Consolidating social innovation

This chapter addresses the consolidation processes of socially innovative initiatives. In particular, it aims at understanding which are the conditions favouring or constraining their (at least potential) survival and/or development. We consider social innovation as a relational process that is contextually embedded. It raises as a reaction to the inability of existing policies in meeting emerging or existing needs and its potential growth or consolidation may depend (also) on the governance systems’ capacity to identify, accept and share new ideas. It might challenge conventional policy balances, existing stakeholders’ relations and distribution of power and resources. It might also challenge the multi-level institutional arrangements with the aim of expanding and influencing broader contexts. The chapter focuses mainly on the relation and interaction of social innovation with the respective institutional contexts from the perspective of the consolidation of socially innovative initiatives. In particular, it analyses the conditions at the very basis of the consolidation process, trying to identify the main dimensions influencing it. The analyses addresses the conditions according to which they succeed or fail in developing, mainly highlighting the processes through which they try to integrate into mainstream policies and exert their influence on policies fighting poverty and social exclusion

Governing local social innovations against poverty across Europe

In this introductory chapter, we present our understanding of the core concepts of this book, namely social innovation and poverty, and situate these concepts in contemporary debates on the governance of welfare provision. We define social innovation as actions that satisfy social needs through the transformation of social relations, which crucially implies an increase of the capabilities and access to resources of people living in poverty. Poverty is not reduced to a lack of monetary income, but refers to a range of processes of social exclusion in various spheres of life that hinders people’s full participation in society. We outline the aim of this book as a sustained attempt to analyse how the social innovation dynamics of localised initiatives are shaped by the welfare regime context with its specific spatial and institutional characteristics. Finally, we discuss the methodological strategy of the comparative case study research on which this book is based.

Conclusion: local social innovation and welfare reform

In this chapter, we draw a range of overall conclusions from our case-study based investigation of how local social innovations operate as vehicles of welfare reform. We reflect on the impact of the increased interest of policy-makers in social innovation and on the relationship between social innovation and other social policy paradigms, notably the established paradigm of social protection and its main contender, the social investment paradigm. We also discuss our main findings with regard to the mix of actors, resources and instruments supporting localized social innovations, the multi-scalar nature social innovations, its empowerment dimension and relationship with knowledge. Finally, we look at the consolidation of social innovation in specific welfare-institutional contexts.

The multi-scalar puzzle of social innovation

Most of the scholars emphasise the local dimension and the bottom-up dynamics as the modus of social innovation. At the same time, they tend to assume that other (higher) spatial, institutional and political levels are hostile to social innovation. These assumptions entail manifold risks for both social research and action. In this chapter, we challenge the idea that social innovation is a solely bottom-up practice, to embrace a more comprehensive and relational approach on how it actually moves between and across scales, depending on the strategies it adopts and on the institutional scalar arrangements framing its development. We do not argue that the local does not play a relevant and special role. Many initiatives are indeed ‘bottom-linked’ and the ‘local’ is the level where all other levels conflate. The case studies´ analysis of the ImPRovE project highlights which scales are mainly involved in social innovation and how opportunities and constraints are distributed among them. A typology on the multiscalar nature of social innovation is proposed, considering the strategies that socially innovative initiatives adopt in order to establish connections between and across scales. Finally, the potential avenues for further research are described to better disentangle the multi-scalar puzzle of social innovation.

The historical trajectory of social innovation in the European Union

This chapter outlines the history of practices and discourses of social innovation in the EU, thus demonstrating how EU institutions have shaped the meaning and content of social innovation over time. It discusses the historical roots of social innovation in Europe and analyses how it evolved from a grassroots model of social action in the 1970s into a crucial dimension in official EU policy making during the Barroso Commission (2004-2014). Taking a chronological approach, the chapter situates social innovation developments within the broader policy framework of the EU’s overarching strategies: the re-launched Lisbon Strategy (2006-2010) and the Europe 2020 initiative (2010-ongoing) and assesses how the notion of social innovation has been used to creatively combine apparently contradictory policy goals within the Europe 2020 Strategy, such as poverty reduction on the one hand, competitiveness on the other.

Contradictory dynamics of empowerment in social innovation initiatives

In this chapter, we undertake a systematic analysis of the empowerment dimension of social innovation initiatives. The notions of social innovation and empowerment have a rather similar history. We provide a brief historical overview of the concept of empowerment and the diverse and competing meanings the concept has acquired over time. We then specify three dimensions of empowerment to analyse the empowering potential of social innovation: the bottom-up and top-down dynamics of empowerment, the relation between individual and collective forms of empowerment and the extent to which empowerment has an instrumental or expressive focus. In the analysed case studies of social innovation initiatives, we observe a pre-eminence of top-down empowerment, the dominance of individual empowerment dynamics and a predominant focus on instrumental forms of empowerment in social innovation initiatives, especially in the governance of labour market activation.

On Elephants, butterflies and lions: social protection, innovation and investment

The rise of social innovation as a paradigm for social intervention is part of the ongoing restructuring process of post-war European welfare systems’. The chapter analyses this transformation focusing on how social innovation relates to other, more institutionalised paradigms of social intervention, namely social protection and social investment. The three paradigms’ main characteristics are represented through a metaphor using animals and their characteristics in order to exemplify their specificities. Elephants, representing the social protection paradigm as awkward, but solid and based on reciprocity and solidarity in the herd. Butterflies, representing the social innovation paradigm as flexible and creative, but fragile and unstable. Lions, representing the social investment paradigm as assertive, active in the preservation of their own status in a competitive context. The conditions within which these paradigms have developed, the institutions involved and their aims and functions are studied through a literature review. Then, the relations among them are investigated through the analysis of 31 case studies on innovation in welfare policies targeted to poverty and social exclusion conducted in the European Countries. The conclusions provide some reflections on the paradigms´ prospects by gaining an understanding of how their different combinations impact on their capacity to reduce poverty and social exclusion.

Knowledge for social innovation

The chapter investigates two ideal types of knowledge about and for social innovations combating poverty: A model of linear change based on standardized knowledge and a context-sensitive model based on tacit knowledge for transformative alternatives. Case study analysis focussed on the field of homelessness and re-use. Six housing first initiatives in six European cities and two large networks of work integration social enterprises in UK and Flanders were studied to disentangle the dualist model by exploring how and why practitioners use different types of knowledge to pursue their respective mission. While codification and standardisation pushes for standardized knowledge, contextual knowledge is important for successful implementation. In all cases, the respective governance of producing and disseminating knowledge was decisive for effective agency. Knowledge alliances based on multi-level collaborations between stakeholders with different perspectives and forms of expertise were identified as promising forms of producing and disseminating knowledge to upscale and to diffuse socially innovative initiatives and approaches.

Modalities of governing the welfare mix

To address unmet social needs and tackle complex societal challenges, social innovation initiatives often mobilise new actors, resources and/or approaches within specific fields of social action. Changing welfare mixes and the governance of various actors, instruments and resources are therefore key concerns for social innovation research. In this chapter, we analyse the changing welfare mixes in social innovation initiatives and their governance on the micro-level by looking at the networks of organisations and institutions behind these initiatives. We provide a descriptive analysis of the different welfare mixes of social innovation initiatives and their strategies and mode of governance and identify patterns and typologies in the governance of local social innovations. Particular attention is attributed to the role of public actors, resources and instruments. We use our empirical findings to assess the main tendencies on changing welfare mixes as identified in the scholarly literature.

Negotiating diversity and equality

The chapter disentangles the interplay of diversity and equality in Europe from a historical perspective and based on in depth-analysis of case studies in the field of education, intercultural learning and labour market activation. It identifies cultural hierarchies as key causes of poverty, especially in the case of Roma population and migrants. European anti-discrimination policies show the potential and limits of initiatives to combat poverty. The focus on language and communicative skills and the political imperative to stress civic integration results in individualising and culturalizing diversity. Funding restrictions tend to restrict policies that aim at reducing equality to fostering the equal access to the labour market by means of activation policies. These specific reductionist understandings of culturalist and socio-economic approaches are identified as key hindrances for effective policies to combat poverty in its multidimensionality.