Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Private, Social and Public Actors for Public Innovation

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Valuing Public Innovation

  • 282 Accesses

Abstract

Public administration research has challenged the traditional image of public innovation as an internally driven process governed by politicians and policymakers. Increasingly, a wider systemic view of public innovation is being adopted. There is a need to understand how private firms and not-for-profit organizations can contribute to public innovation. In this chapter, synthesizing extant research on interactive and collaborative public innovation, we seek to describe how different actor groups are involved in public innovation, i.e. especially how private and social actors contribute to public innovation. In this chapter, we explore the role of private actors, private entrepreneurship, mission-oriented approaches that engage private and social actors and social innovation for public innovation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Arundel, A., C. Bloch, and B. Ferguson. 2019. “Advancing Innovation in the Public Sector: Aligning Innovation Measurement with Policy Goals.” Research Policy 48 (3): 789–798. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2018.12.001.

  • Aspalter, C. 2011. “The Development of Ideal-Typical Welfare Regime Theory.” International Social Work 54 (6): 735–750. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020872810393765.

  • Barinaga, E. 2012. “Overcoming Inertia: The Social Question in Social Entrepreneurship.” In Handbook on Organizational Entrepreneurship, edited by Daniel Hjorth, 242–256. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benington, J. 2011. “From Private Choice to Public Value?” In Public Value: Theory and Practice, edited by J. Benington and M. H. Moore, 31–51. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • BEPA. 2010. Empowering People, Driving Change. Social Innovation in the European Union. Bruxelles: European Comission.

    Google Scholar 

  • Billis, D. 2010. Hybrid Organizations and the Third Sector: Challenges for Practice, Theory and Policy. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Björgvinsson, E., P. Ehn, and P.-A. Hillgren. 2012. “Agonistic Participatory Design: Working with Marginalised Social Movements.” CoDesign 8 (2–3): 127–144.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bloch, C., and M. M. Bugge. 2013. “Public Sector Innovation—From Theory to Measurement?” Structural Change and Economic Dynamics 27: 133–145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.strueco.2013.06.008.

  • Bozeman, B. 2013. “What Organization Theorists and Public Policy Researchers Can Learn from One Another: Publicness Theory As a Case-in-Point.” Organization Studies 34 (2): 169–188. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840612473549.

  • Chandler, J. D., I. Danatzis, C. Wernicke, M. A. Akaka, and D. Reynolds. 2019. “How Does Innovation Emerge in a Service Ecosystem?” Journal of Service Research 22 (1): 75–89. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094670518797479.

  • Chesbrough, H., W. Vanhaverbeke, and J. West. 2006. Open Innovation: Researching a New Paradigm. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dekker, R., J. Franco Contreras, and A. Meijer. 2020. “The Living Lab as a Methodology for Public Administration Research: A Systematic Literature Review of Its Applications in the Social Sciences.” International Journal of Public Administration 43 (14): 1207–1217. https://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2019.1668410.

  • Desmarchelier, B., F. Djellal, and F. Gallouj. 2021. “Which Innovation Regime for Public Service Innovation Networks for Social Innovation (PSINSIs)? Lessons from a European Cases Database.” Research Policy 50 (9). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2021.104341.

  • DiMaggio, P. J., and W. W. Powell. 1983. “The Iron Cage Revisited: Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organizational Fields.” American Sociological Review 48 (2): 147–160. https://doi.org/10.2307/2095101.

  • Djellal, F., and F. Gallouj. 2013. “Public–Private Innovation Networks in Services (ServPPINs) Differ from Other Innovation Networks (INs): What Lessons for Theory?” In Public–Private Innovation Networks in Services. The Dynamics of Cooperation in Service Innovation, edited by Faïz Gallouj, Luis Rubalcaba, and Paul Windrum, 21–58. Cheltenham: Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dosi, G., C. Freeman, R. Nelson, G. Silverberg, and L. Soete. 1988. Technical Change and Economic Theory, 646. London: Pinter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dryzek, J. S., A. Bachtiger, and K. Milewicz. 2011. “Toward a Deliberative Global Citizens’ Assembly.” Global Policy 2 (1): 33–42. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1758-5899.2010.00052.x.

  • Edquist, C. 2005. “Systems of Innovation: Perspectives and Challenges.” In The Oxford Handbook of Innovation, edited by J. Fagerberg, D. C. Mowery, and R. R. Nelson, 181–208. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Engen, M., L. Fuglsang, T. Tuominen, J. Sundbo, J. K. Møller, A. Scupola, and F. Sørensen. 2021. “Conceptualising Employee Involvement in Service Innovation: An Integrative Review.” Journal of Service Management. EarlyCite. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOSM-11-2019-0348.

  • Esping-Andersen, G. 1990. The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism. Cambridge: Polity.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fagerberg, J. 2018. Mission (Im)Possible? The Role of Innovation (and Innovation Policy) in Supporting Structural Change & Sustainability Transitions. Oslo: Centre For Technology, Innovation and Culture, University of Oslo.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fenger, H. J. M. 2007. “Welfare Regimes in Central and Eastern Europe: Incorporating Post-Communist Countries in a Welfare Regime Typology.” Contemporary Issues and Ideas in Social Sciences 3 (1): 1–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fuglsang, L. 2008a. “Capturing the Benefits of Open Innovation in Public Innovation: A Case Study.” International Journal of Services Technology and Management 9 (3/4): 234–248. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJSTM.2008.019705.

  • Fuglsang, L. 2008b. “Innovation with Care: What It Means.” In Innovation and the Creative Process. Towards Innovation With Care, edited by Lars Fuglsang, 3–21. Cheltenham and Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fuglsang, L. 2010. “Bricolage and Invisible Innovation in Public Service Innovation.” Journal of Innovation Economics & Management 5 (1): 67–87. https://doi.org/10.3917/jie.005.0067.

  • Fuglsang, L. 2013. “Collaboration and Trust in a Public Private Innovation Network: A Case Study of an Emerging Innovation Model.” In Public–Private Innovation Networks in Services. The Dynamics of Cooperation in Service Innovation, edited by Faïz Gallouj, Luis Rubalcaba, and Paul Windrum, 247–264. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fuglsang, L., and A. V. Hansen. 2022. “Framing Improvements of Public Innovation in a Living Lab Context: Processual Learning, Restrained Space and Democratic Engagement.” Research Policy 51 (1). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2021.104390.

  • Fuglsang, L., and J. K. Møller. 2020. “Bridging Public and Private Innovation Patterns.” In Handbook on Hybrid Organisations, edited by David Billis and Colin Rochester, 151–168. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fung, A. 2015. “Putting the Public Back into Governance: The Challenges of Citizen Participation and Its Future.” Public Administration Review 75 (4): 513–522. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12361.

  • Gascó, M. 2017. “Living Labs: Implementing Open Innovation in the Public Sector.” Government Information Quarterly 34 (1): 90–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2016.09.003.

  • Godin, B. 2014. Innovation Contested: The Idea of Innovation Over the Centuries, Routledge Studies in Social and Political Thought. New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodin, R. E., and S. R. Ratner. 2011. “Democratizing International Law.” Global Policy 2 (3): 241–247. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1758-5899.2011.00117.x.

  • Hansen, A. V., L. Fuglsang, F. Gallouj, and A. Scupola. 2021. “Social Entrepreneurs as Change Makers: Expanding Public Service Networks for Social Innovation.” Public Management Review. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2021.1916065.

  • Hartley, J., E. Sørensen, and J. Torfing. 2013. “Collaborative Innovation: A Viable Alternative to Market Competition and Organizational Entrepreneurship.” Public Administration Review 73 (6): 821–830. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12136.

  • Hartley, J., J. Alford, E. Knies, and S. Douglas. 2017. “Towards an Empirical Research Agenda for Public Value Theory.” Public Management Review 19 (5): 670–685.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hartley, J., S. Parker, and J. Beashel. 2019. “Leading and Recognizing Public Value.” Public Administration 97 (2): 264–278. https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12563.

  • Hodge, G. A., and C. Greve. 2005. The Challenge of Public–Private Partnerships: Learning from International Experience. Cheltenham and Northampton, MA.: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jørgensen, M. T., A. V. Hansen, F. Sørensen, L. Fuglsang, J. Sundbo, and J. F. Jensen. 2021. “Collective Tourism Social Entrepreneurship: A Means for Community Mobilization and Social Transformation.” Annals of Tourism Research 88, 103171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2021.103171.

  • Jørgensen, T. B., and B. Bozeman. 2002. “Public Values Lost? Comparing Cases on Contracting Out from Denmark and the United States.” Public Management Review 4 (1): 63–81. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616670110101681.

  • Kearney, C., R. D. Hisrich, and F. Roche. 2009. “Public and Private Sector Entrepreneurship: Similarities, Differences or a Combination?” Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development 16 (1): 26–46. https://doi.org/10.1108/14626000910932863.

  • Keeling, D. I., K. Keeling, K. de Ruyter, and A. Laing. 2021. “How Value Co-creation and Co-destruction Unfolds: A Longitudinal Perspective on Dialogic Engagement in Health Services Interactions.” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 49 (2): 236–257. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-020-00737-z.

  • Kirzner, I. M. 1973. Competition and Entrepreneurship. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klein, P. G., J. T. Mahoney, A. M. McGahan, and C. N. Pitelis. 2010. “Toward a Theory of Public Entrepreneurship.” European Management Review 7 (1): 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1057/emr.2010.1.

  • Leibenstein, H. 1968. “Entrepreneurship and Development.” American Economic Review 58 (2): 72–83.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lévi-Strauss, C. 1966. The Savage Mind. Chicago & London: The University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mazzucato, M. 2015. The Entrepreneurial State: Debunking Public vs. Private Sector Myths. New York: PublicAffairs.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mazzucato, M. 2018. “Mission-Oriented Innovation Policies: Challenges and Opportunities.” Industrial and Corporate Change 27 (5): 803–815. https://doi.org/10.1093/icc/dty034.

  • McGann, M., E. Blomkamp, and J. M. Lewis. 2018. “The Rise of Public Sector Innovation Labs: Experiments in Design Thinking for Policy.” Policy Sciences 51 (3): 249–267. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-018-9315-7.

  • Moulaert, F., and D. MacCallum. 2019. Advanced Introduction to Social Innovation. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nabatchi, T., and M. Leighninger. 2015. Public Participation for 21st Century Democracy. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD. 2015. Frascati Manual 2015. Guidelines for Collecting and Reporting Data on Research and Experimental Development. Paris: OECD.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD. 2018. Oslo Manual 2018. Guidelines for Collecting, Reporting and Using Data on Innovation, 4th ed. Paris: OECD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pedersen, O. K., N. A. Andersen, and P. Kjær. 1992. “Private Policies and the Autonomy of Enterprise—Danish Local and National Industrial-Policy.” Journal of Economic Issues 26 (4): 1117–1144. https://doi.org/10.1080/00213624.1992.11505364.

  • Pestoff, V. 2014. “Hybridity, Coproduction, and Third Sector Social Services in Europe.” American Behavioral Scientist 58 (11): 1412–1424. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764214534670.

  • Petersen, O. H., U. Hjelmar, and K. Vrangbaek. 2018. “Is Contracting Out of Public Services Still the Great Panacea? A Systematic Review of Studies on Economic and Quality Effects from 2000 to 2014.” Social Policy & Administration 52 (1): 130–157. https://doi.org/10.1111/spol.12297.

  • Petrescu, M. 2019. “From Marketing to Public Value: Towards a Theory of Public Service Ecosystems.” Public Management Review 21 (11): 1733–1752. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2019.1619811.

  • Pinchot, G. 1987. “Innovation Through Intrapreneuring.” Research Management 30 (2): 14–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/00345334.1987.11757021.

  • Quélin, B. V., I. Kivleniece, and S. Lazzarini. 2017. “Public–Private Collaboration, Hybridity and Social Value: Towards New Theoretical Perspectives.” Journal of Management Studies 54 (6): 763–792. https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12274.

  • Rainey, H. G., R. W. Backoff, and C. H. Levine. 1976. “Comparing Public and Private Organizations.” Public Administration Review 36 (2): 233–244. https://doi.org/10.2307/975145.

  • Schot, J., and W. E. Steinmueller. 2018. “Three Frames for Innovation Policy: R&D, Systems of Innovation and Transformative Change.” Research Policy 47 (9): 1554–1567. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2018.08.011.

  • Schumpeter, J. A. 1969 [1934]. The Theory of Economic Development. An Inquiry into Profits, Capital, Credit, Interest and the Business Cycle. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sørensen, E. 2020. Interactive Political Leadership. The Role of Politicians in the Age of Governance. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sørensen, F., J. Sundbo, and J. Mattsson. 2013. “Organisational Conditions for Service Encounter Based Innovation.” Research Policy 42 (8): 1446–1456.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sundbo, J. 1998. The Organisation of Innovation in Services. Frederiksberg: Roskilde University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • TEPSIE. 2015. “The Theoretical, Empirical and Policy Foundations for Building Social Innovation in Europe.” In Doing Social Innovation: A Guide for Practitioners, edited by TEPSIE. Brussels: European Commission.

    Google Scholar 

  • Torfing, J., A. H. Krogh, and A. Ejrnaes. 2020. “Measuring and Assessing the Effects of Collaborative Innovation in Crime Prevention.” Policy and Politics 48 (3): 397–423. https://doi.org/10.1332/030557320x15788414270675.

  • Torvinen, H., and P. Ulkuniemi. 2016. “End-User Engagement within Innovative Public Procurement Practices: A Case Study on Public–Private Partnership Procurement.” Industrial Marketing Management 58: 58–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2016.05.015.

  • Vargo, S. L., and R. F. Lusch. 2016. “Institutions and Axioms: An Extension and Update of Service-Dominant Logic.” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 44 (1): 5–23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-015-0456-3.

  • Windrum, P. 2008. “Innovation and Entrepreneurship in Public Services.” In Innovation in Public Sector Services: Entrepreneurship, Creativity and Management, edited by Paul Windrum and Per Koch. Cheltenham and Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Roskilde University, Roskilde, Denmark

    Lars Fuglsang

  2. Open University Business School, The Open University, Milton Keynes, UK

    Jean Hartley

  3. School of Governance, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands

    Karin Geuijen

  4. Inland Norway University of Applied Sciences, Lillehammer, Norway

    Rolf Rønning

Authors
  1. Lars Fuglsang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jean Hartley
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Karin Geuijen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Rolf Rønning
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lars Fuglsang .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Fuglsang, L., Hartley, J., Geuijen, K., Rønning, R. (2022). Private, Social and Public Actors for Public Innovation. In: Valuing Public Innovation. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-15203-0_6

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-15203-0_6

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-031-15202-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-031-15203-0

  • eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation