IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2019i1p23-d299364.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

New Public Institutional Forms and Social Innovation in Urban Governance: Insights from the “Mayor’s Office of New Urban Mechanics” (MONUM) in Boston

Author

Listed:
  • Carmelina Bevilacqua

    (CludsLab PAU Department, Mediterranea University of Reggio Calabria, 89124 Reggio Calabria, Italy)

  • Yapeng Ou

    (CludsLab PAU Department, Mediterranea University of Reggio Calabria, 89124 Reggio Calabria, Italy)

  • Pasquale Pizzimenti

    (CludsLab PAU Department, Mediterranea University of Reggio Calabria, 89124 Reggio Calabria, Italy)

  • Guglielmo Minervino

    (CludsLab PAU Department, Mediterranea University of Reggio Calabria, 89124 Reggio Calabria, Italy)

Abstract

This paper investigates how public sector institutions change their form and approach to achieve a socially innovative urban governance. The “Mayor’s Office of New Urban Mechanics” (MONUM) in Boston, Massachusetts (USA) proves a representative case of innovation in the public sector. As a new type of government agency, it is essentially an open innovation lab dedicated to innovative evidence-based policymaking. Following a new dynamic organizational pattern in urban governance, MONUM is conducive to project-oriented social innovation practices and horizontal multi-sectoral collaboration among the three societal sectors: public, private, and civil. Its results suggest that first, the peculiarity of MONUM lies in its hybrid and boundary-blurring nature. Second, new institutional forms that experiment with urban governance can rely on multi-sectoral collaboration. Third, MONUM has experimented with a systemic approach to social innovation following the “design thinking theory.” The MONUM case can contribute to the current debate in Europe on the need to harmonize EU policies for an effective social inclusion by promoting the application of the place-sensitive approach.

Suggested Citation

  • Carmelina Bevilacqua & Yapeng Ou & Pasquale Pizzimenti & Guglielmo Minervino, 2019. "New Public Institutional Forms and Social Innovation in Urban Governance: Insights from the “Mayor’s Office of New Urban Mechanics” (MONUM) in Boston," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-24, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2019:i:1:p:23-:d:299364
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/1/23/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/1/23/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Herrera, Maria Elena Baltazar, 2015. "Creating competitive advantage by institutionalizing corporate social innovation," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(7), pages 1468-1474.
    2. von Hippel, Eric, 1976. "The dominant role of users in the scientific instrument innovation process," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 5(3), pages 212-239, July.
    3. Eric von Hippel, 2007. "Horizontal innovation networks—by and for users," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 16(2), pages 293-315, April.
    4. Simona Iammarino & Andrés Rodriguez-Pose & Michael Storper, 2019. "Regional inequality in Europe: evidence, theory and policy implications," Journal of Economic Geography, Oxford University Press, vol. 19(2), pages 273-298.
    5. Markus M. Bugge & Carter W. Bloch, 2016. "Between bricolage and breakthroughs—framing the many faces of public sector innovation," Public Money & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 36(4), pages 281-288, May.
    6. Lucía Sáez Vegas & Iñaki Periáñez Cañadillas, 2013. "Market Orientation In Local Government Through The Analysis Of Municipal Website Content: A Framework For Its Measurement," Global Journal of Business Research, The Institute for Business and Finance Research, vol. 7(2), pages 47-58.
    7. Erik Swyngedouw, 2005. "Governance Innovation and the Citizen: The Janus Face of Governance-beyond-the-State," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 42(11), pages 1991-2006, October.
    8. Mariano Fressoli & Elisa Arond & Dinesh Abrol & Adrian Smith & Adrian Ely & Rafael Dias, 2014. "When grassroots innovation movements encounter mainstream institutions: implications for models of inclusive innovation," Innovation and Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 4(2), pages 277-292, October.
    9. Jean Hartley, 2005. "Innovation in Governance and Public Services: Past and Present," Public Money & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(1), pages 27-34, January.
    10. Margit Mayer, 2006. "Manuel Castells’The City and the Grassroots," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(1), pages 202-206, March.
    11. Mike Raco, 1999. "Competition, Collaboration and the New Industrial Districts: Examining the Institutional Turn in Local Economic Development," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 36(5-6), pages 951-968, May.
    12. Ikujiro Nonaka, 1994. "A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(1), pages 14-37, February.
    13. Frank Moulaert & Flavia Martinelli & Erik Swyngedouw & Sara Gonzalez, 2005. "Towards Alternative Model(s) of Local Innovation," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 42(11), pages 1969-1990, October.
    14. Arundel, Anthony & Casali, Luca & Hollanders, Hugo, 2015. "How European public sector agencies innovate: The use of bottom-up, policy-dependent and knowledge-scanning innovation methods," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(7), pages 1271-1282.
    15. Mike Raco & Rob Imrie, 2000. "Governmentality and Rights and Responsibilities in Urban Policy," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 32(12), pages 2187-2204, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Carmelina Bevilacqua & Pasquale Pizzimenti & Yapeng Ou, 2023. "Cities in Transition and Urban Innovation Ecosystems: Place and Innovation Dynamics in the Case of Boston and Cambridge (USA)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(18), pages 1-30, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Demircioglu, Mehmet Akif & Audretsch, David B., 2017. "Conditions for innovation in public sector organizations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(9), pages 1681-1691.
    2. Torugsa, Nuttaneeya (Ann) & Arundel, Anthony, 2017. "Rethinking the effect of risk aversion on the benefits of service innovations in public administration agencies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(5), pages 900-910.
    3. Hurmelinna-Laukkanen, Pia & Nätti, Satu, 2012. "Network orchestration for knowledge mobility: The case of an international innovation community," jbm - Journal of Business Market Management, Free University Berlin, Marketing Department, vol. 5(4), pages 244-264.
    4. Sweidan, Selwa & Ejercito, Karlynne, 2022. "Non-user," Internet Policy Review: Journal on Internet Regulation, Alexander von Humboldt Institute for Internet and Society (HIIG), Berlin, vol. 11(2), pages 1-10.
    5. van der Have, Robert P. & Rubalcaba, Luis, 2016. "Social innovation research: An emerging area of innovation studies?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(9), pages 1923-1935.
    6. Matthew Fuller & Albert David, 2017. "Making nothing or something: corporate Fab Labs seen through their objects as they cross organizational boundaries," Post-Print hal-01629696, HAL.
    7. Barrutia, Jose M. & Echebarria, Carmen & Aguado-Moralejo, Itziar & Apaolaza-Ibáñez, Vanessa & Hartmann, Patrick, 2022. "Leading smart city projects: Government dynamic capabilities and public value creation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 179(C).
    8. Hung, Chia-Liang & Chou, Jerome Chih-Lung & Dong, Tse-Ping, 2011. "Innovations and communication through innovative users: An exploratory mechanism of social networking website," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 31(4), pages 317-326.
    9. Petra A. Nylund & Xavier Ferras-Hernandez & Alexander Brem, 2020. "Automating profitably together: Is there an impact of open innovation and automation on firm turnover?," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 14(1), pages 269-285, February.
    10. Mahr, Dominik & Lievens, Annouk, 2012. "Virtual lead user communities: Drivers of knowledge creation for innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 167-177.
    11. Wang, Lei & Zhou, Yahong & Chiao, Benjamin, 2023. "Robots and firm innovation: Evidence from Chinese manufacturing," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 162(C).
    12. Preißner, Stephanie & Raasch, Christina & Schweisfurth, Tim, 2017. "Is necessity the mother of disruption?," Kiel Working Papers 2097, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    13. Arundel, Anthony & Bloch, Carter & Ferguson, Barry, 2019. "Advancing innovation in the public sector: Aligning innovation measurement with policy goals," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(3), pages 789-798.
    14. Sanjai K. Parahoo & Ahmed A. Al-Nakeeb, 2019. "Investigating antecedents of social innovation in public sector using a service ecosystem lens," International Review on Public and Nonprofit Marketing, Springer;International Association of Public and Non-Profit Marketing, vol. 16(2), pages 235-253, December.
    15. Mirvis, Philip & Herrera, Maria Elena Baltazar & Googins, Bradley & Albareda, Laura, 2016. "Corporate social innovation: How firms learn to innovate for the greater good," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(11), pages 5014-5021.
    16. Maria Roszkowska-Menkes, 2017. "User Innovation: State of the Art and Perspectives for Future Research," Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Innovation, Fundacja Upowszechniająca Wiedzę i Naukę "Cognitione", vol. 13(2), pages 127-154.
    17. Aaron M. Lane, 2020. "The destruction phase of public sector innovation: regulations governing school closure in Australia," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 30(4), pages 1151-1169, September.
    18. Carmen SAVULESCU & Corina-Georgiana ANTONOVICI (LAZAR), 2014. "Knowledge Society Development In The Eu 28," Journal of Public Administration, Finance and Law, Alexandru Ioan Cuza University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, vol. 6(6), pages 74-90, December.
    19. Laurin Buchheim & Alexander Krieger & Sarah Arndt, 2020. "Innovation types in public sector organizations: a systematic review of the literature," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 70(4), pages 509-533, November.
    20. Esther Hoffmann, 2007. "Consumer integration in sustainable product development," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(5), pages 322-338, July.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2019:i:1:p:23-:d:299364. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.