Preview

PDF, English - main document Download (2MB) | Lizenz: What are Social Innovations and how can their Impacts be Measured? Conceptualizing Innovation Field-Specific Impact Models by Zielinski, Filip ; Mildenberger, Georg ; Rabadjieva, Maria ; Sauerbier, Elisa ; Terstriep, Judith ; Wruk, Dominika underlies the terms of Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0

Abstract

The Expert Commission for Research and Development states in its latest report (EFI, 2024) that addressing major societal challenges—such as climate change, demographic aging, or unequal educational opportunities—requires social innovations that initiate change processes at both individual and societal levels. In the context of mission-oriented or transformative research and innovation policy (R&I policy), the promotion of social innovations and public welfare-oriented enterprises—viewed as drivers of transformative change—can be seen as a targeted attempt to address these complex challenges by creating additional options beyond technology-oriented and market-driven solutions. However, according to EFI (2024), R&I policy currently lacks reliable and representative data that comprehensively depict the emergence, dissemination, and impact of social innovations and could serve as a basis for evidence-based R&I policy. This is partly due to the varying understandings of the term "social innovations" and the unresolved question of how their impacts can be systematically and comparably captured.

Against this background, this research paper presents a comprehensive approach to defining and measuring the impact of social innovations (SI). The focus is on how social innovations can be conceptually clearly defined and how their impacts (outcomes and impacts) can be measured. The starting point is the recognition that the "intention" to solve societal and/or ecological problems is a key distinguishing feature of this type of innovation. This intention always interacts with the actual effects, including unintended and potentially negative impacts.

*Understanding the Concept of Social Innovations* The authors of this paper advocate for a concept of SI that systematically relates to the broader concept of innovations and clearly distinguishes it from other types of innovations. This is done by repositioning social innovations based on a broad understanding of innovation that accounts for the dynamics of innovation processes and the diversity of actors. The concept of SI is accordingly located within three definitional frameworks that ask (1) about the "what" (innovation object), (2) the "why" (intention), and (3) the "how" (degree of participation) of innovations. Innovations can thus (1) concern relatively tangible or intangible innovation objects, (2) pursue specific goals, including social, ecological, economic, and cultural, and (3) be created and shaped to varying degrees of participation. Of the three mentioned frameworks, the one concerning the intentions associated with an innovation proves to be the most suitable for linking it with the task of measuring the impact of SI (—» Section 1.6). Innovations are thus classified as SI if they are primarily guided by the intention to solve societal and/or ecological problems better than established solutions. Such an understanding is equally compatible with both the German political and the international scientific discourse.

*Measuring the Impact of Social Innovations* Intentions in the aforementioned sense correspond fundamentally to the formulated impact intention, often referred to as the "Theory of Change" in evaluation research and practice. The actual impacts, which can be assessed using various evaluation or impact measurement methods, are to be distinguished from the intention (—» Section 1.11). It is crucial to capture not only the positively evaluated or intended impacts but also the negative and unintended effects. The IOOI model is used and adapted as the basis for impact measurement. For the important distinction between outcomes and impacts, two common definitions are discussed and then integrated: The differentiation between spatially, temporally, and socially close and distant impacts is maintained at the outcome level but does not serve to distinguish between outcomes and impacts. In terms of attribution logic, impacts are understood as that part of the "outcomes" that can be directly attributed to an SI (—» Section 1.12). That is, the actual impact of an SI results from the outcomes minus the changes that would have occurred without the intervention ("counterfactual"). The IOOI impact model is initially used for measuring the impact of individual interventions, projects, and organizations—those that implement a social innovation ("SI actors"). From a scientific and societal perspective, particularly concerning the mentioned evidence-based R&I policy, estimating the overall impacts of SI implementations is also of particular importance. Based on the assumption that it is rarely a single innovation that drives societal change, but rather bundles of innovations or actors pursuing similar goals, the authors have developed the novel approach of "innovation field-specific impact modeling," which goes beyond individual innovations and focuses on social innovation fields (—» Section 5). In innovation field-specific impact modeling, IOOI models are linked with causal impact chains and associated indicators relevant to actors in the given innovation field. We understand social innovation fields as groups of organizations and other actors that develop, further develop, or implement SI and share essential characteristics. These characteristics include similarities in the specific combination of innovation object and (novel) problem-solving intention (—» Section 1.13).

The innovation field-specific approach offers the advantage of partial standardization of impact chains and their underlying indicators, which can be combined with individual indicators. These are supplemented by basic indicators applicable to all SI or fields. Thus, the presented "middle-range" approach offers a pragmatic way to balance the disadvantages of one-size-fits-all standardization for all SI on the one hand and the ad-hoc development of individual models for single actors on the other. The innovation field-specific impact models better address the particularities of the overall very diverse SI than a general SI model and still offer the advantages of standardization: SI actors can rely on tested models and indicators and use benchmarking data to optimize their strategy; SI research gains an additional data basis, which is also relevant for evidence-based R&I policy. The participatory development of impact models and their indicators together with practitioners in the respective field consequently forms a central component of innovation field-specific standardization.

In summary, this research paper offers a well-founded and differentiated approach to defining and measuring the impact of SI, which has both scientific and practical relevance. By taking the socio-ecological intentions of innovations seriously, the approach helps to make the potential of public welfare-oriented solutions for current societal challenges visible. Through the application, adaptation, and reconfiguration of tested procedures and findings of scientific impact measurement, a valid framework is created to make the actual effects of social innovations tangible. The proposed innovation field-specific approach highlights the importance of collaboration with practitioners and conceptualizes targeted partial standardization with potential for SI actors and society. Additionally, the approach provides valuable impulses for evidence-based policy-making and sustainable societal transformation.