國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Chapter 2 Literature Review
In this chapter, we will review the theories of societal innovation presented by Lehtola and Stahle (2014) and Lin and Chen (2016). Moreover, we will review the definition of sustainable urban development as well as the framework presented by Tang and Lee (2016). At last, we will give an introduction of the UNESCO Creative Cities Network.
2.1 Societal Innovation
According to Lehtola and Stahle (2014), “A societal innovation introduces a novel economic and/or social improvement to people’s everyday life. It brings a (radical or incremental) systemic change to society’s structures or modes of operation, and it is legitimated by the majority of societal stakeholders.”
The concept of societal innovation is not new. It has been used to describe how industrial creation created by firms leads to society shaping cult item (Cova & Svanfeldt, 1993), and constant societal problems through a framework of transition management (Rotmans, 2005). Additionally, some classic examples in textbooks such as the creation of capitalist economic system, the institutionalization of science in universities, the birth of democratic “societal corporate governance” and the emergence of the welfare state are all examples of societal innovations (Lehtola & Ståhle, 2014).
Looking deep into the definition of societal innovation, the characteristics of a society determine the way how a societal innovation should work. A society is always an organized system with a variety of stakeholders including enterprises, NGOs and universities as well as individual citizens and the state itself. Thus, a societal innovation must be systemic and provides (radical or incremental) changes in the structures of society and in the ways it works; moreover, since in a society, structural or systemic changes most often require both formal and informal legitimation, the changes need to be accepted and deployed by both individual citizens and the state, in other words, the communication between societal stakeholders, their motives, and their joint acceptance determine the outcome of societal innovations (Lehtola & Ståhle, 2014).
Lehtola and Stahle (2014) categorize stakeholders in societal innovations into civil society and the state. The civil society consists of the third sector (non-governmental organizations, NGOs), the private sector (enterprises) and research communities (universities). The emergence of innovation is always dependent on stakeholders’
motives, one cannot force others to be creative. Thus, societal innovations are created by stakeholders acting as innovators and/or legitimators within the state and civil
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
society regimes and the more interaction between the stakeholders, the greater the space and possibility for sustainable innovation (Lehtola & Ståhle, 2014).
Summarized from the above literature, a successful societal innovation contains the following six criteria (Lin & Chen, 2016):
(1) Systemic change (2) Structural change
(3) Stakeholders’ involvement and participation
(4) Acceptance and deployment of change by both individual citizens and the government
(5) Systems interdependency
(6) Bringing about desirable outcome and impact
These six criteria are used in this study to examine if the cases match the definition of societal innovation.
2.2 Transformation Processes
According to Lin and Chen (2016), successful innovation is related to successful transformation, which is required by societal innovation. A complete societal transformation should result in a self-serving society (Djellal & Gallouj, 2012) and have the following seven characteristics (Lin & Chen, 2016):
(1) Generation of new idea that lead to employment creation and social inclusion (2) Development, testing and validation of innovative approaches and practices (3) Accumulation of good practices and success stories to be spread and transferred (4) Building bridges and exploiting synergies between unrelated systems, institutions,
or actions of support
(5) Testing of hypotheses through experimentation
(6) Building capacities and mobilizing for change amongst governmental administrators and decision-makers
(7) Supporting change in structures, organizations, and institutional frameworks The cases in this study are also explained by the seven transformation processes to ensure that cases are successfully transformed.
2.3 LERP-PEARL Model
According to the study of Lin and Chen (2016) on four UNESCO creative cities, city transformation requires vision, good leadership, multiple players’ commitment, tangible resources, effective execution, and self-organizing system. In general, it goes
‧
which build up the two-stage “LERP-PEARL” transition model of city transformation (Lin and Chen, 2016). LERP represents leader (L), execution (E), resources (R), and partners (P) which are the crucial elements in the initial triggering stage; PEARL stands for enlarge partner (P), execution (E), activation (A), resources (R), and leadership of multiple constituents (L) and these are required at the second self-organizing stage (Lin
& Chen, 2016).
Literally, lerp is a kind of honey produced by a type of Australian bee. In the model, LERP symbolizes the nutrient that expedite growth and the nurturing environment which a city need at the initial triggering stage. Pearl literally means a precious gem that attracts people’s attention. In the model, PEARL means that after the triggering stage, the city has to become desirable to attract the attention of relevant parties to get more partners involved. Involvement of larger amount of relevant partners enable effective execution at relevant sub-systems. Then, appropriate activation for more participation can call for required resources and commitment. With the participation of enlarged partners, supported with effective execution, proper activation and greater amount of resources, the self-initiated leadership of multiple constituents are more likely to establish for a self-organizing sustainable system (Lin & Chen, 2016). Readers can refer to Table 1 for the summary of LERP-PEARL model.
Table 1: Illustration of the LERP-PEARL model
LERP—triggering stage PEARL—self-organizing stage Leader Starting leadership is
required to get thing moving
Partners The enlarged and motivated partners become the advocates for the vision
Execution Starting leader needs to have strong execution capability to step forward
Execution The partners are the major force for effective execution, either individually or collaboratively Resources Starting leader acquires
initial key resources to attract partners
Activation Activation is required to solicit more participation and critical resources
Partners Partners commit to the vision and join the efforts
Resources Mass amount of resources are assembled from various sources or the sub-systems can self-generate required resources Leadership Collective leadership is achieved Source: Lin, Carol Yeh-Yun; Chen, Jeffrey, 2016. The Impact of Societal and Social Innovation (p.53). Singapore, Springer Singapore.
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
2.4 Sustainable Urban Development
In order to form a framework for analyzing the impact of becoming a creative city, it is necessary to refer to the studies of sustainable urban development.
The United Nations World Commission on Environment and development published in 1987 Our Common Future, which is considered the starting point of the global discourse on sustainability and defined sustainable development as
“development that meets the need of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs”. The definition of sustainable development cannot be clearly defined due to different political ideologies and programs underpinned by different kinds of knowledge, values and philosophy; thus the concept of sustainable urban development is ever-changing and evolving (Tang & Lee, 2016).
Summarized by Tang and Lee (2016), principles of achieving sustainable urban development are based on economic, social, and environment consideration. When defined in terms of the economic sustainability of a city, it seeks continual economic growth of the city, which is now regarded as a relatively weaker form of sustainable development; when emphasized on social sustainability, it seeks a broad range of social principles of futurity, equity and participation, especially involvement of public citizens in the land development process; when viewed on the side of environmental concerns, it seeks balance between land development and nature preservation (Tang & Lee, 2016).
Moreover, since cities are fundamentally human habitats, social development and economic productivity depend on citizens whose mental and physical need are satisfied, city inhabitants’ comfort plays a significant role in sustainable urban development (Tang & Lee, 2016).
Thus, sustainable urban development is a multi-aspect concept. Tang and Lee (2016) define sustainable urban development as “the capacity of any significant human settlements to maintain environmental quality and carrying capacity, to support socio-economic development and management, and to provide sufficient services and livelihoods to all current and future inhabitants.” Readers can refer to Figure 1 for the concept of sustainable urban development.
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Figure 1: Sustainable urban development—defined as capability in three aspects
Source: Tang, Hui-Ting; Lee, Yuh-Ming, 2016. The Making of Sustainable Urban Development: A Synthesis Framework. Sustainability 8 (5), p.492-520.
Based on this definition of sustainable urban development, building a creative city is “the human settlement” and the impact of becoming a creative city should lead to a sustainable city, which implies that the creative city should be able to maintain environmental quality and carrying capacity, to support socio-economic development and management, and to provide sufficient services and livelihoods provided to all current and future inhabitants.
Therefore the impact of becoming a creative city could be divided into three aspects listed below:
(1) The maintain of environmental quality and carrying capacity (2) Socio-economic development and management
(3) Sufficient services and livelihoods provided to all current and future inhabitants
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
2.5 UNESCO Creative Cities Network
In the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, culture and creativity is identified to reach one of the 17 goals: “to make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable”. Culture and creativity are lived and practiced on a daily basis, so by stimulating cultural industries, supporting creation, promoting citizen and cultural participation and approaching the public sphere with the collaboration of public authorities, private sector and civil society, the practical needs of the local population will be suited (UNESCO, n.d.c).
The UNESCO Creative Cities Network (UCCN) was created in 2004 aims to promote cooperation with and among cities that have identified creativity as a strategic factor for sustainable urban development as regards economic, social, cultural and environmental aspects (UNESCO, n.d.a). By joining the Network, cities recognize their commitment to sharing best practices, developing partnerships that promote creativity and the cultural industries, strengthening participation in cultural life and integrating culture in urban development plans (UNESCO, n.d.a). The Network covers seven creative fields: Craft and Folk Arts, Design, film, Gastronomy, Literature, Media Arts, and Music (UNESCO, n.d.a). Until 2017, the Network comprises 180 cities from 72 countries (UNESCO, 2018).
After joining the Network, the cities must present a realistic action plan including specific projects, initiatives or policies to move along s sustainable urban development path; in practice, the cities should attend the Annual Meetings to exchange updated information on activities carried out by cities, determine the Network’s strategy and operations and agree upon important matters related to future developments; in addition to attending Annual Meetings, every four years the Cities should produce a Membership Monitoring Report which demonstrate the implementation of the UNNC Mission Statement, present an action plan to renew their commitment, and provide insight into the impact of the designations; the report thus encourages the development of research and case studies on concepts and experiences of the Creative Cities (UNESCO, 2018).
The data of the cities in this studies are mainly collected from the monitoring reports of the cities.