Click here to download

Entrepreneurial university and social innovation in milan and venice
Journal Title: ECONOMIA E SOCIETÀ REGIONALE  
Author/s: Maurizio Busacca 
Year:  2018 Issue: Language: Italian 
Pages:  23 Pg. 109-131 FullText PDF:  493 KB
DOI:  10.3280/ES2018-003010
(DOI is like a bar code for intellectual property: to have more infomation:  clicca qui   and here 


This essay aims at investigating the relationship between social innovation, university and the city. To reach this goal, the article studies in depth some case studies on innovative practices promoted in Milan and Venice. The article highlights the importance of the relationship between university and social innovation and the prevailing approach to study it based on the triple helix model university-industry-government. The article reveals the limits of this approach and proposes to develop a different analytical approach, more useful and usable to investigate the quality of the processes and actors. Here we adopt the perspective of the city as a regulating group of the economy, developed starting from the works of Arnaldo Bagnasco and Patrick Le Galès on the new political economy of the cities. This perspective offers many learning and reveals some contradictions on the relationship between university and social innovation practices: it reduces the role of the university as an institutional actor and emphasizes the role of academics, which act as "leaven" of the pluralism in urban governance.
Keywords: Social Innovation; Political Economy of the Cities, Higher Education
Jel Code: O35, P16, I23

  1. Bagnasco A. (1992). La ricerca urbana fra antropologia e sociologia. In: Hannerz U. Esplorare la città. Antropologia della vita urbana. Bologna: il Mulino.
  2. Bagnasco A. (2004). Città in cerca di università. Le università regionali e il paradigma dello sviluppo locale. Stato e mercato, 24(3): 455-474., DOI: 10.1425/18797.
  3. Bagnasco A., Le Galès P., a cura di (2001). Le città nell’Europa contemporanea. Bari: Liguori.
  4. Barbera F., Parisi T. (icp). Innovatori sociali: la sindrome di prometeo nell’Italia che cambia. Bologna: il Mulino.
  5. Benneworth P., Cunha J. (2015). Universities’ contributions to social innovation: reflections in theory & practice. European journal of innovation management, 18(4): 508-527., DOI: 10.1108/EJIM-10-2013-0099
  6. Borelli G. (2012). Immagini di città. Processi spaziali e interpretazioni sociologiche. Milano-Torino: Pearson Italia.
  7. Burroni L., Trigilia C. (2010). Le città dell’innovazione. Dove e perché cresce l’alta tecnologia in Italia. Bologna: il Mulino.
  8. Burt R. (1992). Structural Holes: The Social Structure of Competition.
  9. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
  10. Busacca M. (2013). Oltre la retorica della Social Innovation. Impresa Sociale, 2: 39-54.
  11. Busacca M. (2014). Oltre lo specchio, imprese-piattaforma e comunitàimpresa. Esperienze di innovazione sociale dirompente che innescano spazi di immaginario radicale e nuove forme di intrapresa. VIII Colloquio Scientifico sull’impresa sociale. Perugia: Dipartimento di Economia, Università egli Sudi di Perugia, 23-24
  12. maggio. Busacca M., Cantaluppi G., Chini I., Gelli F. (2017). Venezia: tra conflitti e progetti al tramonto di un ciclo politico. In: Pasqui G., Briata P., Fedeli V., a cura di. Secondo Rapporto sulle città. Le agende urbane delle città italiane. Bologna: il Mulino.
  13. Cajaiba-Santana G. (2014). Social innovation: Moving the field forward. A conceptual framework. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 82: 42-51.
  14. Caroli M.G., Fracassi E., Maiolini R., Carnini Pulino S. (2018). Exploring social innovation components and attributes: a taxonomy proposal. Journal of Social Entrepreneurship, 9(2): 94-109., DOI: 10.1080/19420676.2018.1448296
  15. Chiesi L., Costa P. (2017). Ricerca e progetto come innovazione sociale. Modelli di pratiche a confronto in tre casi studio. Sociologia urbana e rurale, 113: 47-64., DOI: 10.3280/SUR2017-113004
  16. Crosta P.L. (2010). Pratiche. Il territorio “è l’uso che se ne fa”. Milano: FrancoAngeli.
  17. Dewey J., Bentley A.F. (1960). Knowing and the known. Boston: Beacon Press.
  18. Etzkowitz H., Webster E., Gebhardt C., Cantisanaro-Terra B.R. (2000). The future of university and the university of the future: evolution of ivory tower to entrepreneurial paradigm. Research Policy, 29: 313-330., DOI: 10.1016/S0048-7333(99)00069-4
  19. Flyvbjerg B. (2001). Making Social Science Matter. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  20. Flyvbjerg B. (2006). Five misunderstandings about case-study research. Qualitative Inquiry, 12(2): 219-245., DOI: 10.1177/1077800405284363
  21. Fumagalli A. (2017). Economia politica del comune. Sfruttamento e sussunzione nel capitalismo bio-cognitivo. Roma: DeriveApprodi.
  22. Halcomb E.J., Davidson P.M. (2006). Is verbatim transcription of interview data always necessary? Applied nursing research, 19(1): 38-42.
  23. Howaldt J., Schwarz M. (2010). Social innovation. Concepts, Research Fields, and International Trends. Dortmund: Sozialforschungstelle Dortmund.
  24. Jenson J. (2015). Social innovation: redesigning the welfare diamond. In: Nicholls A., Simon J., Gabriel M., Whelan C., eds. New frontiers in social innovation research. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
  25. Kawulich B.B. (2005). La observación participante como método de recolección de datos. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum Qualitative Social Research, 6(2): 11-32.
  26. Kawulich B.B. (2012). Collecting data through observation. In: Wagner C., Kawulich B.B., Garner M., eds. Doing social research: A global context. Berkshire: McGraw-Hill Higher Education.
  27. Laredo P. (2007). Revisiting the Third Mission of Universities: Toward a Renewed Categorization of University Activities? Higher Education Policy, 20: 441-456.
  28. Le Galès P. (1998). La nuova “political economy” delle città e delle regioni. Stato e mercato, 18(1): 53-92., DOI: 10.1425/406
  29. Leydesdorff L., Etzkowitz E. (1998). The Triple Helix as a model for innovation. Science and Public Policy, 25(3): 195-203.
  30. Lindblom C.E. (1959). The science of muddling-through. Public Administration Review, 19: 79-88., DOI: 10.3239/9783638036771
  31. Maiolini R. (2016). I finanziamenti d’innovazione sociale in Italia. In: Caroli M.G., a cura di. L’innovazione delle imprese leader per creare valore sociale. Terzo rapporto Ceriis (Centro di ricerche internazionali sull’innovazione sociale) sull’innovazione sociale. Milano: FrancoAngeli.
  32. Molas-Gallart J., Castro-Martínez E. (2007). Ambiguity and conflict in the development of “Third Mission” indicators. Research Evaluation, 16(4): 321-330., DOI: 10.3152/095820207X263592
  33. Moulaert F., MacCallum D., Mehmood A., Hamdouch A. (2013). The International Handbook on Social Innovation. Collective Action, Social Learning and Transdisciplinary Research. Cheltenham and Northampton: Edward Elgar.
  34. Moulaert F., Mehmood A., MacCallum D., Leubolt B. (2017). Social innovation as a trigger for transformations-the role of research. Bruxelles: Publications Office of the European Union.
  35. Murray R., Caulier-Grice J., Mulgan G. (2010). The Open Book of Social Innovation. London: Nesta.
  36. Nicholls A., Edmiston D. (2018). Social Innovation Policy in the European Union. In: Heiskala R., Aro J., eds. Policy Design in the European Union. Palgrave Studies in European Political Sociology. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan.
  37. Pasqui G. (2017). Milano. Rivista il Mulino, 6: 1045-1050., DOI: 10.1402/88558
  38. Pol E., Ville S. (2009). Social innovation: Buzz word or enduring term? The Journal of socio-economics, 38(6): 878-885.
  39. Polizzi E., Vitale T. (2017). Governo collaborativo e catene relazionali di innovazione. Spunti a partire dal caso di Milano. Quaderni di Rassegna Sindacale, 18(2): 129-147.
  40. Savino M. (2016). Venezia e l’università: un innesto proficuo? In: Maurizio B., Rubini L. Venezia chiama Boston. Costruire cultura, innovare la politica. Venezia: Marcianum Press.
  41. Sena B. (2016). L’approccio del case study nella ricerca socioeconomica. Sociologia e ricerca sociale, 111: 5-22., DOI: 10.3280/SR2016-111001
  42. Sennett R. (2014). Insieme: Rituali, piaceri, politiche della collaborazione. Milano: Feltrinelli.
  43. Schön D.A. (1983). The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action. New York: Basic Books.
  44. van der Have R.P., Rubalcaba L. (2016). Social innovation research: An emerging area of innovation studies? Research Policy, 45(9): 1923-1935.
  45. Venturi P., Zandonai F. (2014). Ibridi organizzativi. L’innovazione sociale generata dal gruppo cooperativo Cgm. Bologna: il Mulino

Maurizio Busacca, Entrepreneurial university and social innovation in milan and venice in "ECONOMIA E SOCIETÀ REGIONALE " 3/2018, pp. 109-131, DOI:10.3280/ES2018-003010

   

FrancoAngeli is a member of Publishers International Linking Association a not for profit orgasnization wich runs the CrossRef service, enabing links to and from online scholarly content