Key to the city: unlocking open innovation - URBACT Pilot Transfer Network 2014/15 York, Siracusa, San Sebastian, Tallinn - URBACT
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
Key
to
the
city:
unlocking
open
innovation
URBACT
Pilot
Transfer
Network
2014/15
York,
Siracusa,
San
Sebastian,
Tallinn
1
Introduction This report provides a baseline evaluation for a pilot transfer network examining the theme of Open Innovation. York City (UK) Council’s Genius model provides the framework for the practice transfer. There are three ‘receiving’ cities. Siracusa (Italy) has ambitious plans to establish new, more collaborative relationships with its citizens and hopes to employ an open innovation approach to the democratisation of public services. In San Sebastian (Spain), the economic development agency recognises the critical need to connect academia, research and enterprise to support a thriving and sustainable economy and is exploring how open innovation can play a part in this endeavour. Tallinn’s (Estonia) education department wants to build on its highly successful school system to further enhance the leadership and management of educational institutions; they are asking how an open innovation strategy might contribute to the development of head teachers. The opening chapter provides an overview of Open Innovation – The State of The Art – introducing the concept and providing a brief history of its development and an assessment of the key components. Key “learning points” have been identified to guide readers who may be new to this concept. At a time when cities face declining democratic legitimacy, tight budgets and ever more complex problems, open innovation is appealing. It offers the potential for solutions that traditional markets and government policies have struggled to do1. Openness unlocks knowledge and assets that are invaluable to cash strapped city authorities. It brings about engagement in communities because it promotes transparency and it empowers users by involving them in the innovation. Open innovation processes ensure that the final innovation itself is more relevant and scalable because it has been shaped by the users who know how it will work best, and know how it will fit in their environment. The second chapter identifies the ambitions of the four cities through the development of an Outcomes Framework. We have asked the cities; what is your ambition for this project and how will you know you have achieved it? Furthermore, the four cities have collective, programme level ambitions that are also articulated. The framework will also establish the conditions for successful transfer. On the face of it, to share a model of practice between cities appears straightforward. But we want to understand the cultural and other contextual ingredients that enable effective and sustainable practice transfer as well as the tools and techniques that can contribute to a successful outcome. Through this process of reflective practice we hope to contribute to a wider review of how best to spread great ideas between Europe’s cities. The following chapters provide more detail about each city, their context and ambitions, starting with York, where further details of the Genius process are explained. More detailed descriptions will appear on our project web site where we will also post workshop agendas, presentations, training plans and other related materials. Matt Gott (Lead Expert) 1 Murray, R. Caulier-‐Grice, J. and Mulgan, G. (2010); ‘The Open Book of Social Innovation’, Nesta. Available at http://www.nesta.org.uk/sites/default/files/the_open_book_of_social_innovation.pdf 2
Chapter
1:
Key
to
the
city:
unlocking
open
innovation
Innovation
can
come
from
anywhere.
Universities,
businesses
and
communities
have
great
ideas
and
skills
that
enhance
the
innovation
process.
Open
innovation
is
grounded
in
this
principle.
It
is
defined
by
the
breaking
down
of
an
organisation’s
boundaries
to
encourage
the
flow
of
knowledge
and
creativity
-‐
both
internally
and
externally
-‐
to
promote
innovation.
Many
commercial
organisations
have
been
using
this
principle
brilliantly
for
over
20
years
and
it
is
the
source
of
much
of
their
revenue:
Google
allow
their
employees
to
spend
20%
of
their
time
pursuing
their
own
interests.
The
ideas
that
have
emerged
from
this
have
generated
50%
of
new
product
launches2.
Similarly,
Proctor
and
Gamble
(P&G)
source
50%
of
their
ideas
from
outside
their
organisation3.
Given
the
value
open
innovation
brings
to
corporate
firms,
these
models
are
attracting
the
attention
of
governments
and
cities
across
the
world.
At
a
time
when
cities
face
declining
democratic
legitimacy,
tight
budgets
and
ever
more
complex
problems,
open
innovation
is
appealing.
It
offers
the
potential
for
solutions
that
traditional
markets
and
government
policies
have
struggled
to
do4.
Openness
unlocks
knowledge
and
assets
that
are
invaluable
to
cash
strapped
city
authorities.
It
brings
about
engagement
in
communities
because
it
promotes
transparency
and
it
empowers
users
by
involving
them
in
the
innovation.
Open
innovation
processes
ensure
that
the
final
innovation
itself
is
more
relevant
and
scalable
because
it
has
been
shaped
by
the
users
who
know
how
it
will
work
best,
and
know
how
it
will
fit
in
their
environment.
In
recognition
of
the
promise
of
open
innovation
for
governments
and
cities,
the
model
sits
at
the
heart
of
the
European
Strategy:
‘Europe
2020’.
The
strategy
prioritises
smart,
sustainable
and
inclusive
growth5
-‐
core
themes
of
open
innovation.
The
popularity
of
open
innovation
is
also
seen
in
the
swell
of
enthusiasm
of
social
innovation
which
has
many
overlapping
principles:
collaboration
across
diverse
groups,
involvement
of
the
user
as
well
as
a
joint
focus
on
solving
complex
problems
for
the
good
of
the
public
6.
This
summary
begins
with
an
introduction
to
the
emergence
of
open
innovation.
It
then
goes
on
to
address
how
this
is
being
adopted
in
cities,
before
exploring
the
key
stages
of
open
innovation:
understanding
the
challenge,
coming
up
with
the
idea
and
sustaining
and
embedding.
In
this
last
section,
this
summary
highlights
that,
without
the
capabilities
and
systems
to
support
open
innovation,
it
is
unlikely
to
have
great
impact.
To
ground
it
in
reality,
some
of
the
most
exciting
international
examples
of
open
innovation
in
cities
are
showcased.
2
Wojcicki,
S.
(2011);
‘The
Eight
Pillars
of
Innovation’.
Article
available
at:
http://www.thinkwithgoogle.com/articles/8-‐
pillars-‐of-‐innovation.html
3
Huston,
L.
And
Sakkab,
N.
(2006);
P&G's
New
Innovation
Model,
Harvard
Business
School
Working
Knowledge.
Available
at:
http://hbswk.hbs.edu/archive/5258.html
4
Murray,
R.
Caulier-‐Grice,
J.
and
Mulgan,
G.
(2010);
‘The
Open
Book
of
Social
Innovation’,
Nesta.
Available
at
http://www.nesta.org.uk/sites/default/files/the_open_book_of_social_innovation.pdf
5
European
Council
(2010)
‘Europe
2020
Strategy
Paper’.
Available
at
http://eur-‐
lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2010:2020:FIN:EN:PDF
6
Murray,
R.
Caulier-‐Grice,
J.
and
Mulgan,
G.
(2010);
‘The
Open
Book
of
Social
Innovation’,
Nesta.
Available
at
http://www.nesta.org.uk/sites/default/files/the_open_book_of_social_innovation.pdf
3
1.
Open
Innovation
Open
innovation
accelerates
and
improves
the
innovation
process.
It
is
defined
as
the
transfer
of
knowledge
in
and
out
of
an
organisation
to
help
generate
new
products
and
services
(fig
1).
This
section
will
first
identify
where
open
innovation
has
emerged
from
and
contrast
it
with
traditional
closed
systems.
Second,
it
will
look
at
the
three
flows
of
knowledge
that
shape
open
innovation:
internal
-‐
internal,
external
-‐
internal
and
internal
-‐
external.
7
Figure
1.
Visualisation
of
knowledge
flows
in
open
innovation
by
Chesbrough,
2004
derived
from
Pique,
2011 .
1.1
Closed
to
open
Strands
of
open
innovation
theories
have
existed
in
academia
since
the
70’s8.
Recently
it
has
been
popularised
by
the
self
proclaimed
‘father
of
open
innovation’,
Henry
Chesbrough9.
Chesbrough
identifies
that
open
innovation
has
emerged
as
internet
and
technological
advancements
have
made
it
easier
to
collaborate
and
access
knowledge.
Today,
organisations
now
have
access
to
a
greater
pool
of
ideas,
they
can
unlock
unknown
assets
and
expertise
and
they
can
involve
their
customers
in
the
design
to
make
the
products
more
relevant
and
scalable.
Organisations
can
reduce
risk
with
open
innovation
through
sharing
risk
with
partners
and
rapid
prototyping
and
testing
that
reduces
the
cost
of
failure.
Learning
point:
open
innovation
helps
commercial
organisations
save
money
and
reduce
risk
Open
innovation
has
begun
to
replace
the
old
closed
model
of
innovation
and
the
two
approaches
7
Chesbrough,
H.
(2004)
‘Open
Innovation:
Renewing
Growth
from
Industrial
R&D’
Presentation
from
10th
Annual
Innovation
Conference
in
Pique
(2006)
‘Open
Innovation
and
Knowledge
Cities’.
Presentation
available
at
http://www.slideshare.net/monica_flores_boix/open-‐innovation-‐and-‐knowledge-‐cities22-‐barcelona-‐case
8
Von
Hippel,
E.
(1976)
‘The
Dominant
Role
of
Users
in
the
Scientific
Instrument
Innovation
Process’,
Research
Policy
5,
3,
212–239.
Available
at
http://evhippel.files.wordpress.com/2013/08/1976-‐vh-‐instruments-‐paper.pdf
9
Chesbrough,
H.
(2011);
‘Everything
You
Need
to
Know
About
Open
Innovation’,
Forbes
Blog.
Available
at
http://www.forbes.com/sites/henrychesbrough/2011/03/21/everything-‐you-‐need-‐to-‐know-‐about-‐open-‐innovation/
4
differ
hugely
(table
1).
Closed
organisations
rely
on
scientists
or
universities
to
discover
ideas,
which
then
go
through
the
R&D
department.
Successful
ideas
are
brought
to
market
and
failed
ideas
are
shelved.
Boundaries
are
closed
and
the
intellectual
property
(IP)
protected.
Yet,
in
a
networked,
mobile
world,
closed
business
models
are
no
longer
effective.
Closed
organisations
can
no
longer
keep
their
ideas
secret.
As
the
closed
transfer
of
knowledge
is
too
slow,
organisations
can’t
compete
with
nimble
new
entrants.
Closed
organisations
miss
out
on
valuable
external
insights
that
could
make
their
innovations
better.
These
limitations
of
closed
innovation
became
clear
through
the
‘Great
Stagnation’
where
from
1965
to
1989,
employment
in
R&D
doubled
in
the
US
yet
the
rate
of
patents
slowed10.
Closed
innovation
Open
innovation
Corporate
ethos
Not
invented
here
Best
from
anywhere
We
can
do
it,
we
will
do
it
Choosing
the
best
idea
among
internal
and
Creation
of
the
best
idea
internally
external
ideas
Role
of
customer
Passive
recipients
Active
co-‐innovators
Core
competency
Vertically
integrated
product
and
Core
competitive
differentiation
and
service
design
collaborative
partner
management
Innovation
success
Increased
margins/revenues,
reduced
R&D
return
on
investment,
breakthrough
metrics
time
to
market,
market
share
within
product
or
business
models
existing
market
Attitudes
towards
Own
and
protect
Sharing
internal
IP
can
be
profitable
IP
Do
not
share
internal
IP
Buy,
sell
The
corporation
as
a
knowledge
broker
using
both
licensing
and
commercial
development
to
monetise
IP
Role
of
R&D
and
Internal
R&D
is
the
only
way
to
create
External
R&D
can
also
create
profit
and
value
operations
profit
Use
the
third
partners
for
discovery,
Discover,
design,
develop
and
market
development
and
delivery
of
products
in-‐
house
inventions
Optimise
performance
of
owner
assets
through
both
in
house
and
external
development;
do
enough
R&D
internally
to
recognised
significant
external
R&D
Advantages
First
movers
advantage
Having
a
better
business
model
is
more
important
than
being
a
first
mover
Employees
Professional
employees
inside
the
Working
with
professionals
inside
and
outside
company
the
company
11
Table
1:
Comparison
between
open
and
closed
Innovation,
De
Jong
et
al.,
2008
derived
from
Bakici,
2011 .
10
Cowen,
T.
(2011);
‘The
Great
Stagnation:
How
America
Ate
all
the
Low-‐Hanging
Fruit
of
Modern
History,
Got
Sick,
and
Will
(Eventually)
Feel
Better’.
Dutton,
London.
11
De
Jong,
J.P.J.,
Vanhaverbeke,
W.,
Kalvet,
T.
and
Chesbrough,
H.
(2008);
Policies
for
Open
Innovation:
Theory,
Framework
and
Cases.
Research
project
funded
by
VISION
Era-‐Net.
in
Bakici,
T.
(2011)
‘State
of
the
Art
-‐
Open
Innovation
in
SmartCities’,
ESADE.
Available
at:
http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/apps/projects/logos//6/270896/080/deliverables/001_D11StateoftheArtOpenIn
novation.pdf
5
1.2
Flows
of
open
knowledge
In
open
innovation
terms,
it
is
external
sources
that
are
vital.
External,
new
entrants
offer
the
most
radical,
disruptive
innovations,
often
to
an
under
or
poorly
served
market.
As
incumbent
providers
are
often
heavily
invested
in
existing
approaches,
they
find
it
hard
to
produce
new
ideas
when
they
are
so
familiar
with
the
old12,
13.
P&G
is
widely
celebrated
for
their
open
innovation
model
‘Connect
and
Develop’.
‘Connect
and
Develop’
generates
over
35%
of
the
company’s
innovations
and
a
major
source
of
revenue
through
the
successful
ideas
that
come
from
external
sources14.
They
leverage
their
size
and
market
influence
to
bring
external,
disruptive
innovations
to
scale.
P&G
partner
with
small
companies,
multi-‐nationals,
individual
inventors,
and
in
some
cases,
its
competitors,
to
bring
game-‐changing
innovations
to
market.
In
addition
to
accepting
over
4,000
submissions
annually
for
ideas,
P&G
goes
out
and
solicits
innovation
from
a
larger
network
of
businesses
and
individuals
who
have
a
history
of
working
with
them.
It
does
this
by
issuing
open
briefs
on
themes
such
as
fabric
care
or
wellness15.
As
well
as
drawing
on
external
insights,
organisations
are
increasingly
building
a
culture
of
open
innovation
internally:
improving
knowledge
flows
within
and
catalysing
inspiration.
This
is
central
to
the
model
of
Google
who
have
harnessed
their
culture
around
open
innovation.
They
enable
‘anyone,
anywhere,
to
apply
their
unique
skills,
perspectives
and
passions
to
the
creation
of
new
products
and
features’.
By
sharing
all
company
information
openly
with
employees,
Google
allows
them
to
come
up
with
innovative
solutions
to
the
company’s
problems.
They
also
provide
time
and
space
to
spark
employees’
imagination
by
allowing
them
20%
time
to
pursue
projects
of
their
own
choosing.
Up
to
50%
of
the
company’s
yearly
launches
come
from
20%
time16.
Learning
point:
open
innovation
is
as
much
about
the
flows
within
and
out
of
organisation
as
the
flows
in
Open
innovation
is
also
about
the
flows
of
knowledge
out
of
the
organisation17.
In
closed
innovation,
failed
ideas
are
shelved.
But
it
is
possible
that
these
innovations
can
find
a
route
to
market
externally:
through
joint
ventures,
spin
offs
or
selling
the
IP.
The
financial
benefits
this
brings
both
reduces
the
cost
of
failure
and
generates
better
innovation
outcomes
as
more
ideas
get
off
the
ground.
2.
Open
innovation
in
cities
Faced
with
budget
cuts
and
difficult
challenges,
cities
and
governments
are
looking
to
the
open
innovation
models
of
commercial
organisations
to
try
to
solve
problems
that
existing
market
and
government
structures
have
been
unable
fix.
12
Christensen,
C.
(1997)
‘The
Innovator’s
Dilemma:
When
New
Technologies
Cause
Great
Firms
to
Fail’,
Harvard
Business
School
Press,
Boston.
13
Christensen,
C.
(2009)
‘The
Innovator’s
Prescription:
A
Disruptive
Solution
for
Health
Care’,
McGraw-‐Hill
Professional,
New
York
14
Huston,
L.
and
Sakkab,
N.
(2006)
‘P&G's
New
Innovation
Model’
Harvard
Business
School.
Working
Knowledge
article,
available
at:
http://hbswk.hbs.edu/archive/5258.html
15
Ibid.
16
Wojcicki,
S.
(2011)
‘The
Eight
Pillars
of
Innovation’.
Article
available
at:
http://www.thinkwithgoogle.com/articles/8-‐
pillars-‐of-‐innovation.html
17
Chesbrough,
H.
(2011)
‘Open
Service
Innovation:
Rethinking
Your
Business
to
Grow
and
Compete
in
a
New
Era’,
Jossey
Bass,
San
Francisco.
6
Cities
are
very
different
entities
to
corporate
firms
–
cities
comprise
of
many
organisations
with
differing
interests,
larger
populations
and
their
services
have
many
interdependencies.
However,
there
are
three
core
principles
of
commercial
open
innovation
that
cities
are
beginning
to
harness
well.
In
doing
so,
they
are
starting
to
find
solutions
to
complex
problems
and
to
develop
different,
better
and
lower
cost
services
while
at
the
same
time,
able
to
build
more
vibrant
communities.
This
section
will
first
look
at
the
context
of
open
innovation
in
cities
and
then
explore
the
principles
of
transparency
collaboration
and
participation.
Lastly,
this
section
will
feature
an
open
innovation
case
study
at
a
national
level.
2.1
Open
cities
and
governments
Learning
point:
Open
innovation
can
drive
social
value
in
governments
and
cities.
Throughout
the
20th
century,
governments
were
typically
liberal.
Later,
as
governments
recovered
from
world
wars,
governance
structures
were
often
centralised
and
focused
on
building
a
welfare
state.
Today,
a
new
governance
structure
exists
-‐
open
governance
-‐
which
emphasises
citizen
empowerment
and
social
innovation
(figure
2).
The
swell
of
popularity
for
this
new
form
of
governance
has
come
about
through
three
key
drivers:
first,
technological;
second,
financial
and
third,
rising
public
expectations.
Figure
2.
Open
government,
a
framework
for
citizen
empowerment
in
governments
and
cities,
European
Commission
‘A
vision
for
public
services’,
201318
18
European
Commission
(2013)
‘
A
Vision
for
Public
Services’
draft
report
available
at:
http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/newsroom/cf/dae/document.cfm?doc_id=3179
7
Technological
developments
and
the
internet
have
been
major
catalysts
for
open
cities
and
social
innovation.
Through
the
internet,
citizens
can
access
knowledge
on
public
services
and
information
on
public
spending.
Authorities
and
cities
are
more
accountable
for
their
decisions
and
are
subject
to
closer
scrutiny.
Citizens,
as
a
result,
are
taking
a
greater
interest
in
the
running
and
creation
of
public
services.
In
turn,
they
are
demanding
even
more
information
be
made
available
publicly
-‐
putting
pressure
on
many
governments
to
grant
‘Right
to
Information’19.
This
is
helping
cities
to
build
a
better
understanding
of
challenges
they
face
and
better
enable
citizens
to
contribute
to
public
services.
Financial
pressure
is
often
cited
as
a
key
driver
for
innovation20.
The
public
purse
is
not
bottomless;
increasingly
demographic
pressure
combined
with
recession
has
led
cities
and
governments
to
review
their
services
and
models.
Public
services
and
value
have
traditionally
been
the
responsibility
of
governments
and
cities.
However,
open
innovation
recognises
the
value
of
external
groups
in
the
generation
of
social
value
and
unlocks
their
ability
to
act
–
including
private
sector
investment,
citizens
who
help
themselves
and
community
around
them
as
well
as
the
growing
third
sector.
At
the
same
time,
open
innovation
provides
opportunities
for
cities
to
maintain
their
competitiveness
and
sustain
economic
growth21.
Public
expectations
are
also
driving
city
organisations
towards
a
more
open
approach
as
they
try
to
respond
to
higher
demands.
Increasingly,
society
wants
more
involvement
in
how
services
are
run.
When
people
experience
a
slick,
user
centred
product
or
service
from
the
likes
of
Amazon
or
Apple,
they
can
come
to
expect
the
same
of
public
services.
Through
social
media
there
are
increasing
means
to
broadcast
their
opinions
and
demand
more
of
their
public
services.
As
a
result,
power
no
longer
sits
so
comfortably
in
the
hands
of
governments
and
markets
alone.
Entire
governments
have
been
toppled
through
social
action
supported
by
social
media22.
2.2
Principles
of
open
innovation
in
cities
Collaboration
is
a
fundamental
principle
of
open
innovation.
It
is
even
more
so
for
fragmented
ecosystems
like
cities
with
diverse
groups
and
differing
interests.
Open
innovation
processes
can
bring
these
groups
together
and
in
doing
so
break
down
conflicts
and
build
cohesive
communities.
Collaboration
is
key
for
the
complex
issues
cities
are
trying
to
tackle
as
there
are
multiple
interdependencies,
and
ideas
may
be
lost
in
translation
between
groups.
Overcoming
the
problems
of
translation
requires
an
understanding
of
tacit
knowledge
where
knowledge
is
hard
to
explain
-‐
like
trying
to
describe
a
way
of
working
or
playing
an
instrument23.
To
overcome
this,
continued
and
iterative
interaction
between
different
groups
is
needed24.
Creating
the
systems
and
platforms
for
this
interaction
is
an
important
part
of
the
innovation
process
and
should
be
built
in25.
19
European
Commission
(2013)
‘
A
Vision
for
Public
Services’.
Draft
report
available
at:
http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/newsroom/cf/dae/document.cfm?doc_id=3179
20
Davies,
A.
and
Simon,
J.
(2013)
‘The
Value
and
Role
of
Citizen
Engagement
in
Social
Innovation’.
TEPSIE
report,
available
at
http://youngfoundation.org/wp-‐content/uploads/2013/11/value-‐and-‐role-‐of-‐citizen-‐
engagement.pdf
21
European
Commission
(2013)
‘
A
Vision
for
Public
Services’.
Draft
report,
available
at:
http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/newsroom/cf/dae/document.cfm?doc_id=3179
22
ibid
23
Tuomi,
I.
(2009)
‘Theories
of
Open
Innovation’.
Presentation,
available
at:
http://www.meaning;processing.com/personalPages/tuomi/articles/TheoriesOfOpenInnovation.pdf
24
Chesbrough,
H.
(2011)
‘Open
Service
Innovation:
Rethinking
Your
Business
to
Grow
and
Compete
in
a
New
Era’.
Jossey
Bass,
San
Francisco.
25
Kleiman,
N.
Forman,
A.
Ko,
J.
Giles,
D.
and
Bowles,
J.
(2013)
‘Innovation
and
the
City.
Centre
for
an
Urban
8
Transparency
and
open
practices
bring
about
a
more
vibrant
democracy.
Citizens
from
all
backgrounds
increasingly
have
access
to
information
about
how
the
city
is
run26.
As
innovative
city
leaders
share
information
on
money
invested,
priorities
and
progress
-‐
trust
can
be
built
amongst
citizens.
It
is
trust
that
enables
collaboration,
generating
further
innovation.
Where
old
closed
systems
alienated,
new
open
systems
can
engage
and
excite.
In
Seoul,
Park
Won-‐soon
has
adopted
a
citizen-‐centred,
hands-‐on
communicative
style
of
politics
and
keeps
a
wall
of
post-‐it
notes
with
requests
from
citizens.
His
team
have
also
developed
a
1000
Oasis
Ideas
platform:
where
residents
can
make
suggestions
about
how
Seoul
is
run
and
the
team
can
respond
to
citizens’
complaints27.
Learning
point:
open
innovation
stimulates
a
vibrant
and
inclusive
democracy
Participation
is
a
principle
of
open
innovation
that
builds
empowerment
and
taps
into
societal
assets.
Open
cities
listen
and
provide
opportunities
for
citizens
to
play
a
role
in
the
shaping
of
innovation
in
cities
-‐
defining
the
issues
that
matter
to
them
and
empowering
them
to
take
control
of
the
challenges
facing
them.
It
unlocks
resources
that
are
vital
to
cash
poor
city
governments.
Driven
by
the
purpose
of
public
good,
communities
are
often
willing
volunteers,
who
help
come
up
with
and
refine
solutions.
Involving
users
and
the
wider
city
ecosystem
enables
the
generation
of
more
relevant,
sustainable
and
impactful
services
designed
around
real
needs
and
greater
understanding
of
what
this
might
mean
in
practice.
Developing
more
relevant
innovations
importantly
means
cost
savings
and
risk
reduction28.
2.3
National
example
of
open
and
social
innovation
Ubudehe
is
a
national
example
of
open,
social
innovation
in
practice
that
contains
principles
that
can
apply
to
cities
(box
1).
In
Ubudehe,
communities
are
involved
in
identifying
the
problem,
generating
a
solution
and
putting
it
into
practice.
This
has
wide
ranging
benefits:
increased
social
cohesion,
increased
relevance
of
public
spending,
improved
management
of
public
funds
and
a
cultural
change
towards
entrepreneurship.
On
top
of
this,
cost
savings
of
80%
on
local
construction
projects
have
also
been
reported29.
Box
1.
National
example
of
open
innovation
adapted
from
Gillinson
et
al.
201030
In
2001,
the
Government
of
Rwanda
through
the
Common
Development
Fund
(CDF)
established
a
programme
branded
‘Ubudehe’.
This
programme
was
driven
by
a
partnership
between
the
Ministry
of
Finance
and
Economic
Planning
(MINECOFIN)
and
that
of
Local
Government
Future’.
Report
available
at:
http://nycfuture.org/pdf/Innovation-‐and-‐the-‐City.pdf
26
Bakici,
T.
(2011)
‘State
of
the
Art
-‐
Open
Innovation
in
SmartCities’.
ESADE
report,
available
at:
http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/apps/projects/logos//6/270896/080/deliverables/001_D11Stateofth
eArtOpenInnovation.pdf
27
Choi
Kyong-‐Ae
(2012)
‘Seoul
Mayor:
Almost
Impossible
for
an
Independent
to
be
President’.
Wall
Street
Journal,
Asia
blog
available
at
http://blogs.wsj.com/korearealtime/2012/12/03/seoul-‐mayor-‐almost-‐
impossible-‐for-‐an-‐independent-‐to-‐be-‐president/
28
Bason,
C.
(2010)
‘Leading
Public
Sector
Innovation:
Co-‐Creating
for
a
Better
Society’
Policy
Press.
29
Gillinson,
S.,
Horne,
M.
And
Baeck,
P.
(2010);
Radical
Efficiency:
Different,
Better,
Lower
Cost
Public
Services,
Innovation
Unit
and
Nesta.
Available
at
http://www.innovationunit.org/sites/default/files/Radical%20efficiency%20-‐%20a%20practical%20guide.pdf
30
Ibid.
9
You can also read
