Suchergebnisse

Energy cooperatives, "zero non-renewables" towns and other community initiatives in renewable energy (RE) are emerging across the world, in particular, in Europe and the North America. Such social initiatives vary in size, success rates and implementation strategies. Decentralization consistently appears to be one of the most important characteristics of institutional development and generally, increases the institutional space for local (community) players (Oteman, 2014). Analysis of international cases shows that a range of systemic problems hamper the rapid development and diffusion of RE. Therefore, additional attention is needed from policy makers and other stakeholders that have an interest in speeding up the diffusion process. A study by Negro et al (2012) shows that a lack of stable institutions, and poor alignment of these institutions with practices in other sectors and across governance scales are key systemic problems.

To better understand how constantly changing human-environment interactions could be better organized to respond to current challenges, we examined the Ukrainian Carpathians as an example case of complex forest social-ecological systems (FSES). We did it by interviewing diverse and relevant local stakeholder (N = 450). In particular, we strived to: i) outline how people and nature are linked and interact in coupled FSES; ii) examine the preferences of stakeholders on the forests and associated ecosystem services (ES); iii) map key drivers threatening well-being of FSES and iv) identify potential responses to address the challenges at a local scale. To answer these questions we followed a mixed method route by integrating qualitative (participatory) and quantitative data collection and analyses, with further application of a Driving Force-Pressure-State-Impact-Response (DPSIR) framework in combination with the ES approach in order to assess benefits, threats to these benefits, and responses regarding the studied FSES. We found that the key benefit from FSES is timber and non-wood forest products (like berries and mushrooms), but also various regulating services were ranked highly by respondents. To explore social-ecological innovation, with potential responses of forest-dependent communities to challenges they face, we employed a commonly used assumption that governance must fit to the particular characteristics of FSES in order to enable sustainability. For the particular case of the Ukrainian Carpathians, we identified and discussed the following five nonconformities or "misfits" threatening sustainability: 1) Spatial misfit in legislation; 2) Poor contextualization; 3) Trap of the single ES; 4) Participatory misfit; and 5) Robbing the commons. By conceptualizing those key threats, we proposed responses for sustainability. The findings contributed to an advanced understanding of complex FSES, their key challenges and potential solutions in order to secure well-being of people and nature in coupled ...

AbstractSocial innovation is perceived as a collaborative response from civic society actors to societal challenges and as such is increasingly being recognised as a driver for sustainable development. Social innovation promotes civic values, particularly in marginalised rural areas that are often struggling with biophysical and market limits, as well as shortages of public funding. In order to identify diverging development paths (DDPs) for social innovation, in this article, we use two large sets of empirical material from the SIMRA research project. First, for meta‐analyses of social innovation in diverse situations and contexts, we use 211 validated social innovation examples. Second, we rely on 11 in‐depth cases to reflect on the contexts and dimensions of social innovation. The elaboration of conceptualisation and deductive analyses result in the creation of a typology of social innovation DDPs, with four DDPs identified and explained. The article provides an improved understanding of how social innovation emerges and develops and how to capture processes and resulting changes in marginalised rural areas in order to turn such areas' diversity into strengths. An important conclusion is that social innovation involves both local and external actors, yet cannot develop without specific internal local activity and local knowledge.

Social innovations can tackle various challenges related to gender equity in rural areas, especially when such innovations are initiated and developed by women themselves. We examine cases located in rural areas of Canada, Italy, Lebanon, Morocco, and Serbia, where women are marginalized by gender roles, patriarchal values, male dominated economy and policy, and lack of opportunities for education and employment. Our objective is to analyze five case studies on how women-led social innovation processes can tackle gender equity related challenges manifested at the levels of everyday practice, institutions, and cognitive frames. The analyses are based on interviews, workshops, literature screening, and are examined via the qualitative abductive method. Results summarize challenges that rural women are facing, explore social innovation initiatives as promising solutions, and analyze their implications on gender equity in the five case studies. Based on our results we propose a new concept: reconstructive social innovation cycle. It refers to is defined as cyclical innovation processes that engage women via civil society initiatives. These initiatives reconstruct the existing state of affairs, by questioning marginalizing and discriminative practices, institutions, and cognitive frames that are often perceived as normal. The new concept helps with to assessing the implications that women-led social innovations have for gender equity. ; The authors are grateful to the European Commission for financial support to the project on Social Innovation in Marginalised Rural Areas (SIMRA) provided from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under Grant Agreement No 677622. Contribution of the author from the James Hutton Institute to this study was also partly funded by the Rural & Environment Science & Analytical Services Division of the Scottish Government through its Strategic Research Programme (2016–2021). The Nunavut/Canada case study was supported by Nordforsk Nordic Centre of Excellence: Resource Extraction and Sustainable Arctic Communities (REXSAC: project number 76938).

The "Final Report on Cross-Case Studies Assessment of Social Innovation" provides a transversal and systematic analysis of the Case Studies of Social innovation (SI) identified in the H2020 SIMRA project (http://www.simra-h2020.eu/) using aggregated qualitative and quantitative empirical information. The cross-case analysis identifies commonalities and differences across the cases in relation to the principal issues and characteristics of social innovation processes in Marginalised Rural Areas and examines complex and situated relationships and interactions. The cross-case assessment of the main social innovation issues and characteristics was based on the investigation of important trends identified within five cross-cutting themes of enquiry: The factors that influence the emergence and development of social innovation in terms of both the context and characteristics of actors. The process of reconfiguration and the changes of social practices (e.g. new networks, new government arrangements). The model of social innovation development and the identification of trajectory of divergence. The impacts of the social innovation on dimensions of territorial capital (economy, society, environment, governance). The analysis of policy impacts on social innovation and social innovation policy implications. In addition to the analysis undertaken for each theme of enquiry, composite indicators were calculated which were based upon the methodology developed in Secco et al. (2019) to better understand Social Innovation in Marginalised Rural Areas on a large scale. Outputs associated with the report are recommendations on factors linked to the success and failure of social innovation initiatives in relation to impacts of policies or on policies. ; Suggested citation: Ravazzoli, E., Dalla Torre, C., Streifeneder, T., Pisani, E., Da Re, R., Vicentini, K., Secco, L., Górriz-Mifsud, E., Marini Govigli, V., Melnykovych, M., Valero, D., Bryce, R., Weiß, G., Ludvig, A., Zivojinovic, I. and Lukesch, R. 2020. Final Report on ...

Social innovation (SI) impacts are long-term changes that affect different dimensions of territorial capital (i.e., economy, society, environment, governance) for the territory in which SI occurs. Yet, systematic empirical evidence and theoretically sound assessments of the impacts of SI are scarce. This paper aims to fill the gap and assess the different aspects of SI's impacts in European and Mediterranean areas that are characterized by marginalization processes. To assess the impacts of SI in marginalized areas, we use the evaluation framework developed within the Social Innovation in Marginalized Rural Areas (SIMRA) Horizon 2020 project and apply it to nine SI initiatives related to the fields of agriculture, fisheries, forestry, and rural development. Our findings show that SI produces cross-sectoral (societal, economic, environmental, and governmental) and multi-level impacts (on individuals, community, and society), which have improved the societal well-being, and contributed to the reduction of certain forms of marginality, mainly inside the territory in which SI occurred. ; This project has received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Program under Grant Agreement No. 677622 (H2020 SIMRA–Social Innovation in Marginalised Rural Areas Project).

Social innovation (SI) impacts are long-term changes that affect different dimensions of territorial capital (i.e., economy, society, environment, governance) for the territory in which SI occurs. Yet, systematic empirical evidence and theoretically sound assessments of the impacts of SI are scarce. This paper aims to fill the gap and assess the different aspects of SI's impacts in European and Mediterranean areas that are characterized by marginalization processes. To assess the impacts of SI in marginalized areas, we use the evaluation framework developed within the Social Innovation in Marginalized Rural Areas (SIMRA) Horizon 2020 project and apply it to nine SI initiatives related to the fields of agriculture, fisheries, forestry, and rural development. Our findings show that SI produces cross-sectoral (societal, economic, environmental, and governmental) and multi-level impacts (on individuals, community, and society), which have improved the societal well-being, and contributed to the reduction of certain forms of marginality, mainly inside the territory in which SI occurred. View Full-Text Keywords: social innovation; socio-economic impacts; institutional impacts; environmental impacts; societal well-being; European societal challenges; marginalization; sustainability challenges; local level