ICT-Enabled Social Innovation

ICT-Enabled Social Innova2on (IESI)
ini2a2ves promo2ng social investment
Claudia Fabian & Chris/an Voigt
JRS IPTS Tender (2014 + 2015)
Coordinator Young Founda/on (UK)

Final dra< for
internal use ...
hFps://claudio.zsi.at/
public.php?
service=ﬁles&t=19079cafe92a0
102a39efeb75a9814bd
Password: ...

Expected Publica/on – early
2016!

Centre for Social Innova/on |
Chris/an Voigt & Claudia Fabian
IESI - ICT-Enabled Social Innova/on 2

Outline
①  Objec/ves, research ques/ons and concepts
•  Social investment challenges
•  ICT enabled SI in Welfare
•  5 welfare systems inspired by the Digital Economy and Society
Index
②  Campaigning, Framework and Case Mapping
•  Relevant Networks
•  Country & Social Services coverage
•  Framework
•  Examples
③  Analysis and Findings
•  Types of SI (funding, admin, …)
•  Partnerships (public-private, public-public)
•  Welfare systems
•  A case for open science …

Social investment challenges
§  Social investment challenges
i.  effec/ve & efficient spending
ii.  inves/ng in people
iii.  protec/ng people
§  Welfare systems:
i.  social protec/on, e.g. compensa/ons and subsidies, and
ii.  social investment, e.g. future-oriented services such as
work-life balance, disease preven/on, educa/on
§  Distribu/ve mechanisms: social services, cash / tax
benefits, employer provision, volunteer services

Link to Social Innova2on

Communica/on from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the
European and Social CommiFee and the CommiFee of the Regions: Towards Social
Investment for Growth and Cohesion – including implemen2ng the European Social Fund
2014-2020. COM(2013) 83 ﬁnal. See: hFp://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?catId=1044

Objec2ves and research ques2ons
the one big ques-on: How can
•  ICT-enabled social innova3on support
•  the implementa3on of policies which
•  promote social investment through
•  integrated approaches to social services delivery ?

ü  SRQ1 What types of ICT-enabled innova-on ini3a3ves
promo3ng social investment ? >> (SI governance)
ü  SRQ3 What is the degree of deployment of ICT-enabled
innova3on ini3a3ves promo3ng social investment ? >>
(Partnerships)
ü  SRQ4 Which concrete ini-a-ves involving ICT-enabled
innova3on promo3ng social investment have evidence of outcomes
generated? >> (Examples)
Causali3es and
‚claims of
achievement‘

Research Design
IESI: hFp://is.jrc.ec.europa.eu/
pages/EAP/eInclusion.IESI.html

Concepts and Systems

What is ICT-Enabled Social Innova2on?

'A new conﬁgura/on or combina/on of social prac/ces
providing new or beFer answers to social protec/on system
challenges and needs of individuals throughout their lives,
which emerges from the innova/ve use of Informa/on and
Communica/on Technologies (ICTs) to establish new
rela/onships or strengthen collabora/ons among
stakeholders and foster open processes of co-crea/on and/
or re-alloca/on of public value'.

JRC-IPTS, Misuraca et al, 2015 (IESI D1.2.1)

(Slippery) ICT enabled innova2on
§  direct & indirect enablement (big data vs open source)
§  beliefs & ar/facts (shared economy vs micro jobs)
Faraj, S., Kwon, D., & WaFs, S. (2004). Contested ar/fact: technology sensemaking,
actor networks, and the shaping of the Web browser. Informa/on Technology &
People, 17(2), 186–209.
Evalua2on /
expected func2onali2es
Coali2on Building /
(licensing, open APIs, Grants)

Enabling ICT effects – found in the wild?
Inves2gated effects (cases, n=25)
a)  networking effect
b)  crowd effect
c)  genera2vity
d)  big data effect
e)  decentralising services (zero m.c.)
f)  enabling a commons economy

… other enablers are conceivable ,
e.g. cryptocurrencies, visualisa/ons etc.

Cascading innova2ons

Welfare Systems clasiﬁca/on based on
Digital Economy and Society Index
§  Commonali/es
– similar levels of social expenditure
– human capital (digital inclusion and skills)
– use of broadband and mobile data
– use fo digital public services (e-gov)
– and par/ally public – private collabora/on

Digital Economy and Society Index – EU28
Nordic: Denmark, Finland and Sweden
Anglo-Saxon: UK and Ireland
Con2nental: Austria, Belgium, France, Germany, Luxembourg
and the Netherlands
Mediterranean: Greece, Spain, Italy, Portugal, Cyprus, Malta
Central-Eastern: Bulgaria, Croa/a, Czech Republic, Estonia,
Latvia, Lithuania, Hungary, Poland, Romania, Slovenia,
Slovakia
hFp://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/en/digital-agenda-scoreboard

Nordic
§  Nordic countries (Denmark, Finland and Sweden) enjoy
mostly universal, tax funded, highly centralised. According to
(EUROSTAT 2015c), social expenditure in 2013 amounted to
31.1% to 34,6% of GDP
§  Nordic countries score well above the EU average on all the
Digital Economy and Society Index (DESI) indicators, being the
3 best performing countries in the EU, with par/cularly high
scores in the Human Capital and e-Government areas. More
in detail, over the 80% of the popula/on used e-government
services in 2013 in Denmark, almost 80% in Sweden and 70%
in Finland (against an EU average of around 50%). Around the
90% of ci/zens in all Nordic countries are regular internet
users and have internet access at home and around the 70%
of the popula/on uses ICT in the workplace (European
Commission 2015a).

Anglo-Saxon
§  In English speaking countries (UK and Ireland) the liberal
approach has led to limi/ng the role of the State to acute
market failures, while encouraging wide uptake of private
welfare provisions. In liberal welfare state regimes, which are
highly centralised, the focus has been for many decades on
reducing administra/ve costs while enhancing intra-agency
communica/on in order to support front-line service
providers
§  Both the UK and Ireland score above the EU average
according to the DESI Index, but while over the 95% of
ci/zens in both countries are regular Internet users, only the
63% of Irish and the 55.6% of UK ci/zens used e-Government
services in the last 12 months (European Commission 2015a).

Con2nental
§  The con/nental welfare system includes Austria, Belgium,
France, Germany, Luxembourg and the Netherlands. These
countries are tradi/onally based on a male-bread winner/
female-carer model, with a mix of sta/st, corpora/vist and
familialist tradi/ons. Social protec/on is high for people with
stable, lifelong employment, but is rela/vely low for
everybody else.
§  The use of ICTs, including uptake of e-Government services, is
largely above the EU average for all countries for most Digital
Agenda indicators, with the Netherlands and Belgium
performing par/cularly well and ranking fourth and ﬁvh
respec/vely in the DESI index just aver the Nordic Countries
and just ahead of the UK and Ireland (European Commission
2015a). Centre for Social Innova/on |

Mediterranean
§  The Mediterranean rim (Greece, Spain, Italy, Portugal, Cyprus,
Malta) presents, in many way, an extreme form of the
Western European model, with extremely low employment
rates for women and young people when compared to other
European regions, high pensions expenditure, rigid labour
markets and highly fragmented beneﬁts strictly associated
with stable, long-life employment. The crisis has exacerbated
the situa/on, and social protec/on systems are struggling to
adjust to signiﬁcant cuts in public spending.
§  With the excep/on of Spain, the countries in this group show
lower than average take-up of e-Government services and
regular Internet use is also below EU average in all the 6
countries (European Commission 2015a)

Central-Eastern European
§  Central-Eastern European states (Bulgaria, Croa/a, Czech
Republic, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Hungary, Poland,
Romania, Slovenia, Slovakia) are characterised by low social
protec/on spending (while all pre-2004 member states except
Luxembourg spend at least 25% of their GDP on social
protec/on, all post-2004 member states spend less than this,
with Bal/c countries averaging 16% of GDP in social
expenditure)
§  As for digital services, the situa/on is very fragmented, with
some countries scoring well above (LV, SK, EE) or just slightly
below (LT, SI, CZ, HU) the EU average for regular use of the
Internet and e-Government services uptake (with LV and SI
above the EU average and HU and SK just below) and the
other scoring well below the EU average on both categories
(European Commission 2015a).

Summary:
Complexity within the IESI framework
§  ICT is oven a rather indirect inﬂuencer
§  Social vs. technological innova/on – not a clear cut
dis/nc/on (e.g. crowdfunding, collec/ve intelligence
for policy)
§  Innova/ons tend to cascade (domino eﬀect)
§  Despite ‚welfare systems‘ approach, social
investment policies are highly diverse

Campaigning, Framework and
Case Mapping

Desk research: what are the most useful databases?
Ø  EU repositories and projects directories: JoinUp, ePSI pla{orm, EIPA (EPSA
database), European Pla{orm for inves/ng in children,
OpenEduca/onEuropa, European Service Innova/on Centre, SIRE, FP7/
Horizon (and par/cularly: 1. social innova/on projects: SIMPACT, CrESSI,
SI-DRIVE, TRANSIT, CASI, LIPSE, SEFORÏS, ITSSOIN, BENISI, EFESEIIS, Third
Sector Impact (TSI), DSI, CITISPYCE, SocIEtY, ImPRoVE, TEPSIE, INNOSERV,
2. Ac/ve&healthy ageing and e-Health projects: INNOVAGE, INTERLINKS,
EHR Impact, Haivisio), ICT-PSP, AAL programme, EIP on ac/ve and healthy
ageing, ESF/ERDF, INTERREG…
Ø  EU networks and associa2ons: ESN, Age Pla{orm, Social Pla{orm,
Eurodiaconia, Euroci/es, European Connected Health Alliance, European
Housing Associa/on, Eurocarers, European Local Authori/es Network for
the Informa/on Society, Council of European Municipali/es and Regions….
Ø  Interna2onal repositories: OECD Observatory of Public Sector Innova/on,
Ashoka Europe, UN Public Service Awards, Stanford Social Innova/on
Review, Schwab Founda/on…
22

Cases Worldwide (n=339)

Cases in Europe (n=210)

Social Services Coverage

Framework

IESI Framework (1)
§  Social innova/on
–  need driven/outcome-oriented produc2on
(addressing the needs of a speciﬁc group)
–  open process of co-crea2on/collabora2on innova2on
networks
(end-users are involved in the development,
implementa/on; knowledge integrated)
–  fundamental
(interac/on between stakeholders changed)
–  public value alloca2on/and re-alloca2on
(democra/c ci/zenship or needs of ci/zens)

IESI Framework (2)
§  ICT enabled innova/on poten/al
–  technical/incremental innova2on
(improvement of current services)
–  sustained/organisa2onal innova2on
(improve organisa/onal mechanisms of services)
–  disrup2ve/transforma2ve innova2on
(service delivery: impossible without ICT e.g. use of social
networks for peer support)
–  radical/transforma2ve innova2on
(radically modify exis/ng mechanismn; focus on the
poten/al of the target group)

IESI Framework (3)
§  Levels of governance
–  isolated
(no integra/on in government opera/ons)
–  intra-governmental
(single level of government: integrated case management)
–  inter-governmental
(collabora/on across mul/ple levels of government)
–  inter-sectorial integra2on
(collabora/on between government & service delivery)
–  pervasive
(service integra/on beyond the tradi/onal boundaries)

IESI Framework (4)
§  Types of service integra/on
–  funding
(e.g. pooling of funding)
–  administra2ve
(e.g. inter-sectoral planning; needs assessment)
–  organisa2onal
(e.g. strategic alliances or care networks)
–  delivery system
(case/care management; mul/disciplinary/interdisciplinary
teamwork)

Example: LIFEtool (Austria)
§  Social inclusion/par/cipa/on
–  assis/ve technologies / ac/ve ageing technologies
§  Social innova/on
–  need-driven/outcome-oriented
–  open process of co-crea/on/collabora/on
–  fundamental change
§  ICT enabled social innova/on poten/al
–  radical/transforma/ve innova/on
§  inter-sectorial integra/on
§  service integra/on: funding

Analysis and Findings

Types of SI & Policy objec2ves
What types of ICT-enabled
innova-on ini3a3ves
promote social investment ?

Types of SI & Welfare systems

SI Governance & Partnerships
What partnerships promote social investment ?

SI deployment per welfare system
What is the degree of deployment of ICT-enabled innova3on ini3a3ves promo3ng
social investment ?

Strength of evidence (n=140)
Which concrete ini3a3ves involving ICT-enabled innova3on promo3ng social
investment have evidence of outcomes generated?

Partnerships and welfare system

Framework overview

Outlook: i-Frame

Open Science = Open Data + Provenance
„ ... the trail of dataset changes is known as provenance; generally
Excel is terrible at documen/ng provenance“
hFp://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2015/02/09/data-
versioning-open-science/) ﬁts with ‚Data Management Plan‘

Collected Data Types

§  nominal / discrete categorical data:
social service type, partnership types, …
§  ordinal / ordered categorical data:
strength of impact measurement (ra/ng),
start date, scale of implementa/on, …
§  interval scale / ordered categorical data:
number of staﬀ, costs of service (response rate 55%)
§  ra/os:
exact measures of costs or staﬀ numbers

BACK UP

Evidence Standard Framework
44
IESI - ICT-Enabled Social Innova/on

ICT-Enabled Social Innovation

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (6)

Similar to ICT-Enabled Social Innovation

Similar to ICT-Enabled Social Innovation (20)

More from Christian Voigt

More from Christian Voigt (8)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

ICT-Enabled Social Innovation