to one page of text. ~ 300 words. <br /> <br /> === Paper 1 - Introducing the concept of place in socially innovative actions  ===<br /> * De huidige discussie gaat vooral om de verschillende definities van SI (wat is de correcte definitie). Wel aangeven waar in het debat / welke traditie we ons bevinden (maximalistische / minimalistisch en transformative / radical opzoeken).<br /> ** Minimalist - Maximalist: &quot;A third type of radical innovation has been elaborated by Mangabeira Unger. He distinguishes between '''minimalist social innovations''' which give a human face to an otherwise unsupportable situation, and '''maximalist social innovations''' that aim at deep changes. ”<br /> ** Transformative - Radical <br /> * GAP: hoe het proces in zijn gang gaat is onvoldoende scherp. Zeker wat aan toe te voegen: microniveau. Een scherpere blik op SI.<br /> * Wat gebeurt er? Daar is niet veel naar gekeken.<br /> * Combinatie met Human and Social Geography<br /> * '''PLACE'''<br /> '''ABSTRACT'''<br /> <br /> As the position of the nation state has weakened with decentralisation as result, local socially innovative actions have come to the attention of a plethora of actors. As a means to an end and an end in itself, social innovation has increasingly gained the interest of academics, practitioners and policy makers alike. Much has been said about the definition of social innovation and also the outcomes have been discussed at large. The process dimension of socially innovative actions is less explored. Especially the micro level with the individual as a central point of focus has gained little to no attention in the current discussion. <br /> <br /> Consequently, this study focusses on what is happening on a micro level during the process of social innovation. More specifically, this first paper enhances the discussion by introducing the concept of '''place.''' Decentralisation has enhanced the position of place in organising society. As a location with a purpose it is perceived as something people take shared responsibility of. It presupposes a position of equivalence and pluralism. Place is where the development of new, or the transformation of, social relations between individuals takes place, being at the centre of socially innovative actions. <br /> <br /> In order to explore the concept of place in the process of social innovation, this study takes on a cross-disciplinary approach and draws on the human and social geography literature. Instead of looking at shared norms and values and following a pre-given set, it focusses on altering the meaning of what it is to be social in the process. The results are relevant for researchers, practitioners and policy makers interested in the greater picture of social innovation.<br /> <br /> ''Social innovation, as a means to an end and an end it itself, has increasingly gained the interest of academics, practisioners and policy makers alike. The discussion has largely focussed on the goals of social innovation as well as on finding common ground regarding the definition. Social innovation addresses local social needs and global societal challenges. It does so by using social means through the development of new, or the transformation of, social relations. These socially innovative actions are driven by different processes to enable groups to better satisfy their human needs and improve their living conditions.'' <br /> <br /> ''Instead of joining the greater discussion on the content, outcomes and definition of social innovation, this study focusses on the process dimension. More specifically, it aims at elucidating the processes of social learning, individual and collective awareness rising, and socio-political mobilisation. At a microlevel it explores the connections between the different actors partaking in socially innovative actions.''<br /> <br /> ''Place making: look at the potential of place-based forms of solidarity and care. Recent thinking about citizenship. Look at what people actually do. Who is active in the public space? Increased importance of place in our society. Making place becomes an important project.''<br /> <br /> === Paper 2 - Social innovation and the role of the encounter ===<br /> * lijn: mooi dat er wordt gekeken naar het niveau van organisatie; maar wat gebeurt er op het niveau van individuen?<br /> * relatie met overheden: kunnen publieke instellingen ook innovatief zijn?<br /> * inter-organisatorisch kijken. Niet: wie is de leider / kenmerken e.d. Wel: hoe zit het met de verhouding tussen al die mensen. Dat mist in literatuur!<br /> * etnografisch meerwaarde toevoegen. Gebeurt nog niet in bestuurswetenschappen (public administration). Etnografie en innovatie.<br /> * '''THE ENCOUNTER + NARRATIVE'''<br /> '''ABSTRACT'''<br /> <br /> The social innovation process, as a method and a practise, is dynamic and includes a plethora of different actors. It derives from bringing together these different actors that usually do not maintain relationships or only in direct conflict. The previous paper explored the role of place in connecting people. This paper aims at further elucidating the level of the individual in socially innovative actions. It investigates how the relationships between different actors are (re)organised by drawing on the concept of '''the encounter''' frequently used in the human and social geography literature. Careful consideration is asked for the types of encounters sought for and avoided by individuals. <br /> <br /> Social innovation works towards social change through social actions and conscious awareness. Mutual learning plays an important role in this. The role of '''the narrative''' has often come to the forefront implicating its research significance through narrative analyses for interpreting human meaning and experience. Yet, the practical role of the narrative in mutual learning, mobilising action, and bringing about change has received little to no attention in the public administration discipline. <br /> <br /> Against the background of decentralisation and the growing importance of investing in a public meeting culture, understanding the role of the encounter in socially innovative actions could support public administrators in facilitating alternative structures for societal change. Introducing the narrative, and hence ethnography in innovation, as a practise could provide policy makers an additional instrument for mutual learning and thus to gain a qualitative insight of the relationships between people and the topics of importance to enhance quality of life from a policy perspective.    <br /> <br /> * Moulaert: &quot;''Social innovation is not innovation in its ends only. SI hence works towards social change through the deepening and the broadening of participation, the establishment of more inclusive organisational procedures, the development of the capacity for collective action and the fundamental change of human attitudes and behaviour.&quot;''<br /> * In vergelijk met Zapf (2003, p.427) ''&quot;...process of change in the social structure of a society in its constitutive institutions, cultural patterns, associated social actions and conscious awareness&quot;''<br /> * &quot;Social innovation derives from bringing together different actors that normally do not maintain relationships or only in direct conflict. Reorganise the connections between different actors - mutual learning (narratives?)&quot; (Klein 2010). --&gt; '''Link this with &quot;The encounter&quot;, link to human/social geography'''<br /> &lt;u&gt;Overdenkingen plaats:&lt;/u&gt; <br /> <br /> Greep natiestaten verzwakt en decentralisaties -&gt; plaats belangrijker. Relationeel. Verknoping van relaties. Groepen delen weinig behalve de plaats waar ze samenkomen. Gedeelde verantwoordelijkheid. Plaats -&gt; nieuwe gemeenschappelijkheid. Laagdrempelig. Vanuit nabijheid. Afhankelijkheid (krimp?) -&gt; lotsverbondenheid. Samen verantwoordelijkheid nemen voor een plaats veronderstelt een positie van gelijkwaardigheid. <br /> <br /> Overheid: gelijke kansen. Democratische plicht om om te investeren in een publiek ontmoetingsstructuur. Ook: Potentieel van plaat-gebaseerde vormen van care. Burgerschap als praktijk. Wat mensen concreet doen. Toegenomen belang van plaats in het organiseren van ons samenleven.<br /> === Paper 3 - Ethics of care: Means to an end or end in itself? ===<br /> <br /> The previous two papers explored the role of place and encounter in the social innovation process. Social dynamics for the development of new or existing relationships between individuals is at the core of social innovation. The development of the capacity of collective action is what aimed for. Still, these social means are often solely perceived as a side effect of the social innovation process. Nevertheless, within the encounter between people, social dynamics are an inevitable factor.     <br /> <br /> A concept which could meaningfully explain the social dynamics in collective action is the concept of '''care.''' Care is at times used as a synonym for solidarity and could be understood as connections that are made between individuals on the basis of natural predispositions. Apart from natural predisposition, moral principles are also influencing the development of relationships in socially innovative actions. Hence, the theory of an '''ethics of care,''' in which interpersonal relationships and benevolence are a virtue to moral actions, could meaningfully address the social dynamics in the social innovation process. In short, this paper focusses in particular on how individuals take care of each other. This leads to the question if an ethics of care is a means to an end, or an end in itself in social innovation.     <br /> <br /> In order to explore the role of an ethics of care in the social innovation process this study draws on in-depth interviews.  <br /> <br /> The results of this research are relevant for public administrators to better understand the role of ethics of care in micro practises. It will enhance the understanding of how the choices of individuals effects societal change.     <br /> * Amin, A. (2012). ''Land of strangers''. Cambridge: Polity. <br /> * Cajaiba-Santana, G. (2014). Social innovation: Moving the field forward. A conceptual framework. ''Technological Forecasting &amp; Social Change, 82'', 42-51. <br /> * Gibson-Graham, J. K. (2003). An ethics of the local. ''Rethinking Marxism, 15''(1), 49-74.  <br /> <br /> === Paper 4 - Politics of care for social innovation ===<br /> The involvement of civil society to bring about social change while also renovating democracy has gained importance in public administration. Transparency, legitimacy and democracy need to be guaranteed with specific governance mechanisms. Apart from bringing about cultural change amongst civil society, this also depends on a cultural change in public administration. Social innovation aims at eliminating the long lines set by rules and regulations by bypassing existing welfare state institutions. Local socially innovative actions tend to highlight the need for recognition and representation and could hence help to improve conventional welfare state politics. Still, a sense of togetherness and pluralism does not rest alone on the idea of recognition and community, or i.e. the commons.    <br /> <br /> Instead of looking at the code or the principles, the norms and the values, this paper focusses on the cultivation of the political person. In particular, the self-formation as an ethical subject involving practices of forming the ethical political subject. It puts emphasis on the attitude of a divers set of policy makers rather than looking at the administrative perspective. Which attitudes and practices could enable ethically sensitive, negotiated settlements between different groups and individuals in the social innovation process and the construction of the commons. It looks at what a '''politics of care''' could be and how local politics participate in ethics of care and building new communities and collaboration. <br /> <br /> In-depth interviews with policy makers are used as method to explore this research. Aldermen and civil servants of different municipalities in the Netherlands are the sample in particular.    <br /> <br /> The aim is to explore the '''anthropology of policy makers''' to enable a more affective and informal perspective for the political subject. More so, to explore how anthropology, as a means, could change attitudes and enhance determination in mobilising action and leading change in an organisational setting. The paper looks at places where the commons exercise their responsibility in order to provide policy makers a closer look into micro political opportunities. Hence, the results are relevant for public administration and policy makers in particular.    <br /> * Grimm, R., Fox, C., Baines, S., &amp; Albertson, K. (2013). Social innovation, an answer to contemporary societal challenges? Locating the concept in theory and practice. ''Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research, 26''(4), 436-455. <br /> * Pinxten, H., &amp; Verstraete, G. (1998). ''Cultuur en Macht. Over identiteit en conflict in een multiculturele wereld''. Antwerpen: Uitgeverij Houtekiet.<br /> <br /> === Paper 5 - What happens when you become the best practise ===<br /> The up-scaling of local socially innovative actions is of paramount importance to a variety of actors included and excluded in the process. The so-called best practise should lead by example and practises should become transferrable to other cases and contexts. Yet, the local social innovation is oftentimes context-bound and running on bottom-up initiatives and practises. Transferring it to other places and context could therefore be problematic. In addition, gaining publicity as best-practise could work as an accelerator but may also act as a boundary for success.    <br /> <br /> Ulrum is a small village in the province of Groningen, The Netherlands. Due to population aging and dejuvination demographic changes are clearly felt and visible. In order to become a future-proof village, residents started working on changing their village in a place tailored to their needs. With a plethora of local, regional, national and international partners the residents have worked on finding a solution which fits the local needs of Ulrum. Instead of taking an external look, the project was set up from the inside, with the people who live and work in Ulrum. The official timeline of the project was three years, finishing in 2016. However, DEEL &amp; Ulrum continues till this day. <br /> <br /> In order to explore what happens when you become a best-practise, this research draws on a wide selection of data. All meeting minutes are used to develop a timeline of events. This information may also be used to analyse possible changes in the project due to these events. The documentary made of the Ulrum caused a lot of commotion in the village and the project. This documentary is also used in the analyses. In addition, interviews are conducted with various people involved in the project.    <br /> <br /> The aim of this study is to provide an insight of the dynamics taking place when a local project becomes a best-practise. Due to historical data, a retrospective view provides the opportunity to elucidate the process over time.     <br /> <br /> The results are of interest to people involved in social innovation projects. The greater field of social innovation and public administration in particular benefit from this research.     <br /> * Howaldt, J., Butzin, A., Domanski, D., &amp; Kaletka, C. (2014). ''Theoretical Approaches to Social Innovation – A Critical Literature Review.'' A deliverable of the project: “Social Innovation: Driving Force of Social Change” (SI-DRIVE). Dortmund: Sozialforschungsstelle.  <br /> * Moulaert, F., MacCallum, D., Mehmood, A., &amp; Hamdouch, A. (2013). ''The international handbook on social innovation: Collective action, social learning and transdisciplinary research''. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. <br /> <br /> === Paper 6 - Auto-Ethnography for social innovation ===<br /> The last paper focusses on the role of the intermediary, the facilitator, the professional in the process of social innovation. Concentrating on managing and creating innovative and productive contexts and to value each other’s strengths and avoid each other weaknesses is one of the tasks of the intermediary.<br /> <br /> The central supporting role of the professional and the public meeting culture is compelling in the social innovation process. It is of importance to explore this role if only to undermine the illusion of spontaneous care and direct solidarity. Place-bound and local forms of direct types of care are strongly interwoven with the indirect care of the welfare state through financing professionals and the meeting culture. The role of reflection and balancing power through perpetuating or imposing priorities from outside is what the professional needs to cope with. Within this the encounter with different kind of people is also challenge and furthermore a risk full process. Absorbing this risk is key to the process of socially innovative actions. Yet, for who is the professional absorbing this risk, the local community or political figures and bodies. Who is the object of care, of solidarity, is the question. Within the encounter the professional continuously takes on a different role, in which they themselves become a different person, a stranger. <br /> <br /> Through auto-ethnography this paper explores the field of tension between distance and involvement of alienation and appropriation, the self-evidence of the researcher and the informants in thinking, feeling and doing. It provides an insight of the dynamics in the case of Ulrum.<br /> <br /> The aim of this paper is presenting an alternative for making personal experiences relevant for people in similar positions and the pedagogy discipline in particular.<br /> * Ellis, Carolyn (2004). ''The ethnographic I: A methodological novel about autoethnography''. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press.<br /> * Ellis, Carolyn (2009). Telling tales on neighbors: Ethics in two voices. ''International Review of Qualitative Research'', ''2''(1), 3-28.<br /> {{Project config}}<br /> {{Project<br /> |Supercontext=PR SSM 00128<br /> |Project type=SSM, Standaard<br /> |Topcontext=PR SSM 00128<br /> |Name=Papers &amp; Articles<br /> |Start date=2017/07/06<br /> |Summary=Written papers and articles<br /> |Show summary=Ja<br /> |Show navigation tree=Ja<br /> |Show sub projects=Ja<br /> |Show participants=Nee<br /> |Show sources=Nee<br /> }}</div>

KimBoes https://gofreshwiki.nl/wiki/index.php?title=PR_00144&diff=50598 2018-01-11T15:12:12Z

<p>KimBoes: </p> <hr /> <div>== Keywords to describe our research: ==<br /> * Cross-disciplinary approach to study social innovation<br /> <br /> == Abstracts ==<br /> Identify the purpose (motivation)<br /> * Why did you decide to do this study or project?<br /> * How did you conduct your research?<br /> * Why is this research and your findings important?<br /> * Why should someone read your entire essay?<br /> * This section should include the importance of your work, the difficulty of the area, and the impact it might have if successful.<br /> Explain the problem at hand (problem statement)<br /> * What problem is your research trying to better understand or solve?<br /> * What is the scope of your study - a general problem, or something specific?<br /> * What is your main claim or argument?<br /> Describe the method (approach)<br /> <br /> Give your conclusion<br /> * What are the implications of your work?<br /> * Are your results general or very specific?<br /> <br /> Outline --&gt; Introduction - Body - Conclusion. Two paragraphs up to one page of text. ~ 300 words. <br /> <br /> === Paper 1 - Introducing the concept of place in socially innovative actions  ===<br /> * De huidige discussie gaat vooral om de verschillende definities van SI (wat is de correcte definitie). Wel aangeven waar in het debat / welke traditie we ons bevinden (maximalistische / minimalistisch en transformative / radical opzoeken).<br /> ** Minimalist - Maximalist: &quot;A third type of radical innovation has been elaborated by Mangabeira Unger. He distinguishes between '''minimalist social innovations''' which give a human face to an otherwise unsupportable situation, and '''maximalist social innovations''' that aim at deep changes. ”<br /> ** Transformative - Radical <br /> * GAP: hoe het proces in zijn gang gaat is onvoldoende scherp. Zeker wat aan toe te voegen: microniveau. Een scherpere blik op SI.<br /> * Wat gebeurt er? Daar is niet veel naar gekeken.<br /> * Combinatie met Human and Social Geography<br /> * '''PLACE'''<br /> '''ABSTRACT'''<br /> <br /> As the position of the nation state has weakened with decentralisation as result, local socially innovative actions have come to the attention of a plethora of actors. As a means to an end and an end in itself, social innovation has increasingly gained the interest of academics, practitioners and policy makers alike. Much has been said about the definition of social innovation and also the outcomes have been discussed at large. The process dimension of socially innovative actions is less explored. Especially the micro level with the individual as a central point of focus has gained little to no attention in the current discussion. <br /> <br /> Consequently, this study focusses on what is happening on a micro level during the process of social innovation. More specifically, this first paper enhances the discussion by introducing the concept of '''place.''' Decentralisation has enhanced the position of place in organising society. As a location with a purpose it is perceived as something people take shared responsibility of. It presupposes a position of equivalence and pluralism. Place is where the development of new, or the transformation of, social relations between individuals takes place, being at the centre of socially innovative actions. <br /> <br /> In order to explore the concept of place in the process of social innovation, this study takes on a cross-disciplinary approach and draws on the human and social geography literature. Instead of looking at shared norms and values and following a pre-given set, it focusses on altering the meaning of what it is to be social in the process. The results are relevant for researchers, practitioners and policy makers interested in the greater picture of social innovation.<br /> <br /> ''Social innovation, as a means to an end and an end it itself, has increasingly gained the interest of academics, practisioners and policy makers alike. The discussion has largely focussed on the goals of social innovation as well as on finding common ground regarding the definition. Social innovation addresses local social needs and global societal challenges. It does so by using social means through the development of new, or the transformation of, social relations. These socially innovative actions are driven by different processes to enable groups to better satisfy their human needs and improve their living conditions.'' <br /> <br /> ''Instead of joining the greater discussion on the content, outcomes and definition of social innovation, this study focusses on the process dimension. More specifically, it aims at elucidating the processes of social learning, individual and collective awareness rising, and socio-political mobilisation. At a microlevel it explores the connections between the different actors partaking in socially innovative actions.''<br /> <br /> ''Place making: look at the potential of place-based forms of solidarity and care. Recent thinking about citizenship. Look at what people actually do. Who is active in the public space? Increased importance of place in our society. Making place becomes an important project.''<br /> <br /> === Paper 2 - Social innovation and the role of the encounter ===<br /> * lijn: mooi dat er wordt gekeken naar het niveau van organisatie; maar wat gebeurt er op het niveau van individuen?<br /> * relatie met overheden: kunnen publieke instellingen ook innovatief zijn?<br /> * inter-organisatorisch kijken. Niet: wie is de leider / kenmerken e.d. Wel: hoe zit het met de verhouding tussen al die mensen. Dat mist in literatuur!<br /> * etnografisch meerwaarde toevoegen. Gebeurt nog niet in bestuurswetenschappen (public administration). Etnografie en innovatie.<br /> * '''THE ENCOUNTER + NARRATIVE'''<br /> '''ABSTRACT'''<br /> <br /> The social innovation process, as a method and a practise, is dynamic and includes a plethora of different actors. It derives from bringing together these different actors that usually do not maintain relationships or only in direct conflict. The previous paper explored the role of place in connecting people. This paper aims at further elucidating the level of the individual in socially innovative actions. It investigates how the relationships between different actors are (re)organised by drawing on the concept of '''the encounter''' frequently used in the human and social geography literature. Careful consideration is asked for the types of encounters sought for and avoided by individuals. <br /> <br /> Social innovation works towards social change through social actions and conscious awareness. Mutual learning plays an important role in this. The role of '''the narrative''' has often come to the forefront implicating its research significance through narrative analyses for interpreting human meaning and experience. Yet, the practical role of the narrative in mutual learning, mobilising action, and bringing about change has received little to no attention in the public administration discipline. <br /> <br /> Against the background of decentralisation and the growing importance of investing in a public meeting culture, understanding the role of the encounter in socially innovative actions could support public administrators in facilitating alternative structures for societal change. Introducing the narrative, and hence ethnography in innovation, as a practise could provide policy makers an additional instrument for mutual learning and thus to gain a qualitative insight of the relationships between people and the topics of importance to enhance quality of life from a policy perspective.    <br /> <br /> * Moulaert: &quot;''Social innovation is not innovation in its ends only. SI hence works towards social change through the deepening and the broadening of participation, the establishment of more inclusive organisational procedures, the development of the capacity for collective action and the fundamental change of human attitudes and behaviour.&quot;''<br /> * In vergelijk met Zapf (2003, p.427) ''&quot;...process of change in the social structure of a society in its constitutive institutions, cultural patterns, associated social actions and conscious awareness&quot;''<br /> * &quot;Social innovation derives from bringing together different actors that normally do not maintain relationships or only in direct conflict. Reorganise the connections between different actors - mutual learning (narratives?)&quot; (Klein 2010). --&gt; '''Link this with &quot;The encounter&quot;, link to human/social geography'''<br /> &lt;u&gt;Overdenkingen plaats:&lt;/u&gt; <br /> <br /> Greep natiestaten verzwakt en decentralisaties -&gt; plaats belangrijker. Relationeel. Verknoping van relaties. Groepen delen weinig behalve de plaats waar ze samenkomen. Gedeelde verantwoordelijkheid. Plaats -&gt; nieuwe gemeenschappelijkheid. Laagdrempelig. Vanuit nabijheid. Afhankelijkheid (krimp?) -&gt; lotsverbondenheid. Samen verantwoordelijkheid nemen voor een plaats veronderstelt een positie van gelijkwaardigheid. <br /> <br /> Overheid: gelijke kansen. Democratische plicht om om te investeren in een publiek ontmoetingsstructuur. Ook: Potentieel van plaat-gebaseerde vormen van care. Burgerschap als praktijk. Wat mensen concreet doen. Toegenomen belang van plaats in het organiseren van ons samenleven.<br /> === Paper 3 - Ethics of care: Means to an end or end in itself? ===<br /> <br /> * link innovatie: rol van ethics in gemeenschap vormen. Is dat:<br /> * zorgdragen voor ipv innovatief menstype te zijn (als individu) of is de ethics of care die in de gemeenschap ontstaat de sociale innovatie?<br /> * '''CARE + THE COMMONS'''<br /> '''ABSTRACT'''<br /> <br /> The previous two papers explored the role of place and encounter in the social innovation process. Social dynamics for the development of new or existing relationships between individuals is at the core of social innovation. The development of the capacity of collective action is what aimed for. Still, these social means are often solely perceived as a side effect of the social innovation process. Nevertheless, within the encounter between people, social dynamics are an inevitable factor. <br /> <br /> A concept which could meaningfully explain the social dynamics in collective action is the concept of '''care.''' Care is at times used as a synonym for solidarity and could be understood as connections that are made between individuals on the basis of natural predispositions. Apart from natural predisposition, moral principles are also influencing the development of relationships in socially innovative actions. Hence, the theory of an '''ethics of care,''' in which interpersonal relationships and benevolence are a virtue to moral actions, could meaningfully address the social dynamics in the social innovation process. In short, this paper focusses in particular on how individuals take care of each other. This leads to the question if an ethics of care is a means to an end, or an end in itself in social innovation. <br /> <br /> In the current discussion of citizenship different forms of place-based care could potentially influence collective action. In this vein, care may become part of '''the commons.''' This study perceives the commons as a group of people taking responsibility for organising and providing local services of importance to them. It is a field of new social practises based on socio-cultural change. Practises of care could inhibit or open up possibilities to change people's attitude towards other individuals and wider social groups. Understanding ethics and care as part of the commons <br /> <br /> The results of this research are relevant for public administrators to better understand the role of ethics of care in micro practises. It will enhance the understanding of how the choices of individuals effects societal change.<br /> <br /> * But how can we make visible the human relations that underlie care? conception of care - as part of the commons. Care: connections that are made on the basis of our natural predisposition to love, empathise, reciprocate and share meanings. The commons: where community organizes and provides its own services: Instead asking us to understand commons as an informal social activity from the bottom up known as ‘commoning’. This is where the real ideas for change are conceived and grow.<br /> <br /> * The Commons – &quot;a vision of empowered citizens taking charge of their lives and their endangered resources&quot;(Bollier &amp; Helfrich 2012) – is a field of possibilities and new social practices, based on sharing, cooperation, reciprocity and socio-cultural change. These practices are providing pioneering solutions to the challenge of how to reproduce our livelihoods beyond market and state.  <br /> <br /> The aim of this study is to recognise care and different responsibilities formed in material, technological, symbolic and imagined space. ....can be extended as a form of interest in the commons. <br /> <br /> The emphasis is placed not just on immediate contact experiences, but also on how the accrued histories of social experience and material circumstances contributing to the individual's feelings about different sorts of encounters. In particular, how do 'real' and 'imagined' feelings and practices of care inhibit or open up the possibilities that a bridge is being made between people's attitudes to particular individuals and to wider social groups. <br /> <br /> Place making: look at the potential of place-based forms of solidarity and care. Recent thinking about citizenship. Look at what people actually do. Who is active in the public space? Increased importance of place in our society. Making place becomes an important project.<br /> <br /> Ethics of care: looks at ethics which pays more attention to emotional and private role of ethical judgments.<br /> <br /> Look at the actual practices in everyday life settings and grass-roots movements<br /> <br /> Care for each other plays everywhere; we look at how it works in neighbourhoods and in the family. <br /> <br /> Focus on the individual experiences.<br /> <br /> (To scan the landscape for evidence and proposals for new ways of gathering diversity into a functioning ‘commons’. <br /> <br /> Argument link with social innovation: the role of ethics in community building: <br /> <br /> Not a focus on the innovative individual but: <br /> <br /> are the different ways to care for each other that arise in the community a social innovation in itself? <br /> <br /> === Paper 4 - Politics of care for social innovation ===<br /> The involvement of civil society to bring about social change while also renovating democracy has gained importance in public administration. Transparency, legitimacy and democracy need to be guaranteed with specific governance mechanisms. Apart from bringing about cultural change amongst civil society, this also depends on a cultural change in public administration. Social innovation aims at eliminating the long lines set by rules and regulations by bypassing existing welfare state institutions. Local socially innovative actions tend to highlight the need for recognition and representation and could hence help to improve conventional welfare state politics. Still, a sense of togetherness and pluralism does not rest alone on the idea of recognition and community, or i.e. the commons.    <br /> <br /> Instead of looking at the code or the principles, the norms and the values, this paper focusses on the cultivation of the political person. In particular, the self-formation as an ethical subject involving practices of forming the ethical political subject. It puts emphasis on the attitude of a divers set of policy makers rather than looking at the administrative perspective. Which attitudes and practices could enable ethically sensitive, negotiated settlements between different groups and individuals in the social innovation process and the construction of the commons. It looks at what a '''politics of care''' could be and how local politics participate in ethics of care and building new communities and collaboration. <br /> <br /> In-depth interviews with policy makers are used as method to explore this research. Aldermen and civil servants of different municipalities in the Netherlands are the sample in particular.    <br /> <br /> The aim is to explore the '''anthropology of policy makers''' to enable a more affective and informal perspective for the political subject. More so, to explore how anthropology, as a means, could change attitudes and enhance determination in mobilising action and leading change in an organisational setting. The paper looks at places where the commons exercise their responsibility in order to provide policy makers a closer look into micro political opportunities. Hence, the results are relevant for public administration and policy makers in particular.    <br /> * Grimm, R., Fox, C., Baines, S., &amp; Albertson, K. (2013). Social innovation, an answer to contemporary societal challenges? Locating the concept in theory and practice. ''Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research, 26''(4), 436-455. <br /> * Pinxten, H., &amp; Verstraete, G. (1998). ''Cultuur en Macht. Over identiteit en conflict in een multiculturele wereld''. Antwerpen: Uitgeverij Houtekiet.<br /> <br /> === Paper 5 - What happens when you become the best practise ===<br /> The up-scaling of local socially innovative actions is of paramount importance to a variety of actors included and excluded in the process. The so-called best practise should lead by example and practises should become transferrable to other cases and contexts. Yet, the local social innovation is oftentimes context-bound and running on bottom-up initiatives and practises. Transferring it to other places and context could therefore be problematic. In addition, gaining publicity as best-practise could work as an accelerator but may also act as a boundary for success.    <br /> <br /> Ulrum is a small village in the province of Groningen, The Netherlands. Due to population aging and dejuvination demographic changes are clearly felt and visible. In order to become a future-proof village, residents started working on changing their village in a place tailored to their needs. With a plethora of local, regional, national and international partners the residents have worked on finding a solution which fits the local needs of Ulrum. Instead of taking an external look, the project was set up from the inside, with the people who live and work in Ulrum. The official timeline of the project was three years, finishing in 2016. However, DEEL &amp; Ulrum continues till this day. <br /> <br /> In order to explore what happens when you become a best-practise, this research draws on a wide selection of data. All meeting minutes are used to develop a timeline of events. This information may also be used to analyse possible changes in the project due to these events. The documentary made of the Ulrum caused a lot of commotion in the village and the project. This documentary is also used in the analyses. In addition, interviews are conducted with various people involved in the project.    <br /> <br /> The aim of this study is to provide an insight of the dynamics taking place when a local project becomes a best-practise. Due to historical data, a retrospective view provides the opportunity to elucidate the process over time.     <br /> <br /> The results are of interest to people involved in social innovation projects. The greater field of social innovation and public administration in particular benefit from this research.     <br /> * Howaldt, J., Butzin, A., Domanski, D., &amp; Kaletka, C. (2014). ''Theoretical Approaches to Social Innovation – A Critical Literature Review.'' A deliverable of the project: “Social Innovation: Driving Force of Social Change” (SI-DRIVE). Dortmund: Sozialforschungsstelle.  <br /> * Moulaert, F., MacCallum, D., Mehmood, A., &amp; Hamdouch, A. (2013). ''The international handbook on social innovation: Collective action, social learning and transdisciplinary research''. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. <br /> <br /> === Paper 6 - Auto-Ethnography for social innovation ===<br /> The last paper focusses on the role of the intermediary, the facilitator, the professional in the process of social innovation. Concentrating on managing and creating innovative and productive contexts and to value each other’s strengths and avoid each other weaknesses is one of the tasks of the intermediary.<br /> <br /> The central supporting role of the professional and the public meeting culture is compelling in the social innovation process. It is of importance to explore this role if only to undermine the illusion of spontaneous care and direct solidarity. Place-bound and local forms of direct types of care are strongly interwoven with the indirect care of the welfare state through financing professionals and the meeting culture. The role of reflection and balancing power through perpetuating or imposing priorities from outside is what the professional needs to cope with. Within this the encounter with different kind of people is also challenge and furthermore a risk full process. Absorbing this risk is key to the process of socially innovative actions. Yet, for who is the professional absorbing this risk, the local community or political figures and bodies. Who is the object of care, of solidarity, is the question. Within the encounter the professional continuously takes on a different role, in which they themselves become a different person, a stranger. <br /> <br /> Through auto-ethnography this paper explores the field of tension between distance and involvement of alienation and appropriation, the self-evidence of the researcher and the informants in thinking, feeling and doing. It provides an insight of the dynamics in the case of Ulrum.<br /> <br /> The aim of this paper is presenting an alternative for making personal experiences relevant for people in similar positions and the pedagogy discipline in particular.<br /> * Ellis, Carolyn (2004). ''The ethnographic I: A methodological novel about autoethnography''. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press.<br /> * Ellis, Carolyn (2009). Telling tales on neighbors: Ethics in two voices. ''International Review of Qualitative Research'', ''2''(1), 3-28.<br /> {{Project config}}<br /> {{Project<br /> |Supercontext=PR SSM 00128<br /> |Project type=SSM, Standaard<br /> |Topcontext=PR SSM 00128<br /> |Name=Papers &amp; Articles<br /> |Start date=2017/07/06<br /> |Summary=Written papers and articles<br /> |Show summary=Ja<br /> |Show navigation tree=Ja<br /> |Show sub projects=Ja<br /> |Show participants=Nee<br /> |Show sources=Nee<br /> }}</div>

KimBoes https://gofreshwiki.nl/wiki/index.php?title=PR_00144&diff=50597 2018-01-11T15:07:37Z

<p>KimBoes: </p> <hr /> <div>== Keywords to describe our research: ==<br /> * Cross-disciplinary approach to study social innovation<br /> <br /> == Abstracts ==<br /> Identify the purpose (motivation)<br /> * Why did you decide to do this study or project?<br /> * How did you conduct your research?<br /> * Why is this research and your findings important?<br /> * Why should someone read your entire essay?<br /> * This section should include the importance of your work, the difficulty of the area, and the impact it might have if successful.<br /> Explain the problem at hand (problem statement)<br /> * What problem is your research trying to better understand or solve?<br /> * What is the scope of your study - a general problem, or something specific?<br /> * What is your main claim or argument?<br /> Describe the method (approach)<br /> <br /> Give your conclusion<br /> * What are the implications of your work?<br /> * Are your results general or very specific?<br /> <br /> Outline --&gt; Introduction - Body - Conclusion. Two paragraphs up to one page of text. ~ 300 words. <br /> <br /> === Paper 1 - Introducing the concept of place in socially innovative actions  ===<br /> * De huidige discussie gaat vooral om de verschillende definities van SI (wat is de correcte definitie). Wel aangeven waar in het debat / welke traditie we ons bevinden (maximalistische / minimalistisch en transformative / radical opzoeken).<br /> ** Minimalist - Maximalist: &quot;A third type of radical innovation has been elaborated by Mangabeira Unger. He distinguishes between '''minimalist social innovations''' which give a human face to an otherwise unsupportable situation, and '''maximalist social innovations''' that aim at deep changes. ”<br /> ** Transformative - Radical <br /> * GAP: hoe het proces in zijn gang gaat is onvoldoende scherp. Zeker wat aan toe te voegen: microniveau. Een scherpere blik op SI.<br /> * Wat gebeurt er? Daar is niet veel naar gekeken.<br /> * Combinatie met Human and Social Geography<br /> * '''PLACE'''<br /> '''ABSTRACT'''<br /> <br /> As the position of the nation state has weakened with decentralisation as result, local socially innovative actions have come to the attention of a plethora of actors. As a means to an end and an end in itself, social innovation has increasingly gained the interest of academics, practitioners and policy makers alike. Much has been said about the definition of social innovation and also the outcomes have been discussed at large. The process dimension of socially innovative actions is less explored. Especially the micro level with the individual as a central point of focus has gained little to no attention in the current discussion. <br /> <br /> Consequently, this study focusses on what is happening on a micro level during the process of social innovation. More specifically, this first paper enhances the discussion by introducing the concept of '''place.''' Decentralisation has enhanced the position of place in organising society. As a location with a purpose it is perceived as something people take shared responsibility of. It presupposes a position of equivalence and pluralism. Place is where the development of new, or the transformation of, social relations between individuals takes place, being at the centre of socially innovative actions. <br /> <br /> In order to explore the concept of place in the process of social innovation, this study takes on a cross-disciplinary approach and draws on the human and social geography literature. Instead of looking at shared norms and values and following a pre-given set, it focusses on altering the meaning of what it is to be social in the process. The results are relevant for researchers, practitioners and policy makers interested in the greater picture of social innovation.<br /> <br /> ''Social innovation, as a means to an end and an end it itself, has increasingly gained the interest of academics, practisioners and policy makers alike. The discussion has largely focussed on the goals of social innovation as well as on finding common ground regarding the definition. Social innovation addresses local social needs and global societal challenges. It does so by using social means through the development of new, or the transformation of, social relations. These socially innovative actions are driven by different processes to enable groups to better satisfy their human needs and improve their living conditions.'' <br /> <br /> ''Instead of joining the greater discussion on the content, outcomes and definition of social innovation, this study focusses on the process dimension. More specifically, it aims at elucidating the processes of social learning, individual and collective awareness rising, and socio-political mobilisation. At a microlevel it explores the connections between the different actors partaking in socially innovative actions.''<br /> <br /> ''Place making: look at the potential of place-based forms of solidarity and care. Recent thinking about citizenship. Look at what people actually do. Who is active in the public space? Increased importance of place in our society. Making place becomes an important project.''<br /> <br /> === Paper 2 - Social innovation and the role of the encounter ===<br /> * lijn: mooi dat er wordt gekeken naar het niveau van organisatie; maar wat gebeurt er op het niveau van individuen?<br /> * relatie met overheden: kunnen publieke instellingen ook innovatief zijn?<br /> * inter-organisatorisch kijken. Niet: wie is de leider / kenmerken e.d. Wel: hoe zit het met de verhouding tussen al die mensen. Dat mist in literatuur!<br /> * etnografisch meerwaarde toevoegen. Gebeurt nog niet in bestuurswetenschappen (public administration). Etnografie en innovatie.<br /> * '''THE ENCOUNTER + NARRATIVE'''<br /> '''ABSTRACT'''<br /> <br /> The social innovation process, as a method and a practise, is dynamic and includes a plethora of different actors. It derives from bringing together these different actors that usually do not maintain relationships or only in direct conflict. The previous paper explored the role of place in connecting people. This paper aims at further elucidating the level of the individual in socially innovative actions. It investigates how the relationships between different actors are (re)organised by drawing on the concept of '''the encounter''' frequently used in the human and social geography literature. Careful consideration is asked for the types of encounters sought for and avoided by individuals. <br /> <br /> Social innovation works towards social change through social actions and conscious awareness. Mutual learning plays an important role in this. The role of '''the narrative''' has often come to the forefront implicating its research significance through narrative analyses for interpreting human meaning and experience. Yet, the practical role of the narrative in mutual learning, mobilising action, and bringing about change has received little to no attention in the public administration discipline. <br /> <br /> Against the background of decentralisation and the growing importance of investing in a public meeting culture, understanding the role of the encounter in socially innovative actions could support public administrators in facilitating alternative structures for societal change. Introducing the narrative, and hence ethnography in innovation, as a practise could provide policy makers an additional instrument for mutual learning and thus to gain a qualitative insight of the relationships between people and the topics of importance to enhance quality of life from a policy perspective.    <br /> <br /> * Moulaert: &quot;''Social innovation is not innovation in its ends only. SI hence works towards social change through the deepening and the broadening of participation, the establishment of more inclusive organisational procedures, the development of the capacity for collective action and the fundamental change of human attitudes and behaviour.&quot;''<br /> * In vergelijk met Zapf (2003, p.427) ''&quot;...process of change in the social structure of a society in its constitutive institutions, cultural patterns, associated social actions and conscious awareness&quot;''<br /> * &quot;Social innovation derives from bringing together different actors that normally do not maintain relationships or only in direct conflict. Reorganise the connections between different actors - mutual learning (narratives?)&quot; (Klein 2010). --&gt; '''Link this with &quot;The encounter&quot;, link to human/social geography'''<br /> &lt;u&gt;Overdenkingen plaats:&lt;/u&gt; <br /> <br /> Greep natiestaten verzwakt en decentralisaties -&gt; plaats belangrijker. Relationeel. Verknoping van relaties. Groepen delen weinig behalve de plaats waar ze samenkomen. Gedeelde verantwoordelijkheid. Plaats -&gt; nieuwe gemeenschappelijkheid. Laagdrempelig. Vanuit nabijheid. Afhankelijkheid (krimp?) -&gt; lotsverbondenheid. Samen verantwoordelijkheid nemen voor een plaats veronderstelt een positie van gelijkwaardigheid. <br /> <br /> Overheid: gelijke kansen. Democratische plicht om om te investeren in een publiek ontmoetingsstructuur. Ook: Potentieel van plaat-gebaseerde vormen van care. Burgerschap als praktijk. Wat mensen concreet doen. Toegenomen belang van plaats in het organiseren van ons samenleven.<br /> === Paper 3 - Ethics of care: Means to an end or end in itself? ===<br /> <br /> * link innovatie: rol van ethics in gemeenschap vormen. Is dat:<br /> * zorgdragen voor ipv innovatief menstype te zijn (als individu) of is de ethics of care die in de gemeenschap ontstaat de sociale innovatie?<br /> * '''CARE + THE COMMONS'''<br /> '''ABSTRACT'''<br /> <br /> The previous two papers explored the role of place and encounter in the social innovation process. Social dynamics for the development of new or existing relationships between individuals is at the core of social innovation. The development of the capacity of collective action is what aimed for. Still, these social means are often solely perceived as a side effect of the social innovation process. Nevertheless, within the encounter between people, social dynamics are an inevitable factor. <br /> <br /> A concept which could meaningfully explain the social dynamics in collective action is the concept of '''care.''' Care is at times used as a synonym for solidarity and could be understood as connections that are made between individuals on the basis of natural predispositions. Apart from natural predisposition, moral principles are also influencing the development of relationships in socially innovative actions. Hence, the theory of an '''ethics of care,''' in which interpersonal relationships and benevolence are a virtue to moral actions, could meaningfully address the social dynamics in the social innovation process. In short, this paper focusses in particular on how individuals take care of each other. This leads to the question if an ethics of care is a means to an end, or an end in itself in social innovation. <br /> <br /> In the current discussion of citizenship different forms of place-based care could potentially influence collective action. In this vein, care may become part of '''the commons.''' This study perceives the commons as a group of people taking responsibility for organising and providing local services of importance to them. It is a field of new social practises based on socio-cultural change. Practises of care could inhibit or open up possibilities to change people's attitude towards other individuals and wider social groups. Understanding ethics and care as part of the commons <br /> <br /> The results of this research are relevant for public administrators to better understand the role of ethics of care in micro practises. It will enhance the understanding of how the choices of individuals effects societal change.<br /> <br /> * But how can we make visible the human relations that underlie care? conception of care - as part of the commons. Care: connections that are made on the basis of our natural predisposition to love, empathise, reciprocate and share meanings. The commons: where community organizes and provides its own services: Instead asking us to understand commons as an informal social activity from the bottom up known as ‘commoning’. This is where the real ideas for change are conceived and grow.<br /> <br /> * The Commons – &quot;a vision of empowered citizens taking charge of their lives and their endangered resources&quot;(Bollier &amp; Helfrich 2012) – is a field of possibilities and new social practices, based on sharing, cooperation, reciprocity and socio-cultural change. These practices are providing pioneering solutions to the challenge of how to reproduce our livelihoods beyond market and state.  <br /> <br /> The aim of this study is to recognise care and different responsibilities formed in material, technological, symbolic and imagined space. ....can be extended as a form of interest in the commons. <br /> <br /> The emphasis is placed not just on immediate contact experiences, but also on how the accrued histories of social experience and material circumstances contributing to the individual's feelings about different sorts of encounters. In particular, how do 'real' and 'imagined' feelings and practices of care inhibit or open up the possibilities that a bridge is being made between people's attitudes to particular individuals and to wider social groups. <br /> <br /> Place making: look at the potential of place-based forms of solidarity and care. Recent thinking about citizenship. Look at what people actually do. Who is active in the public space? Increased importance of place in our society. Making place becomes an important project.<br /> <br /> Ethics of care: looks at ethics which pays more attention to emotional and private role of ethical judgments.<br /> <br /> Look at the actual practices in everyday life settings and grass-roots movements<br /> <br /> Care for each other plays everywhere; we look at how it works in neighbourhoods and in the family. <br /> <br /> Focus on the individual experiences.<br /> <br /> (To scan the landscape for evidence and proposals for new ways of gathering diversity into a functioning ‘commons’. <br /> <br /> Argument link with social innovation: the role of ethics in community building: <br /> <br /> Not a focus on the innovative individual but: <br /> <br /> are the different ways to care for each other that arise in the community a social innovation in itself? <br /> <br /> === Paper 4 - Politics of care for social innovation ===<br /> * Hoe kun je politici hier in meenemen; houding cultiveren. Niet in bestuurlijke zin maar houding als persoon.<br /> * antropologie van beleidsmakers.<br /> '''ABSTRACT'''<br /> <br />                * ''(Chambon, David and Devevey 1982). Chambon et al. argue that social innovation practices are different from existing practices because they respond to a society which is blocked by ‘institutions’. Social innovation rejects ‘long circuits’ and aims to shorten way between appearance of need and its satisfaction by bypassing existing (welfare) state institutions.''  <br /> <br /> === Paper 5 - What happens when you become the best practise ===<br /> The up-scaling of local socially innovative actions is of paramount importance to a variety of actors included and excluded in the process. The so-called best practise should lead by example and practises should become transferrable to other cases and contexts. Yet, the local social innovation is oftentimes context-bound and running on bottom-up initiatives and practises. Transferring it to other places and context could therefore be problematic. In addition, gaining publicity as best-practise could work as an accelerator but may also act as a boundary for success.    <br /> <br /> Ulrum is a small village in the province of Groningen, The Netherlands. Due to population aging and dejuvination demographic changes are clearly felt and visible. In order to become a future-proof village, residents started working on changing their village in a place tailored to their needs. With a plethora of local, regional, national and international partners the residents have worked on finding a solution which fits the local needs of Ulrum. Instead of taking an external look, the project was set up from the inside, with the people who live and work in Ulrum. The official timeline of the project was three years, finishing in 2016. However, DEEL &amp; Ulrum continues till this day. <br /> <br /> In order to explore what happens when you become a best-practise, this research draws on a wide selection of data. All meeting minutes are used to develop a timeline of events. This information may also be used to analyse possible changes in the project due to these events. The documentary made of the Ulrum caused a lot of commotion in the village and the project. This documentary is also used in the analyses. In addition, interviews are conducted with various people involved in the project.    <br /> <br /> The aim of this study is to provide an insight of the dynamics taking place when a local project becomes a best-practise. Due to historical data, a retrospective view provides the opportunity to elucidate the process over time.     <br /> <br /> The results are of interest to people involved in social innovation projects. The greater field of social innovation and public administration in particular benefit from this research.     <br /> * Howaldt, J., Butzin, A., Domanski, D., &amp; Kaletka, C. (2014). ''Theoretical Approaches to Social Innovation – A Critical Literature Review.'' A deliverable of the project: “Social Innovation: Driving Force of Social Change” (SI-DRIVE). Dortmund: Sozialforschungsstelle.  <br /> * Moulaert, F., MacCallum, D., Mehmood, A., &amp; Hamdouch, A. (2013). ''The international handbook on social innovation: Collective action, social learning and transdisciplinary research''. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. <br /> <br /> === Paper 6 - Auto-Ethnography for social innovation ===<br /> The last paper focusses on the role of the intermediary, the facilitator, the professional in the process of social innovation. Concentrating on managing and creating innovative and productive contexts and to value each other’s strengths and avoid each other weaknesses is one of the tasks of the intermediary.<br /> <br /> The central supporting role of the professional and the public meeting culture is compelling in the social innovation process. It is of importance to explore this role if only to undermine the illusion of spontaneous care and direct solidarity. Place-bound and local forms of direct types of care are strongly interwoven with the indirect care of the welfare state through financing professionals and the meeting culture. The role of reflection and balancing power through perpetuating or imposing priorities from outside is what the professional needs to cope with. Within this the encounter with different kind of people is also challenge and furthermore a risk full process. Absorbing this risk is key to the process of socially innovative actions. Yet, for who is the professional absorbing this risk, the local community or political figures and bodies. Who is the object of care, of solidarity, is the question. Within the encounter the professional continuously takes on a different role, in which they themselves become a different person, a stranger. <br /> <br /> Through auto-ethnography this paper explores the field of tension between distance and involvement of alienation and appropriation, the self-evidence of the researcher and the informants in thinking, feeling and doing. It provides an insight of the dynamics in the case of Ulrum.<br /> <br /> The aim of this paper is presenting an alternative for making personal experiences relevant for people in similar positions and the pedagogy discipline in particular.<br /> * Ellis, Carolyn (2004). ''The ethnographic I: A methodological novel about autoethnography''. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press.<br /> * Ellis, Carolyn (2009). Telling tales on neighbors: Ethics in two voices. ''International Review of Qualitative Research'', ''2''(1), 3-28.<br /> {{Project config}}<br /> {{Project<br /> |Supercontext=PR SSM 00128<br /> |Project type=SSM, Standaard<br /> |Topcontext=PR SSM 00128<br /> |Name=Papers &amp; Articles<br /> |Start date=2017/07/06<br /> |Summary=Written papers and articles<br /> |Show summary=Ja<br /> |Show navigation tree=Ja<br /> |Show sub projects=Ja<br /> |Show participants=Nee<br /> |Show sources=Nee<br /> }}</div>

KimBoes https://gofreshwiki.nl/wiki/index.php?title=PR_00144&diff=50596 2018-01-11T15:04:48Z

<p>KimBoes: </p> <hr /> <div>== Keywords to describe our research: ==<br /> * Cross-disciplinary approach to study social innovation<br /> <br /> == Abstracts ==<br /> Identify the purpose (motivation)<br /> * Why did you decide to do this study or project?<br /> * How did you conduct your research?<br /> * Why is this research and your findings important?<br /> * Why should someone read your entire essay?<br /> * This section should include the importance of your work, the difficulty of the area, and the impact it might have if successful.<br /> Explain the problem at hand (problem statement)<br /> * What problem is your research trying to better understand or solve?<br /> * What is the scope of your study - a general problem, or something specific?<br /> * What is your main claim or argument?<br /> Describe the method (approach)<br /> <br /> Give your conclusion<br /> * What are the implications of your work?<br /> * Are your results general or very specific?<br /> <br /> Outline --&gt; Introduction - Body - Conclusion. Two paragraphs up to one page of text. ~ 300 words. <br /> <br /> === Paper 1 - Introducing the concept of place in socially innovative actions  ===<br /> * De huidige discussie gaat vooral om de verschillende definities van SI (wat is de correcte definitie). Wel aangeven waar in het debat / welke traditie we ons bevinden (maximalistische / minimalistisch en transformative / radical opzoeken).<br /> ** Minimalist - Maximalist: &quot;A third type of radical innovation has been elaborated by Mangabeira Unger. He distinguishes between '''minimalist social innovations''' which give a human face to an otherwise unsupportable situation, and '''maximalist social innovations''' that aim at deep changes. ”<br /> ** Transformative - Radical <br /> * GAP: hoe het proces in zijn gang gaat is onvoldoende scherp. Zeker wat aan toe te voegen: microniveau. Een scherpere blik op SI.<br /> * Wat gebeurt er? Daar is niet veel naar gekeken.<br /> * Combinatie met Human and Social Geography<br /> * '''PLACE'''<br /> '''ABSTRACT'''<br /> <br /> As the position of the nation state has weakened with decentralisation as result, local socially innovative actions have come to the attention of a plethora of actors. As a means to an end and an end in itself, social innovation has increasingly gained the interest of academics, practitioners and policy makers alike. Much has been said about the definition of social innovation and also the outcomes have been discussed at large. The process dimension of socially innovative actions is less explored. Especially the micro level with the individual as a central point of focus has gained little to no attention in the current discussion. <br /> <br /> Consequently, this study focusses on what is happening on a micro level during the process of social innovation. More specifically, this first paper enhances the discussion by introducing the concept of '''place.''' Decentralisation has enhanced the position of place in organising society. As a location with a purpose it is perceived as something people take shared responsibility of. It presupposes a position of equivalence and pluralism. Place is where the development of new, or the transformation of, social relations between individuals takes place, being at the centre of socially innovative actions. <br /> <br /> In order to explore the concept of place in the process of social innovation, this study takes on a cross-disciplinary approach and draws on the human and social geography literature. Instead of looking at shared norms and values and following a pre-given set, it focusses on altering the meaning of what it is to be social in the process. The results are relevant for researchers, practitioners and policy makers interested in the greater picture of social innovation.<br /> <br /> ''Social innovation, as a means to an end and an end it itself, has increasingly gained the interest of academics, practisioners and policy makers alike. The discussion has largely focussed on the goals of social innovation as well as on finding common ground regarding the definition. Social innovation addresses local social needs and global societal challenges. It does so by using social means through the development of new, or the transformation of, social relations. These socially innovative actions are driven by different processes to enable groups to better satisfy their human needs and improve their living conditions.'' <br /> <br /> ''Instead of joining the greater discussion on the content, outcomes and definition of social innovation, this study focusses on the process dimension. More specifically, it aims at elucidating the processes of social learning, individual and collective awareness rising, and socio-political mobilisation. At a microlevel it explores the connections between the different actors partaking in socially innovative actions.''<br /> <br /> ''Place making: look at the potential of place-based forms of solidarity and care. Recent thinking about citizenship. Look at what people actually do. Who is active in the public space? Increased importance of place in our society. Making place becomes an important project.''<br /> <br /> === Paper 2 - Social innovation and the role of the encounter ===<br /> * lijn: mooi dat er wordt gekeken naar het niveau van organisatie; maar wat gebeurt er op het niveau van individuen?<br /> * relatie met overheden: kunnen publieke instellingen ook innovatief zijn?<br /> * inter-organisatorisch kijken. Niet: wie is de leider / kenmerken e.d. Wel: hoe zit het met de verhouding tussen al die mensen. Dat mist in literatuur!<br /> * etnografisch meerwaarde toevoegen. Gebeurt nog niet in bestuurswetenschappen (public administration). Etnografie en innovatie.<br /> * '''THE ENCOUNTER + NARRATIVE'''<br /> '''ABSTRACT'''<br /> <br /> The social innovation process, as a method and a practise, is dynamic and includes a plethora of different actors. It derives from bringing together these different actors that usually do not maintain relationships or only in direct conflict. The previous paper explored the role of place in connecting people. This paper aims at further elucidating the level of the individual in socially innovative actions. It investigates how the relationships between different actors are (re)organised by drawing on the concept of '''the encounter''' frequently used in the human and social geography literature. Careful consideration is asked for the types of encounters sought for and avoided by individuals. <br /> <br /> Social innovation works towards social change through social actions and conscious awareness. Mutual learning plays an important role in this. The role of '''the narrative''' has often come to the forefront implicating its research significance through narrative analyses for interpreting human meaning and experience. Yet, the practical role of the narrative in mutual learning, mobilising action, and bringing about change has received little to no attention in the public administration discipline. <br /> <br /> Against the background of decentralisation and the growing importance of investing in a public meeting culture, understanding the role of the encounter in socially innovative actions could support public administrators in facilitating alternative structures for societal change. Introducing the narrative, and hence ethnography in innovation, as a practise could provide policy makers an additional instrument for mutual learning and thus to gain a qualitative insight of the relationships between people and the topics of importance to enhance quality of life from a policy perspective.    <br /> <br /> * Moulaert: &quot;''Social innovation is not innovation in its ends only. SI hence works towards social change through the deepening and the broadening of participation, the establishment of more inclusive organisational procedures, the development of the capacity for collective action and the fundamental change of human attitudes and behaviour.&quot;''<br /> * In vergelijk met Zapf (2003, p.427) ''&quot;...process of change in the social structure of a society in its constitutive institutions, cultural patterns, associated social actions and conscious awareness&quot;''<br /> * &quot;Social innovation derives from bringing together different actors that normally do not maintain relationships or only in direct conflict. Reorganise the connections between different actors - mutual learning (narratives?)&quot; (Klein 2010). --&gt; '''Link this with &quot;The encounter&quot;, link to human/social geography'''<br /> &lt;u&gt;Overdenkingen plaats:&lt;/u&gt; <br /> <br /> Greep natiestaten verzwakt en decentralisaties -&gt; plaats belangrijker. Relationeel. Verknoping van relaties. Groepen delen weinig behalve de plaats waar ze samenkomen. Gedeelde verantwoordelijkheid. Plaats -&gt; nieuwe gemeenschappelijkheid. Laagdrempelig. Vanuit nabijheid. Afhankelijkheid (krimp?) -&gt; lotsverbondenheid. Samen verantwoordelijkheid nemen voor een plaats veronderstelt een positie van gelijkwaardigheid. <br /> <br /> Overheid: gelijke kansen. Democratische plicht om om te investeren in een publiek ontmoetingsstructuur. Ook: Potentieel van plaat-gebaseerde vormen van care. Burgerschap als praktijk. Wat mensen concreet doen. Toegenomen belang van plaats in het organiseren van ons samenleven.<br /> === Paper 3 - Ethics of care: Means to an end or end in itself? ===<br /> <br /> * link innovatie: rol van ethics in gemeenschap vormen. Is dat:<br /> * zorgdragen voor ipv innovatief menstype te zijn (als individu) of is de ethics of care die in de gemeenschap ontstaat de sociale innovatie?<br /> * '''CARE + THE COMMONS'''<br /> '''ABSTRACT'''<br /> <br /> The previous two papers explored the role of place and encounter in the social innovation process. Social dynamics for the development of new or existing relationships between individuals is at the core of social innovation. The development of the capacity of collective action is what aimed for. Still, these social means are often solely perceived as a side effect of the social innovation process. Nevertheless, within the encounter between people, social dynamics are an inevitable factor. <br /> <br /> A concept which could meaningfully explain the social dynamics in collective action is the concept of '''care.''' Care is at times used as a synonym for solidarity and could be understood as connections that are made between individuals on the basis of natural predispositions. Apart from natural predisposition, moral principles are also influencing the development of relationships in socially innovative actions. Hence, the theory of an '''ethics of care,''' in which interpersonal relationships and benevolence are a virtue to moral actions, could meaningfully address the social dynamics in the social innovation process. In short, this paper focusses in particular on how individuals take care of each other. This leads to the question if an ethics of care is a means to an end, or an end in itself in social innovation. <br /> <br /> In the current discussion of citizenship different forms of place-based care could potentially influence collective action. In this vein, care may become part of '''the commons.''' This study perceives the commons as a group of people taking responsibility for organising and providing local services of importance to them. It is a field of new social practises based on socio-cultural change. Practises of care could inhibit or open up possibilities to change people's attitude towards other individuals and wider social groups. Understanding ethics and care as part of the commons <br /> <br /> The results of this research are relevant for public administrators to better understand the role of ethics of care in micro practises. It will enhance the understanding of how the choices of individuals effects societal change.<br /> <br /> * But how can we make visible the human relations that underlie care? conception of care - as part of the commons. Care: connections that are made on the basis of our natural predisposition to love, empathise, reciprocate and share meanings. The commons: where community organizes and provides its own services: Instead asking us to understand commons as an informal social activity from the bottom up known as ‘commoning’. This is where the real ideas for change are conceived and grow.<br /> <br /> * The Commons – &quot;a vision of empowered citizens taking charge of their lives and their endangered resources&quot;(Bollier &amp; Helfrich 2012) – is a field of possibilities and new social practices, based on sharing, cooperation, reciprocity and socio-cultural change. These practices are providing pioneering solutions to the challenge of how to reproduce our livelihoods beyond market and state.  <br /> <br /> The aim of this study is to recognise care and different responsibilities formed in material, technological, symbolic and imagined space. ....can be extended as a form of interest in the commons. <br /> <br /> The emphasis is placed not just on immediate contact experiences, but also on how the accrued histories of social experience and material circumstances contributing to the individual's feelings about different sorts of encounters. In particular, how do 'real' and 'imagined' feelings and practices of care inhibit or open up the possibilities that a bridge is being made between people's attitudes to particular individuals and to wider social groups. <br /> <br /> Place making: look at the potential of place-based forms of solidarity and care. Recent thinking about citizenship. Look at what people actually do. Who is active in the public space? Increased importance of place in our society. Making place becomes an important project.<br /> <br /> Ethics of care: looks at ethics which pays more attention to emotional and private role of ethical judgments.<br /> <br /> Look at the actual practices in everyday life settings and grass-roots movements<br /> <br /> Care for each other plays everywhere; we look at how it works in neighbourhoods and in the family. <br /> <br /> Focus on the individual experiences.<br /> <br /> (To scan the landscape for evidence and proposals for new ways of gathering diversity into a functioning ‘commons’. <br /> <br /> Argument link with social innovation: the role of ethics in community building: <br /> <br /> Not a focus on the innovative individual but: <br /> <br /> are the different ways to care for each other that arise in the community a social innovation in itself? <br /> <br /> === Paper 4 - Politics of care for social innovation ===<br /> * Hoe kun je politici hier in meenemen; houding cultiveren. Niet in bestuurlijke zin maar houding als persoon.<br /> * antropologie van beleidsmakers.<br /> '''ABSTRACT'''<br /> <br /> The involvement of civil society to bring about social change while also renovating democracy has gained importance in public administration. Transparency, legitimacy and democracy need to be guaranteed with specific governance mechanisms. Apart from bringing about cultural change amongst civil society, this also depends on a cultural change in public administration. Social innovation aims at eliminating the long lines set by rules and regulations by bypassing existing welfare state institutions. Local forms of social innovation tend to highlight the need for recognition and reprensentation and could hence help to improve conventional welfare state politics. Still, a sense of togetherness and pluralism does not rest alone on an the idea of recognision and community (the commons)                <br /> <br /> Instead of looking at the code or the principles, the norms and the values, this paper focusses on the cultivation of the political person. In particular, the self-formation as an ethical subject involving practices of forming the ethical political subject. It puts emphasis on the attitude of a divers set of policy makers rather than looking at the administrative perspective. Which attitudes and practices could enable ethically sensitive, negotiated settlements between different groups and individuals in the social innovation process and the construction of the commons. It looks at what a '''politics of care''' could be and how local politics participate in ethics of care and building new communities and collaboration.        <br /> <br /> The aim is to explore the '''anthropology of policy makers''' to enable a more affective and informal perspective for the political subject. More so, to explore how anthropology, as a means, could enable more attitude and greater determination in mobilising action and leading change in an organisational settings. <br /> <br /> The paper looks at places where the commons exercise their responsibility in order to provide policy makers a closer look into micro political opportunities. Hence, the results are relevant for public administration and policy makers in particular. <br /> <br /> ''i.e. (focus: decision makers’ and civil servants’ ) capacity in learning to develop spaces for common decisions, integrate different sources of power and aims and elaborate new practices of working together.''<br /> <br /> ''While the previous papers focussed especially on the individual in the social innovation process, this paper concentrates on political responsibility and political practice. Referring to the concept of care''<br /> <br /> ''will enable us to identify more precisely the problems associated with…..as the are constructed in the proces of social innovation. We focus on the process dimension of SI as this dimension is most relevant to the governance challenges….''<br /> * ''(Chambon, David and Devevey 1982). Chambon et al. argue that social innovation practices are different from existing practices because they respond to a society which is blocked by ‘institutions’. Social innovation rejects ‘long circuits’ and aims to shorten way between appearance of need and its satisfaction by bypassing existing (welfare) state institutions.''  <br /> <br /> === Paper 5 - What happens when you become the best practise ===<br /> * Dit bekijken met een externe blik en hoe het het project en de mensen en de plaats heeft veranderd<br /> * de rol van plaats<br /> * vanuit het perspectief van best practice / reflectie over de eigen positie<br /> * sociale mobiliteit / creëert hiërarchie / hoe valt dat in de groep<br /> '''ABSTRACT'''<br /> <br /> The up-scaling of local socially innovative actions is of paramount importance to a variety of actors included and excluded in the process. The so-called best practise should lead by example and practises should become transferrable to other cases and contexts. Yet, the local social innovation is oftentimes context-bound and running on bottom-up initiatives and practises. Gaining publicity could work as an accelerator but may also act as a boundary for succes. <br /> <br /> The social innovation process is often influenced by political pressure, in itself influenced by socio-economic and socio-demographic challenges such as legitimacy and inclusiveness. Public institutions and in particular the key persons involved in the process are facing great challenges. Favourable conditions need to be created, yet simultaneously a risk assessment is asked for taking into account inequality, keeping in control of the exclusionary process and avoiding risks of delegation and passive subsidiary. At the same time the local organisation, i.e. the local promoters, are equally concerned with the dynamics of internal relations, living up to the expectations of policy makers, the pressure of subsidies, timeframes and publicity. Hence, a functioning connection between the bottom up perspective and top down practices is of paramount importance. <br /> <br /> Local socially innovative actions act as micro-processes making macro-political settlements possible. This paper takes a closer look at the practise of social innovation to identify in more detail the governance challenges and dilemma's faced when becoming a succes story. The focus shall not solely be on the intervention or action in isolation but includes its spatial form and institutional embedding as well. It looks at contextual conditions, collaboration, interdependence, the awareness of it and the actual creation of active trust and reflexive engagement. This paper analyses how these tensions play out in actual practices as they are constructed in practices of social innovation.<br /> <br /> The aim of this paper is to gain a better understanding of the balance among social, managerial and political aims, devoting special attention to responsibility and accountability, both within the commons and public institutions as well as their partnerships with different kind of actors. The unit of analysis are localised social innovations and include its spatial form and institutional embedding. In particular, the case of Ulrum is utilised as an example in this paper. The results of this research are relevant for actors partaking in the social innovation process as well as public administration. <br /> <br /> ''That is its multi scaler and networked nature as a complex assemblage of actors, institutions and instruments, as an intrinsic part of the social innovation process.'' <br /> <br /> ''The focus of this paper is on governance challenges and dilemma’s .... on a regional and national level.'' <br /> <br /> ''Look into the possibilities and the boundaries of citizenship.'' <br /> <br /> ''and include its spatial form and institutional embedding''<br /> <br /> ''we approach localized forms of SI against the backdrop of the restructering of the wellfare state + new social challenges (participation and joint decision making?)''<br /> <br /> ''vraag naar participatie en inspraak: nieuwe uitdagingen. Ulrum geeft door opzet en veelheid aan partners mogelijkheden.'' <br /> <br /> ''proces: risks''<br /> <br /> ''best practice -&gt; exposure -&gt; effects?''<br /> <br /> ''Internal relations (+ encounter with the stranger)''<br /> <br /> ''Leaving space to citizens’ and communities’ self-organisation -&gt; risks for:''<br /> <br /> ''public institutions (focus key persons in strategic public institutions): their biggest challenge is to create favourable conditions + risks (inequality, keeping control over exclusionary processes, avoiding risks of delegation and passive subsidiary).''<br /> <br /> === Paper 6 - Auto-Ethnography for social innovation ===<br /> The last paper focusses on the role of the intermediary, the facilitator, the professional in the process of social innovation. Concentrating on managing and creating innovative and productive contexts and to value each other’s strengths and avoid each other weaknesses is one of the tasks of the intermediary.<br /> <br /> The central supporting role of the professional and the public meeting culture is compelling in the social innovation process. It is of importance to explore this role if only to undermine the illusion of spontaneous care and direct solidarity. Place-bound and local forms of direct types of care are strongly interwoven with the indirect care of the welfare state through financing professionals and the meeting culture. The role of reflection and balancing power through perpetuating or imposing priorities from outside is what the professional needs to cope with. Within this the encounter with different kind of people is also challenge and furthermore a risk full process. Absorbing this risk is key to the process of socially innovative actions. Yet, for who is the professional absorbing this risk, the local community or political figures and bodies. Who is the object of care, of solidarity, is the question. Within the encounter the professional continuously takes on a different role, in which they themselves become a different person, a stranger. <br /> <br /> Through auto-ethnography this paper explores the field of tension between distance and involvement of alienation and appropriation, the self-evidence of the researcher and the informants in thinking, feeling and doing. It provides an insight of the dynamics in the case of Ulrum.<br /> <br /> The aim of this paper is presenting an alternative for making personal experiences relevant for people in similar positions and the pedagogy discipline in particular.<br /> * Ellis, Carolyn (2004). ''The ethnographic I: A methodological novel about autoethnography''. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press.<br /> * Ellis, Carolyn (2009). Telling tales on neighbors: Ethics in two voices. ''International Review of Qualitative Research'', ''2''(1), 3-28.<br /> {{Project config}}<br /> {{Project<br /> |Supercontext=PR SSM 00128<br /> |Project type=SSM, Standaard<br /> |Topcontext=PR SSM 00128<br /> |Name=Papers &amp; Articles<br /> |Start date=2017/07/06<br /> |Summary=Written papers and articles<br /> |Show summary=Ja<br /> |Show navigation tree=Ja<br /> |Show sub projects=Ja<br /> |Show participants=Nee<br /> |Show sources=Nee<br /> }}</div>

KimBoes https://gofreshwiki.nl/wiki/index.php?title=LC_00448&diff=50595 2018-01-11T13:59:29Z

<p>KimBoes: </p> <hr /> <div>===Paper 1 - Introducing the concept of place in socially innovative actions===<br /> *De huidige discussie gaat vooral om de verschillende definities van SI (wat is de correcte definitie). Wel aangeven waar in het debat / welke traditie we ons bevinden (maximalistische / minimalistisch en transformative / radical opzoeken).<br /> **Minimalist - Maximalist: &quot;A third type of radical innovation has been elaborated by Mangabeira Unger. He distinguishes between '''minimalist social innovations''' which give a human face to an otherwise unsupportable situation, and '''maximalist social innovations''' that aim at deep changes. ”<br /> **Transformative - Radical<br /> *GAP: hoe het proces in zijn gang gaat is onvoldoende scherp. Zeker wat aan toe te voegen: microniveau. Een scherpere blik op SI.<br /> *Wat gebeurt er? Daar is niet veel naar gekeken.<br /> *Combinatie met Human and Social Geography<br /> *'''PLACE'''<br /> '''ABSTRACT'''<br /> <br /> As the position of the nation state has weakened with decentralisation as result, local socially innovative actions have come to the attention of a plethora of actors. As a means to an end and an end in itself, social innovation has increasingly gained the interest of academics, practitioners and policy makers alike. Much has been said about the definition of social innovation and also the outcomes have been discussed at large. The process dimension of socially innovative actions is less explored. Especially the micro level with the individual as a central point of focus has gained little to no attention in the current discussion.<br /> <br /> Consequently, this study focusses on what is happening on a micro level during the process of social innovation. More specifically, this first paper enhances the discussion by introducing the concept of '''place.''' Decentralisation has enhanced the position of place in organising society. As a location with a purpose it is perceived as something people take shared responsibility of. It presupposes a position of equivalence and pluralism. Place is where the development of new, or the transformation of, social relations between individuals takes place, being at the centre of socially innovative actions.<br /> <br /> In order to explore the concept of place in the process of social innovation, this study takes on a cross-disciplinary approach and draws on the human and social geography literature. Instead of looking at shared norms and values and following a pre-given set, it focusses on altering the meaning of what it is to be social in the process. The results are relevant for researchers, practitioners and policy makers interested in the greater picture of social innovation.<br /> <br /> ''Social innovation, as a means to an end and an end it itself, has increasingly gained the interest of academics, practisioners and policy makers alike. The discussion has largely focussed on the goals of social innovation as well as on finding common ground regarding the definition. Social innovation addresses local social needs and global societal challenges. It does so by using social means through the development of new, or the transformation of, social relations. These socially innovative actions are driven by different processes to enable groups to better satisfy their human needs and improve their living conditions.''<br /> <br /> ''Instead of joining the greater discussion on the content, outcomes and definition of social innovation, this study focusses on the process dimension. More specifically, it aims at elucidating the processes of social learning, individual and collective awareness rising, and socio-political mobilisation. At a microlevel it explores the connections between the different actors partaking in socially innovative actions.''<br /> <br /> ''Place making: look at the potential of place-based forms of solidarity and care. Recent thinking about citizenship. Look at what people actually do. Who is active in the public space? Increased importance of place in our society. Making place becomes an important project.''<br /> ===Paper 2 - Social innovation and the role of the encounter===<br /> *lijn: mooi dat er wordt gekeken naar het niveau van organisatie; maar wat gebeurt er op het niveau van individuen?<br /> *relatie met overheden: kunnen publieke instellingen ook innovatief zijn?<br /> *inter-organisatorisch kijken. Niet: wie is de leider / kenmerken e.d. Wel: hoe zit het met de verhouding tussen al die mensen. Dat mist in literatuur!<br /> *etnografisch meerwaarde toevoegen. Gebeurt nog niet in bestuurswetenschappen (public administration). Etnografie en innovatie.<br /> *'''THE ENCOUNTER + NARRATIVE'''<br /> '''ABSTRACT'''<br /> <br /> The social innovation process, as a method and a practise, is dynamic and includes a plethora of different actors. It derives from bringing together these different actors that usually do not maintain relationships or only in direct conflict. The previous paper explored the role of place in connecting people. This paper aims at further elucidating the level of the individual in socially innovative actions. It investigates how the relationships between different actors are (re)organised by drawing on the concept of '''the encounter''' frequently used in the human and social geography literature. Careful consideration is asked for the types of encounters sought for and avoided by individuals.<br /> <br /> Social innovation works towards social change through social actions and conscious awareness. Mutual learning plays an important role in this. The role of '''the narrative''' has often come to the forefront implicating its research significance through narrative analyses for interpreting human meaning and experience. Yet, the practical role of the narrative in mutual learning, mobilising action, and bringing about change has received little to no attention in the public administration discipline.<br /> <br /> Against the background of decentralisation and the growing importance of investing in a public meeting culture, understanding the role of the encounter in socially innovative actions could support public administrators in facilitating alternative structures for societal change. Introducing the narrative, and hence ethnography in innovation, as a practise could provide policy makers an additional instrument for mutual learning and thus to gain a qualitative insight of the relationships between people and the topics of importance to enhance quality of life from a policy perspective.<br /> *Moulaert: &quot;''Social innovation is not innovation in its ends only. SI hence works towards social change through the deepening and the broadening of participation, the establishment of more inclusive organisational procedures, the development of the capacity for collective action and the fundamental change of human attitudes and behaviour.&quot;''<br /> *In vergelijk met Zapf (2003, p.427) ''&quot;...process of change in the social structure of a society in its constitutive institutions, cultural patterns, associated social actions and conscious awareness&quot;''<br /> *&quot;Social innovation derives from bringing together different actors that normally do not maintain relationships or only in direct conflict. Reorganise the connections between different actors - mutual learning (narratives?)&quot; (Klein 2010). --&gt; '''Link this with &quot;The encounter&quot;, link to human/social geography'''<br /> &lt;u&gt;Overdenkingen plaats:&lt;/u&gt;<br /> <br /> Greep natiestaten verzwakt en decentralisaties -&gt; plaats belangrijker. Relationeel. Verknoping van relaties. Groepen delen weinig behalve de plaats waar ze samenkomen. Gedeelde verantwoordelijkheid. Plaats -&gt; nieuwe gemeenschappelijkheid. Laagdrempelig. Vanuit nabijheid. Afhankelijkheid (krimp?) -&gt; lotsverbondenheid. Samen verantwoordelijkheid nemen voor een plaats veronderstelt een positie van gelijkwaardigheid.<br /> <br /> Overheid: gelijke kansen. Democratische plicht om om te investeren in een publiek ontmoetingsstructuur. Ook: Potentieel van plaat-gebaseerde vormen van care. Burgerschap als praktijk. Wat mensen concreet doen. Toegenomen belang van plaats in het organiseren van ons samenleven.<br /> ===Paper 3 - Ethics of care: Means to an end or end in itself?===<br /> *link innovatie: rol van ethics in gemeenschap vormen. Is dat:<br /> *zorgdragen voor ipv innovatief menstype te zijn (als individu) of is de ethics of care die in de gemeenschap ontstaat de sociale innovatie?<br /> *'''CARE + THE COMMONS'''<br /> '''ABSTRACT'''<br /> <br /> The previous two papers explored the role of place and encounter in the social innovation process. Social dynamics for the development of new or existing relationships between individuals is at the core of social innovation. The development of the capacity of collective action is what aimed for. Still, these social means are often solely perceived as a side effect of the social innovation process. Nevertheless, within the encounter between people, social dynamics are an inevitable factor.<br /> <br /> A concept which could meaningfully explain the social dynamics in collective action is the concept of '''care.''' Care is at times used as a synonym for solidarity and could be understood as connections that are made between individuals on the basis of natural predispositions. Apart from natural predisposition, moral principles are also influencing the development of relationships in socially innovative actions. Hence, the theory of an '''ethics of care,''' in which interpersonal relationships and benevolence are a virtue to moral actions, could meaningfully address the social dynamics in the social innovation process. In short, this paper focusses in particular on how individuals take care of each other. This leads to the question if an ethics of care is a means to an end, or an end in itself in social innovation.<br /> <br /> In the current discussion of citizenship different forms of place-based care could potentially influence collective action. In this vein, care may become part of '''the commons.''' This study perceives the commons as a group of people taking responsibility for organising and providing local services of importance to them. It is a field of new social practises based on socio-cultural change. Practises of care could inhibit or open up possibilities to change people's attitude towards other individuals and wider social groups. Understanding ethics and care as part of the commons<br /> <br /> The results of this research are relevant for public administrators to better understand the role of ethics of care in micro practises. It will enhance the understanding of how the choices of individuals effects societal change.<br /> *But how can we make visible the human relations that underlie care? conception of care - as part of the commons. Care: connections that are made on the basis of our natural predisposition to love, empathise, reciprocate and share meanings. The commons: where community organizes and provides its own services: Instead asking us to understand commons as an informal social activity from the bottom up known as ‘commoning’. This is where the real ideas for change are conceived and grow.<br /> <br /> *The Commons – &quot;a vision of empowered citizens taking charge of their lives and their endangered resources&quot;(Bollier &amp; Helfrich 2012) – is a field of possibilities and new social practices, based on sharing, cooperation, reciprocity and socio-cultural change. These practices are providing pioneering solutions to the challenge of how to reproduce our livelihoods beyond market and state.<br /> The aim of this study is to recognise care and different responsibilities formed in material, technological, symbolic and imagined space. ....can be extended as a form of interest in the commons.<br /> <br /> The emphasis is placed not just on immediate contact experiences, but also on how the accrued histories of social experience and material circumstances contributing to the individual's feelings about different sorts of encounters. In particular, how do 'real' and 'imagined' feelings and practices of care inhibit or open up the possibilities that a bridge is being made between people's attitudes to particular individuals and to wider social groups.<br /> <br /> Place making: look at the potential of place-based forms of solidarity and care. Recent thinking about citizenship. Look at what people actually do. Who is active in the public space? Increased importance of place in our society. Making place becomes an important project.<br /> <br /> Ethics of care: looks at ethics which pays more attention to emotional and private role of ethical judgments.<br /> <br /> Look at the actual practices in everyday life settings and grass-roots movements<br /> <br /> Care for each other plays everywhere; we look at how it works in neighbourhoods and in the family.<br /> <br /> Focus on the individual experiences.<br /> <br /> (To scan the landscape for evidence and proposals for new ways of gathering diversity into a functioning ‘commons’.<br /> <br /> Argument link with social innovation: the role of ethics in community building:<br /> <br /> Not a focus on the innovative individual but:<br /> <br /> are the different ways to care for each other that arise in the community a social innovation in itself?<br /> ===Paper 4 - Politics of care for social innovation===<br /> *Hoe kun je politici hier in meenemen; houding cultiveren. Niet in bestuurlijke zin maar houding als persoon.<br /> *antropologie van beleidsmakers.<br /> '''ABSTRACT'''<br /> <br /> The involvement of civil society to bring about social change while also renovating democracy has gained importance in public administration. Transparency, legitimacy and democracy need to be guaranteed with specific governance mechanisms. Apart from bringing about cultural change amongst civil society, this also depends on a cultural change in public administration. Social innovation aims at eliminating the long lines set by rules and regulations by bypassing existing welfare state institutions. Local forms of social innovation tend to highlight the need for recognition and reprensentation and could hence help to improve conventional welfare state politics. Still, a sense of togetherness and pluralism does not rest alone on an the idea of recognision and community (the commons)<br /> <br /> Instead of looking at the code or the principles, the norms and the values, this paper focusses on the cultivation of the political person. In particular, the self-formation as an ethical subject involving practices of forming the ethical political subject. It puts emphasis on the attitude of a divers set of policy makers rather than looking at the administrative perspective. Which attitudes and practices could enable ethically sensitive, negotiated settlements between different groups and individuals in the social innovation process and the construction of the commons. It looks at what a '''politics of care''' could be and how local politics participate in ethics of care and building new communities and collaboration.<br /> <br /> The aim is to explore the '''anthropology of policy makers''' to enable a more affective and informal perspective for the political subject. More so, to explore how anthropology, as a means, could enable more attitude and greater determination in mobilising action and leading change in an organisational settings.<br /> <br /> The paper looks at places where the commons exercise their responsibility in order to provide policy makers a closer look into micro political opportunities. Hence, the results are relevant for public administration and policy makers in particular.<br /> <br /> ''i.e. (focus: decision makers’ and civil servants’ ) capacity in learning to develop spaces for common decisions, integrate different sources of power and aims and elaborate new practices of working together.''<br /> <br /> ''While the previous papers focussed especially on the individual in the social innovation process, this paper concentrates on political responsibility and political practice. Referring to the concept of care''<br /> <br /> ''will enable us to identify more precisely the problems associated with…..as the are constructed in the proces of social innovation. We focus on the process dimension of SI as this dimension is most relevant to the governance challenges….''<br /> *''(Chambon, David and Devevey 1982). Chambon et al. argue that social innovation practices are different from existing practices because they respond to a society which is blocked by ‘institutions’. Social innovation rejects ‘long circuits’ and aims to shorten way between appearance of need and its satisfaction by bypassing existing (welfare) state institutions.''<br /> ===Paper 5 - What happens when you become the best practise===<br /> *Dit bekijken met een externe blik en hoe het het project en de mensen en de plaats heeft veranderd<br /> *de rol van plaats<br /> *vanuit het perspectief van best practice / reflectie over de eigen positie<br /> *sociale mobiliteit / creëert hiërarchie / hoe valt dat in de groep<br /> '''ABSTRACT'''<br /> <br /> The up-scaling of local socially innovative actions is of paramount importance to a variety of actors included and excluded in the process. The so-called best practise should lead by example and practises should become transferrable to other cases and contexts. Yet, the local social innovation is oftentimes context-bound and running on bottom-up initiatives and practises. Gaining publicity could work as an accelerator but may also act as a boundary for succes.<br /> <br /> The social innovation process is often influenced by political pressure, in itself influenced by socio-economic and socio-demographic challenges such as legitimacy and inclusiveness. Public institutions and in particular the key persons involved in the process are facing great challenges. Favourable conditions need to be created, yet simultaneously a risk assessment is asked for taking into account inequality, keeping in control of the exclusionary process and avoiding risks of delegation and passive subsidiary. At the same time the local organisation, i.e. the local promoters, are equally concerned with the dynamics of internal relations, living up to the expectations of policy makers, the pressure of subsidies, timeframes and publicity. Hence, a functioning connection between the bottom up perspective and top down practices is of paramount importance.<br /> <br /> Local socially innovative actions act as micro-processes making macro-political settlements possible. This paper takes a closer look at the practise of social innovation to identify in more detail the governance challenges and dilemma's faced when becoming a succes story. The focus shall not solely be on the intervention or action in isolation but includes its spatial form and institutional embedding as well. It looks at contextual conditions, collaboration, interdependence, the awareness of it and the actual creation of active trust and reflexive engagement. This paper analyses how these tensions play out in actual practices as they are constructed in practices of social innovation.<br /> <br /> The aim of this paper is to gain a better understanding of the balance among social, managerial and political aims, devoting special attention to responsibility and accountability, both within the commons and public institutions as well as their partnerships with different kind of actors. The unit of analysis are localised social innovations and include its spatial form and institutional embedding. In particular, the case of Ulrum is utilised as an example in this paper. The results of this research are relevant for actors partaking in the social innovation process as well as public administration.<br /> <br /> ''That is its multi scaler and networked nature as a complex assemblage of actors, institutions and instruments, as an intrinsic part of the social innovation process.''<br /> <br /> ''The focus of this paper is on governance challenges and dilemma’s .... on a regional and national level.''<br /> <br /> ''Look into the possibilities and the boundaries of citizenship.''<br /> <br /> ''and include its spatial form and institutional embedding''<br /> <br /> ''we approach localized forms of SI against the backdrop of the restructering of the wellfare state + new social challenges (participation and joint decision making?)''<br /> <br /> ''vraag naar participatie en inspraak: nieuwe uitdagingen. Ulrum geeft door opzet en veelheid aan partners mogelijkheden.''<br /> <br /> ''proces: risks''<br /> <br /> ''best practice -&gt; exposure -&gt; effects?''<br /> <br /> ''Internal relations (+ encounter with the stranger)''<br /> <br /> ''Leaving space to citizens’ and communities’ self-organisation -&gt; risks for:''<br /> <br /> ''public institutions (focus key persons in strategic public institutions): their biggest challenge is to create favourable conditions + risks (inequality, keeping control over exclusionary processes, avoiding risks of delegation and passive subsidiary).''<br /> ===Paper 6 - Auto-Ethnography for social innovation===<br /> *Professional als object van solidariteit.<br /> *buffer zijn / risico absorberen<br /> *pedagogie als discipline?<br /> '''ABSTRACT'''<br /> <br /> The last paper focusses on the role of the intermediary, the facilitator, the professional in the process of social innovation. Concentrating on managing and creating innovative and productive contexts and to value each others strengths and avoid each other weaknesses is one of the tasks of the intermediary.<br /> <br /> The central supporting role of the professional and the public meeting culture is compelling in the social innovation process. It is of importance to explore this role if only to undermine the illusion of spontaneous care and direct solidarity. Place-bound and local forms of direct types of care are strongly interwoven with the indirect care of the welfare state through financing professionals and the meeting culture. The role of reflection and balancing power through perpetuating or imposing priorities from outside is what the professional needs to cope with.<br /> <br /> Through auto-ethnography this paper explores the field of tension between distance and involvement of alienation and appropriation, the self-evidence of the researcher and the informants in thinking, feeling and doing. It provides an insight of the dynamics in the case of Ulrum.<br /> <br /> The aim of this paper is presenting an alternative for making personal experiences relevant for people in similar positions and the pedagogy discipline in particular. The results of this research are relevant for pedagogy and practitioners of social innovation.<br /> <br /> Auto-etnografie:<br /> <br /> Kracht auto-etnografie: inzicht verschaffen in de doorwerking van gebeurtenissen, maatregelen, wetgeving, normen en waarden en concrete levens maar ook inzicht in de totstandkoming van onderzoeksresultaten en conclusies.<br /> <br /> Analytische auto-etnografie als methode?<br /> <br /> encounter with 'the stranger'<br /> <br /> Role facilitator / intermediary in SI needs: managing and creating innovative and productive contexts to value each others stenghts and avoid each other weaknesses.<br /> <br /> Experiment with new theories, techniques, methods of research and, in this case: representation.<br /> <br /> Massey: &quot;Unavoidably we had to think about the politics and ethics of out academic 'locality'. And here choice looms as a daily challenge: a choice of the theorist, not to try to 'get is right' but to persue inventiveness&quot;<br /> <br /> Opvallend is de centrale ondersteunende rol van 'professionals' en 'publieke ontmoetingsstructuur'. De positie van professionals (in 4 politics hier anders bedoeld). Rol van reflectie en machtsverhoudingen (bestendigen of prioriteiten van buiten opleggen). Het is echter belangrijk om deze rol zichtbaar te maken (alleen al omdat het mythes over het spontane karakter van zorg voor elkaar en directe solidariteit onderuit haalt). De plaatsgebonden vormen van directe vormen van solidariteit (care) zijn via de financiering van professionals en ontmoetingsstructuur sterk verweven met de indirecte solidariteit (care) van de verzorgingsstaat. In Ulrum ook: Ook andere sporen van overheidssfinanciering: het gebruik maken van publiek gefinancierde onderzoeksinstellingen. Sterk verweven in de praktijk (indirect en direct).<br /> <br /> Zie ook Kok: &quot;de overheid was nog nooit zo betrokken&quot;<br /> <br /> Ethnografie als methode: Ulrum: aan den lijve kunnen ondervinden hoe ‘het’ er aan toe gaat + hoe (het systeem) werkt. Zie ook best-practice zijn. Meer inzicht verkregen in de interactie tussen de verschillende actoren / vertegenwoordigers van….<br /> <br /> Jeff Ferrell zet zich met zijn auto-etnografische benadering af tegen de positivistische onderzoeksbenadering die geen oog heeft voor de ‘situated logic and emotion which define criminal experience’ (1998: 20). Hij stelt dat deze benadering meer recht doet aan de dagelijkse praktijk van participerende observatie. Hij is dan ook een voorstander van wat hij ‘true confessions’ noemt: ‘accounts of field research that in fact undermine absolutist notions of scholarly truth by incorporating situationally truthfully representations of field researchers’ lived and limiting experiences’.<br /> <br /> Ferrells auto-etnografische benadering, die in dienst staat van het beschrijven van de sociale wereld van ''…'', komt tot uiting in drie aspecten: (a) representatie, (b) analyse en (c) de rol van de onderzoeker in de tekst.<br /> <br /> De verdiensten van de auto-etnografie (als vanzelfsprekend onderdeel van de etnografie) hebben betrekking op:<br /> <br /> 1.    het integreren van de persoonlijke ervaringen van onderzoekers in teksten om zo te komen tot een rijkere beschrijving van de sociale werelden die zij onderzoeken;<br /> <br /> 2.    het expliciteren van de rol van de onderzoeker in publicaties; en<br /> <br /> 3.    het ontwikkelen van nieuwe (meer aansprekende) vormen van representatie.<br /> <br /> Ferrell geeft aan dat auto-etnografische inzichten vooral ontwikkeld kunnen worden als onderzoekers zelf zo veel als mogelijk deelnemen aan de sociale wereld die zij bestuderen. Ferrell gaat hierin veel verder dan de meeste onderzoekers: ‘I will try not to hide behind the cloak of a researcher or scholar, but rather participate as fully as possible in these risky social processes’ (Ferrell, 1998: 21). In feite komt zijn doel tijdens veldwerk neer op ''going native'' (drie jaar lang elke maand een week daar gewoond)<br /> <br /> alle ruimte geven aan de ''day-to-day reality'' van de ''…'' en richt zich hierbij op de ‘situational meanings and emotions – its moments of pleasure and pain, its emergent logics and excitement’ (Ferrell, 1998: 24-25). Doel ligt vooral in het zo levensecht mogelijk beschrijven van de sociale wereld van / process van SI''…''. Wel reflecteren op de eerder genoemde concepten. Bijvoorbeeld:<br /> <br /> hoe de bewoners met hun handelingen betekenis kunnen geven aan hun dorp.<br /> <br /> ook: nadere analyse van: interacties tussen vreemden in de openbare ruimte (Müller, 2011).<br /> <br /> Ferrell duidelijk dat auto-etnografie vooral als methode kan werken wanneer er sprake is van een proces van ''going native'', waarin onderzoekers worden geconfronteerd met nieuwe ervaringen die afwijken van wat zij gewend zijn. Juist door de eigen emotionele reactie op een nieuwe sociale situatie serieus te nemen en daarover na te denken kan inzicht worden verkregen in cruciale aspecten van de te onderzoeken sociale wereld.<br /> <br /> In het spanningsveld van distantie en betrokkenheid vervreemding en toe-eigening worden de vanzelfsprekendheden (van de onderzoeker en de informanten) in denken, voelen en doen ontdekt en inzichtelijk gemaakt.<br /> <br /> {{Light Context<br /> |Supercontext=PR 00144<br /> |Topcontext=PR SSM 00128<br /> |Toppage=Other<br /> |Sequence number=1<br /> |Context type=Situation<br /> |Heading=First Version Abstracts Dec 2017<br /> |Start date=2018/01/11<br /> |Show referred by=Ja<br /> |Referred by text=Hier wordt aan gewerkt of naar verwezen door:<br /> }}</div>

KimBoes https://gofreshwiki.nl/wiki/index.php?title=LC_00448&diff=50594 2018-01-11T13:57:24Z

<p>KimBoes: </p> <hr /> <div>December 2017 Abstracts{{Light Context<br /> |Supercontext=PR 00144<br /> |Topcontext=PR SSM 00128<br /> |Toppage=Other<br /> |Sequence number=1<br /> |Context type=Situation<br /> |Heading=First Version Abstracts Dec 2017<br /> |Start date=2018/01/11<br /> |Show referred by=Ja<br /> |Referred by text=Hier wordt aan gewerkt of naar verwezen door:<br /> }}</div>

KimBoes https://gofreshwiki.nl/wiki/index.php?title=LC_00448&diff=50593 2018-01-11T13:56:54Z

<p>KimBoes: Nieuwe pagina aangemaakt met ' {{Light Context |Supercontext=PR 00144 |Topcontext=PR SSM 00128 |Toppage=Other |Sequence number=1 |Context type=Situation |Heading=First Version Abstracts Dec 2017...'</p> <hr /> <div><br /> {{Light Context<br /> |Supercontext=PR 00144<br /> |Topcontext=PR SSM 00128<br /> |Toppage=Other<br /> |Sequence number=1<br /> |Context type=Situation<br /> |Heading=First Version Abstracts Dec 2017<br /> |Start date=2018/01/11<br /> |Show referred by=Ja<br /> |Referred by text=Hier wordt aan gewerkt of naar verwezen door:<br /> }}</div>

KimBoes https://gofreshwiki.nl/wiki/index.php?title=LC_00758&diff=50592 2018-01-11T13:48:49Z

<p>KimBoes: </p> <hr /> <div>'''Titles of our research (August 2017)''' <br /> <br /> '''Petra de Braal -''' <br /> <br /> '''Kim Boes -''' <br /> <br /> == Projectlogboek ==<br /> Hierin houden wij aantekeningen van besprekingen bij, de dingen die we al hebben geschreven en ook de monitoring en evaluatie van ons project. <br /> <br /> === Aantekeningen besprekingen ===<br /> <br /> ==== '''14.06.2017 - Antwerpen - Stijn, Kim, Petra''' ====<br /> * In ons eerste geschreven stuk praten we niet over de plaats/plek van de projecten. Deze zijn natuurlijk van belang en mogen daarom zeker niet vergeten worden. <br /> * Er worden een heleboel verschillende richtingen genoemd met bijpassende auteurs<br /> ** Het kleine verzet - Tine Hens. Collum in MoMagazine - 5 artikelen over project Stijn<br /> ** Geografie --&gt; Care --&gt; Doreen Massey <br /> ** Frans Thisse (sociale geografie) <br /> ** Feminisme --&gt; Solidariteit --&gt; Geography of effects <br /> ** The end of capitalism as we knew it - Graham and Gibson <br /> *** Ethics of the local <br /> *** Are we thinking Marxism <br /> * We moeten ook de andere kant van het verhaal beschrijven, de kant waar we meer kritisch naar kijken<br /> ** Mandy de Wilde - Als meedoen pijn doet <br /> ** Evelien Tonkens en Jan Willem Duyvendak in discussie met Jan Rotmans <br /> * Wij pikten &quot;Imagined community&quot; uit Ash Amin --&gt; waar komt dit vandaan. Verbeelding en sense of place <br /> * Gill Valentine --&gt; Geography of encounter - Contact hypothese <br /> * George Simmel - The Stranger<br /> * Kijk ook naar Cohesie en Segregatie <br /> <br /> ==== '''02.10.2017 - Antwerpen - Stijn, Kim, Petra''' ====<br /> Outline wordt als eerste besproken <br /> * Onvoldoende argumentatie in de outline, deze verder uitbreiden <br /> ** Alleen concepten is niet genoeg om het te argumenteren <br /> ** Geef meer en duidelijkere informatie rondom de keuze voor sociale innovatie, waar is de GAP<br /> ** huidige discussie gaat vooral om de verschillende definities van SI (wat is de correcte definitie). Wel aangeven waar in het debat / welke traditie we ons bevinden (maximalistisch / minimalistisch en transformatief / ....opzoeken).<br /> ** GAP: hoe het proces in zijn gang gaat is onvoldoende scherp. Zeker wat aan toe te voegen: microniveau. Een scherpere blik op SI.<br /> ** Wat gebeurt er? Daar is niet veel naar gekeken. <br /> * Proces is te weinig uitgelegd. Gaat te snel over en heeft meer info en uitleg nodig. <br /> ** Denk aan verschillende processen die er zijn <br /> ** Denk ook aan je positionering. Voor wie schrijven we de teksten <br /> * Als tip kunnen we gaan kijken naar de micro verbanden tussen mensen. Dit is tot nu toe weinig gedaan in de literatuur rondom sociale innovatie en zou dus een innovatieve invalshoek kunnen zijn voor ons onderzoek.<br /> <br /> '''Paper 1''' <br /> <br /> Dit mag een theoretisch paper zijn. Gericht naar en geplaatst in de algemene sociale innovatie literatuur. Zonder data (met case in het achterhoofd). <br /> * We gaan al in de richting van place and community in onze argumentatie. <br /> ** Amin en Massey zijn tot nu toe auteurs en richtingen die niet gelinkt zijn met sociale innovatie. Dit zou een nieuwe invalshoek kunnen zijn. <br /> ** publiek: andere SI onderzoekers <br /> '''Paper 2''' <br /> * Wie is het publiek van dit paper? Waar willen wij iets bereiken met de kennis die we hier hebben? Hier kijken naar andere actoren in het debat. <br /> ** Bestuurswetenschappen zou een richting kunnen zijn waar er verder nog niet veel naar het proces wordt gekeken. <br /> ** lijn: mooi dat er wordt gekeken naar het niveau van organisatie; maar wat gebeurt er op het niveau van individuen? <br /> ** relatie met overheden: kunnen publieke instellingen ook innovatief zijn? <br /> ** inter-organisatorisch kijken. Niet: wie is de leider / kenmerken e.d. Wel: hoe zit het met de verhouding tussen al die mensen. Dat mist in literatuur! <br /> ** etnografisch meerwaarde toevoegen. Gebeurt nog niet in bestuurswetenschappen. Etnografie en innovatie. <br /> ** Nadeel van die discipline: generieke modellen. <br /> ** Genoemd: intentional neighbouring. Christelijk / bewuste werkwijze/ vanuit overtuiging / werkt dat? <br /> ** concepten: proces: specifieke plaats / hoe kan dat ontmoeten er uit zien / nabijheid <br /> ** proces: individu al noemen / hoe vindt die ontmoeting plaats in specifieke ruimte en komt daar collaboration uit? Hoe? <br /> * NOTE: The Encounter wordt in de sociale wetenschappen theorie altijd gezien als een '''''ontmoeting tussen vreemden.''''' <br /> * Heeft een zwaardere lading; gaat over een specifiek type ontmoeting <br /> * Niet meer dan twee concepten per paper bespreken anders wordt het teveel. Traffic: 1 argument per paper / 2 concepten. Volgend paper: nuance aanbrengen (externe factor). <br /> '''Paper 3'''<br /> <br /> Hier willen we verder inzoomen op de individu. <br /> * Zouden verder in kunnen gaan op de ethiek; Ethics of care (Amin)<br /> ** Wat betekend het &quot;zorgen voor elkaar&quot;. De typische rol van de man en de vrouw maar ook geloofsovertuiging; e.g. intentional neighbouring (christelijke mensen die in een achterstandsbuurt gaan wonen en effectief werken aan het opnieuw verbindingen maken tussen mensen om de kwaliteit van leven er weer te verhogen) <br /> ** Kijkt eigenlijk naar het klein individuele proces / ethics in microproces. <br /> ** specifiek: zorgdragen voor elkaar. <br /> ** In literatuur ethics soms gebruikt als alternatief voor solidariteit (feministische literatuur) <br /> ** specifiek kijken naar individuele ervaringen (techniek). <br /> ** link innovatie: rol van ethics in gemeenschap vormen. Is dat: <br /> ** zorgdragen voor ipv innovatief menstype te zijn (als individu) of is de ethics of care die in de gemeenschap ontstaat de sociale innovatie? <br /> * De vraag is dan: '''Ethics of care: Means to an end or end in itself?''' <br /> * welke concepten hier gebruiken? <br /> '''Paper 4'''<br /> <br /> Zouden willen kijken naar de houding van de politici zelf. Welke relatie moet je aangaan? <br /> * Kunnen eventueel kunnen kijken naar de affiniteit, het gevoel van mensen die in het bestuur zitten. <br /> * Hoe kun je politici hier in meenemen; houding cultiveren. Niet in bestuurlijke zin maar houding als persoon. <br /> * Kan geplaatst worden in de bestuurswetenschappen en/of beleidswetenschappen. <br /> * Op de lange termijn: luisteren <br /> * Hier vanuit antropologisch perspectief naar kijken / affectief <br /> * keuze: affectieve dimensie (hoe positioneert iemand zich en het project/ welke uitleg wordt gegeven / is iemand authentiek of wil hij mensen voor zijn/haar karretje spannen OF kijken naar waarden en normen. <br /> * antropologie van beleidsmakers. Kijkt men daar al naar in de bestuurswetenschappen of de beleidswetenschappen? <br /> '''Paper 5'''<br /> * Als je best practice wordt, wat doet dat dan met je? Wat gebeurd er met je? <br /> * Wat doet het als je wordt uitgekozen, busladingen geïnteresseerden langskomen, je een voorbeeld / succesvol wordt? <br /> * Dit bekijken met een externe blik en hoe het het project en de mensen en de plaats heeft veranderd <br /> * de rol van plaats <br /> * vanuit het perspectief van best practice / reflectie over de eigen positie <br /> * sociale mobiliteit / creëert hiërarchie / hoe valt dat in de groep <br /> * techniek: auto-etnografie <br /> * dilemma's: affectief / interne verhoudingen / exposure <br /> '''Paper 6'''<br /> * Verbinden aan paper 5. <br /> * Auto-etnografie van Petra om te kijken wat het doet met de persoon die dit proces inzet.<br /> ** Ben je een professional of ben je een bewoner?<br /> ** Kan je als professional je afsluiten voor wat er op de plek gebeurd? Stijn denkt dat dit wel kan. Stijn denkt: de professional gaat weg en kent deze reactie niet.<br /> ** Mensen vinden het lastig om verbindingen te blijven leggen met elkaar wanneer de professional weg is: Dit is risicovol, de Encounter is risicovol - Exposure. Professional als object van solidariteit. <br /> ** buffer zijn / risico absorberen <br /> ** pedagogie als discipline? <br /> <br /> Bespreking van de argumentatie die we hadden meegestuurd. <br /> * Alle definities van sociale innovatie bespreken. Beginnen met die van the Young Foundation <br /> * In hoofdstuk 4 maken we een te grote sprong tussen collaboration en social capital. Deze twee zijn nog ver van elkaar verwijderd. Overbruggend social capital zit daar nog wel tussen<br /> ** Als mensen anders zijn is collaboration veel moeilijker, hier is veel meer voor nodig dan wanneer mensen hetzelfde zijn. <br /> ** Putnam - Bowling alone: hoe werkt collaboratie. Decline social capital. Social capital is macro analyse. Wederzijds vertrouwen. collaboratie is samenwerken. <br /> ** Putnam: geen gebrek aan sociaal kapitaal maar: gebrek aan overbruggend sociaal kapitaal. Bij 'de vreemde' is dat veel moeilijker (proffesionals / organisatie / overheid) <br /> * Kijken naar literatuur rondom Ethnographie of innovation &amp; Antropology of innovation <br /> <br /> ==== '''03-01-2018 - Antwerpen - Stijn, Kim, Petra''' ====<br /> Empirisch materiaal doorgenomen.<br /> <br /> Encounter:<br /> <br /> Wat is een encounter? De aard van de interactie die we organiseren?<br /> <br /> Breskens: overheid en coporatie hebben verantwoordelijkheid (vastgesteld / missie) Hoe sluit die aan op de bestaande zorgethiek (van mensen zelf / uit de interviews naar boven komt)? En hoe kunnen de overheid en maatschappelijke organisaties daarop aansluiten?<br /> * paper 1. The Encounter. G.W. Allport The Nature of Prejudice: contacthypothese. Heel bekend en veel literatuur over. Equal status contact. Stijn: Gaat over iets anders dan waar wij naar kijken. Gaat over: eaqual status contact. Daar zijn geen professionals bij betrokken. Betreft contacten buiten interventie perspectief. Maar: wij kunnen het concept losmaken en een nieuwe invulling geven. Wat zjjn de mogelijheden om meer als gelijken samen te komen. Juist wel vanuit een interventie perspectief! Onderzoeken: niet ingaan op vooroordelen (= Allport) maar juist kijken hoe je dit kunt organiseren en de effecten. Heeft ook link met 'affectief burgerschap' van bijvoorbeeld Mandy de Wilde. Die insteek kiezen we niet. Stap 1: literatuur over the encounter erbij zoeken.<br /> * paper 2. The role of Place. Aantonen HOE plaats een rol kan spelen (i.p.v. dat plaats belangrijk is). Voorbeeld besproken dat gemeente denkt dat wijkgebouw de oplossing is in Breskens / de voorzieningen in Veere). Door zelf betekenis te geven. Placemaking. Er is literatuur over 'aging and place'. Discussie: moeten we voorzieningen verplaatsen of daar laten. Veel beleid door bepaald. Maar: is een dure optie. Niet meegaan in de discussie over die twee opties maar: binnen de optie wel daar laten: hoe doe je dat / hoe kun je dat vormgeven? Je kiest die strategie en hoe kun je dat dan doen? Interventie in dit debat! Combinatie maken van 'aging and place' en 'placemaking'.<br /> * paper 5. Best Peactice. Er is veel literatuur over hoe best practices mobiel worden. Rol stigmatisering. Controle over beeldvorming.<br /> * paper 6. Auto-ethnografie. Wat is het effect van....Vanuit actie-perspectief kijken. <br /> <br /> === Geschreven teksten ===<br /> 02.05.2017 Petra de Braal - {{Cite|resource=File:Research_Introduction_-_Petra_de_Braal_Mei_2017.pdf|name=Research Introduction|dialog=process-file-dialog}} <br /> <br /> 14.06.2017 Petra de Braal en Kim Boes - {{Cite|resource=File:Social_innovation_–_Content_and_Process.pdf|name=Social innovation – Content and Process|dialog=process-file-dialog}}''': ''A discussion between Amin and the practical experiences we gained from our projects'''''<br /> <br /> 23.12.2017 Petra de Braal en Kim Boes - {{Cite|resource=File:Abstracts_PhD_dec_2017.pdf|name=Abstract PhD Social Innovation|dialog=process-file-dialog}} <br /> === Monitoring, toetsing en evalueren ===<br /> ''Hier jouw tekst''<br /> <br /> <br /> == Onderzoekslogboek ==<br /> <br /> Hierin houden wij het proces bij van de verschillende delen van ons onderzoek. <br /> === Aanpak van het verkrijgen van de onderzoeksvragen ===<br /> '''17.04.2017 Eerste onderzoeksvragen/thema's'''<br /> * Social Innovation<br /> ** Social Innovation Process<br /> *** The individual in the process<br /> **** How do they give meaning to their actions?<br /> **** How does this affect the co-production of self?<br /> <br /> '''02.05.2017 Onderzoeksvragen opgesteld in eerste stuk geschreven door Petra''' <br /> * How does reflexivity mediate the agency-structure dynamics in social innovation processes? <br /> * What is the role of narratives in the social innovation process? <br /> * What is the role of identity dynamics in the social innovation process? <br /> <br /> === Aanpak van het opstellen van het onderzoeksplan ===<br /> <br /> ==== Eerste versie onderzoeksplan ====<br /> '''Email Stijn 28.08.2017''' <br /> <br /> ''&quot;Bereiden jullie een document met een tijdsplanning voor jullie doctoraat voor?'' <br /> <br /> ''Kunnen jullie ook al een en ander op papier zetten over de structuur van jullie doctoraat? Mijn voorstel zou zijn dat jullie op artikels doctoreren (omvat een inleidend hoofdstuk die doctoraat kadert en positioneert in wetenschappelijk debat, minimaal vier papers met telkens een argument dat op basis van empirische gegevens wordt onderbouwd en een conclusie). De werkzaamheden kunnen zo in kleinere pakketjes opgedeeld kunnen worden, wat me in jullie geval meer hanteerbaar lijkt. Het zou goed zijn mochten jullie al eens nadenken wat jullie in elk van die hoofdstukken zouden kwijt willen (argument, dimensie van de algemene problematiek, welke case). Dit mag tentatief zijn, maar het zal een eerste idee geven van wat nodig is voor het doctoraat.&quot;''<br /> <br /> '''Reactie 02.10.2017'''<br /> <br /> ===== '''Paper 1''': Setting the scene for social innovation =====<br /> &lt;u&gt;Aim: Critical discussion between the current literature and our secondary data&lt;/u&gt;<br /> * Argumentation:<br /> ** Social innovation is under represented as a practise in the innovation research literature (Cajaiba-Santana 2014). However, increasingly the focus shifts also into the direction of social innovation centralised around tackling issues affecting society at large (Phillips et al. 2015). While it is recognised social innovation is a vital practise in todays society (Grimm et al. 2013), scholars ask for more research in this field (Mulgan 2006; Cajaiba-Santana 2014; Phillips et al. 2015).     <br /> * Method - Secondary data<br /> ** Case: Ulrum &amp; dZH <br /> <br /> ===== '''Paper 2''': The process of social innovation =====<br /> &lt;u&gt;Aim:&lt;/u&gt; <br /> * Argumentation:<br /> ** While the literature on the business innovation process has been explored in-depth over the last decades, research focussing on the social innovation process is to date limited (Lettice and Parekh 2010; Phillips et al. 2015). <br /> * Concepts discussed:<br /> ** The encounter<br /> * Method - Case study method. Combination of secondary data (official documents, published articles, blog, etc.), interviews, and focus group<br /> ** Case: Combination of the data sets Ulrum &amp; dZH <br /> <br /> ===== '''Paper 3''': Practises of care =====<br /> &lt;u&gt;Aim:&lt;/u&gt;<br /> * Argumentation:<br /> * Concepts discussed:<br /> ** <br /> * Method - Case study method. Combination of secondary data (official documents, published articles, blog, etc.), interviews, and focus group<br /> ** Case: Combination of the data sets Ulrum &amp; dZH <br /> <br /> ===== '''Paper 4''': Politics of care - Governance =====<br /> &lt;u&gt;Aim:&lt;/u&gt;<br /> * Argumentation:<br /> * Concepts discussed:<br /> ** Agency<br /> ** Policy making<br /> * Method - Case study method. Combination of secondary data (official documents, published articles, blog, etc.), interviews, and focus group<br /> ** Case: Combination of the data sets Ulrum &amp; dZH <br /> <br /> ===== '''Timeframe (version september 2017)''' =====<br /> '''Year 1 --&gt; October 2018'''<br /> * Write theoretical paper with a critical discussion between current literature and secondary data <br /> * Collect data <br /> ** Conduct interviews<br /> ** Transcribe interviews <br /> ** Part analyses <br /> '''Year 2+3 = 27 months''' <br /> * Publish three empirical papers <br /> * Extra months could be included taken from the fourth year <br /> '''Year 4 --&gt; 6 - 9 months''' <br /> * Write introduction and conclusion<br /> * Finishing touch <br /> '''Finish by December 2021'''<br /> <br /> {{Light Context<br /> |Supercontext=PR 00139<br /> |Topcontext=PR SSM 00128<br /> |Toppage=Process<br /> |Sequence number=1<br /> |Context type=Situation<br /> |Heading=Process<br /> |Show referred by=Nee<br /> }}</div>

KimBoes https://gofreshwiki.nl/wiki/index.php?title=Bestand:Abstracts_PhD_dec_2017.pdf&diff=50591 2018-01-11T13:48:11Z

<p>KimBoes: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Resource Light config}}<br /> {{Resource Description<br /> |file name=Abstracts PhD dec 2017.pdf<br /> |created in page=LC 00758<br /> |title=Abstract PhD Social Innovation<br /> |creator=Kim Boes<br /> |date=2018-01-11<br /> }}</div>

KimBoes https://gofreshwiki.nl/wiki/index.php?title=Bestand:Abstracts_PhD_dec_2017.pdf&diff=50590 2018-01-11T13:48:08Z

<p>KimBoes: </p> <hr /> <div></div>

KimBoes