Democratising Smart Cities? Penta-Helix Multistakeholder Social Innovation Framework

Igor Calzada
{"title":"Democratising Smart Cities? Penta-Helix Multistakeholder Social Innovation Framework","authors":"Igor Calzada","doi":"10.3390/smartcities3040057","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The smart cities policy approach has been intensively implemented in European cities under the Horizon 2020 programme. However, these implementations not only reduce the interdependencies among stakeholders to technocratic Public-Private-Partnership (PPP) models, but also fail to question the identities of strategic stakeholders and how they prioritise their business/social models. These aspects are putting democracy at stake in smart cities. Therefore, this article aims to unfold and operationalise multistakeholders’ policy frameworks from the social innovation perspective by suggesting the ex-novo penta-helix framework—including public, private, academia, civic society, and social entrepreneurs/activists—to extend the triple and quadruple-helix frameworks. Based on fieldwork action research conducted from February 2017 to December 2018—triangulating desk research, 75 interviews, and three validation workshops—this article applies the penta-helix framework to map out five strategic dimensions related to (i) multistakeholder helix framework and (ii) the resulting business/social models comparatively in three follower cities of the H2020-Replicate project: Essen (Germany), Lausanne (Switzerland), and Nilüfer (Turkey). For each case study, the findings reveal: (i) a unique multistakeholder composition, (ii) diverse preferences on business/social models, (iii) a regular presence of the fifth helix as intermediaries, and (iv) the willingness to experiment with democratic arrangements beyond the hegemonic PPP.","PeriodicalId":273366,"journal":{"name":"Organizational Behavior & Key Stakeholders eJournal","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-10-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"31","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Organizational Behavior & Key Stakeholders eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/smartcities3040057","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 31

Abstract

The smart cities policy approach has been intensively implemented in European cities under the Horizon 2020 programme. However, these implementations not only reduce the interdependencies among stakeholders to technocratic Public-Private-Partnership (PPP) models, but also fail to question the identities of strategic stakeholders and how they prioritise their business/social models. These aspects are putting democracy at stake in smart cities. Therefore, this article aims to unfold and operationalise multistakeholders’ policy frameworks from the social innovation perspective by suggesting the ex-novo penta-helix framework—including public, private, academia, civic society, and social entrepreneurs/activists—to extend the triple and quadruple-helix frameworks. Based on fieldwork action research conducted from February 2017 to December 2018—triangulating desk research, 75 interviews, and three validation workshops—this article applies the penta-helix framework to map out five strategic dimensions related to (i) multistakeholder helix framework and (ii) the resulting business/social models comparatively in three follower cities of the H2020-Replicate project: Essen (Germany), Lausanne (Switzerland), and Nilüfer (Turkey). For each case study, the findings reveal: (i) a unique multistakeholder composition, (ii) diverse preferences on business/social models, (iii) a regular presence of the fifth helix as intermediaries, and (iv) the willingness to experiment with democratic arrangements beyond the hegemonic PPP.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
智慧城市的民主化?五螺旋多利益相关者社会创新框架
根据“地平线2020”计划,智慧城市政策方法已在欧洲城市得到了广泛实施。然而,这些实现不仅将利益相关者之间的相互依赖关系减少到技术官僚的公私伙伴关系(PPP)模式,而且也没有质疑战略利益相关者的身份以及他们如何优先考虑他们的业务/社会模式。这些方面使智慧城市的民主处于危险之中。因此,本文旨在从社会创新的角度展开和实施多利益相关者的政策框架,建议采用从零开始的五螺旋框架——包括公共、私人、学术界、公民社会和社会企业家/活动家——来扩展三螺旋和四螺旋框架。基于2017年2月至2018年12月进行的实地调查行动研究——三角测量桌研究、75次访谈和三次验证研讨会——本文应用五螺旋框架,在h2020 -复制项目的三个追随者城市(埃森(德国)、洛桑(瑞士)和nil fer(土耳其))中,绘制了与(i)多利益相关者螺旋框架和(ii)由此产生的商业/社会模式相关的五个战略维度。对于每个案例研究,研究结果显示:(i)独特的多利益相关者组成,(ii)对商业/社会模式的不同偏好,(iii)第五螺旋作为中介的定期存在,以及(iv)在霸权PPP之外尝试民主安排的意愿。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Democratising Smart Cities? Penta-Helix Multistakeholder Social Innovation Framework What Determines Where Public Investment Goes? Regional Governance and The Role of Institutional Rules and Power The Human Experience of Being-in-the-Board: A Phenomenological Approach Organisational Culture: A Comparative Study of Public Sector and Private Sector Banks in East Delhi What Lies in the Shadows: Two Archetype Faces Used by a Successful Narcissistic Leader
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1