FROM SOCIAL INNOVATION TO CIVIC CULTURE: AN ALTERNATIVE FOR

SMART CITIES.

SILVIA ALEJANDRA POVEDA ARDILA

Universidad Industrial de Santander, Santander, Colombia
silviapvda@gmail.com

RUTH ZÁRATE RUEDA

Universidad Industrial de Santander, Santander, Colombia
ruthzaraterueda@gmail.com

EFRÉN ROMERO RIAÑO

Universidad Industrial de Santander, Santander, Colombia
Eromeror1483@gmail.com

ABSTRACT

Social innovation (SI) refers to the processes and outcomes that develop a novel approach to
address and achieve meeting pressing needs and problems of the society, in order to improve the
quality of life of individuals. Looks for ways to improve societies capabilities of solving their
own problems, because it firmly believes that these are the main actors to solve them. The SI is a
process that generates social changes that cannot be achieved with the existing practices, for this
reason the construction of territories or smart cities requires mechanisms of development of the
internal capacities of each region towards a sustainable culture of citizen participation, starting
from the implementation of socially innovative strategies.
The main objective of this dissertation is to characterize the current trends of SI and civic culture
in terms of scientific production, by reviewing literature developed from the systematic review
proposed by Tranfield, Denyer and Smart (2003) and the bibliometric analysis, supported by
mining data software VantagePoint. The methodological option allows working with studies in an
orderly manner, identifying criteria of effectiveness, efficiency, objectivity and reproducibility,
which ensures minimize bias and/or subjectivity in the findings. The method used is content
analysis, based on scientific literature from ISI WOS, frameworks and manuals.
The results show the production dynamics of studies related to the topic of SI considering the
bibliographic fields countries, authors, journals and interactions of keywords in the period

1
between 2005 and 2015. Also an analysis of conceptual approaches from various authors and the
process of building the SI policy in Colombia are presented.
Keywords: social innovation, civic culture, smart cities, systematic review, bibliometric analysis.

INTRODUCTION

Social Innovation according to the Center for Social Innovation (CIS) of the National Agency for
Overcoming Extreme Poverty (ANSPE) are solutions (products, services, practices or
management models) that meet to be sustainable over time and that, when implemented, prove to
be more efficient and to have more impact than existing solutions to improve the quality of life of
the population living in extreme poverty. For Nicholls and Dees (2015), SI can be understood as
the simultaneous production of new ideas and new social structures where the rules of public
goods, justice and equity are re contextualize, encouraging the creation of new opportunities.
However it is surprising to find how little is known about this area of knowledge compared to the
extensive literature that is found in innovation in business and science. According to a study
conducted by the University of Oxford, “found no systematic overviews of the field, no major
datasets or long-term analyses, and few signs of interest from the big foundations or academic
research funding bodies” (Mulgan, Tucker, Ali & Sanders, 2007, p.5). For this reason all the
academic research being done on social innovation are very important, as literature today still has
a large deficit around unifying concepts and a remarkable dearth of research and serious analysis
of how social innovation is and how it can be supported (Mulgan et al., 2007).
The gap between the number of studies in business innovation or innovation in markets and
social innovation may be due among other things to the fact that competitive reins that drive
innovation in commercial markets are not present when it comes to social innovation, and also do
to the absence of institutions and funds dedicated to it. So it is often a matter of luck when good
ideas get to be implemented (Mulgan et al., 2007).
According to Rodríguez and Alvarado (2008), innovations in the social field often arise in
extreme conditions, where neither the state nor the market have intervened with solutions to the
problems, in a scenario where the needs of a society have not been resolved . On the other hand
civic culture it‟s understood according to the Vision Colombia II Centenary 2019, as "the values,
beliefs, assumptions, attitudes and perceptions that guide the behavior of people" (p.7). The

2
concept of civic culture is related to certain ideas of contemporary social science, regarding the
active exercise of citizenship through participation in public affairs.
SI is a process that generates social changes that cannot be achieved with existing practices, for
this reason for the construction of smart cities mechanisms of development of the internal
capacities of each region towards a sustainable culture of citizen participation are required,
starting from the implementation of socially innovative strategies and the use of technology as a
key tool for communication and appropriation of these strategies proactively and timely, so it
generates visible results in the shortest possible time and with high level of effectiveness.
Considering this it´s proposed as objective of this dissertation the characterization of current
trends in social innovation and civic culture in terms of scientific production, by reviewing
literature developed from the systematic review and bibliometric analysis supported on the
VantagePoint software. Analyzing publications in the period between 2005- 2015, with the
purpose of serving for the development of the industrial engineering thesis «Systematic review of
the literature on social innovation as a framework of the project “innovation for a participative
civic culture”». The paper is structured as follows: the first section describes the methodology
used for the review of the literature; the second presents the most relevant results: the
bibliometric analysis and the literature review that allows the conceptualization and
understanding of the subject matter of SI; finally the main conclusions generated in the developed
process are mentioned.

METHODOLOGY

To carry out the review of the scientific literature on social innovation, the methodology of the
systematic review presented by Tranfield et al. (2003) was developed, there was also held a
bibliometric analysis, which is the study of the information in production dynamics of scientific
papers considering the bibliographic fields (Palvia et al., 2004). Table 1 shows the stages and
phases of the systematic review proposed by Tranfield et al. (2003).
This type of review was chosen because it guarantees transparency and reproducibility, so that
the quality of the review process is improved, legitimizing and giving authority to the resulting
evidence. In addition this methodology provides a basis for researchers in formulating decisions
and taking actions (Tranfield et al., 2003). The methodology of the systematic review according
to Pérez (2012) guarantees the reliability, credibility and replicability of results, where the
relevant literary space (ELR) is located. An objective review is guaranteed by providing
3
information on the number of sources presented, employees search methods, the criteria for
inclusion and exclusion of studies, the relevance of these and the objective evidence of reasoning.
Therefore is feasible the reproducibility of the method and results (Pérez, 2012).

Systematic literature review

Planning the review

According to Tranfield et al. (2003), the early stages of systematic reviews are an ongoing
process of definition, clarification and refinement. Having clearly defined the object of study, all
relevant information on the subject was gathered, using the search query. Studies result of
running the search query in the Core Collection of the database Web of Science, are subjected to
a process of identification, selection and evaluation in a structured way, using the eligibility
criteria in order to respond to a specific research question (The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011).
Table 1. Stages of a systematic review.

Stage 1: Planning the review

Phase 0 - Identification for the need for a review
Phase 1 - Preparation of a proposal for a review
Phase 2 - Development of a review protocol
Stage n: Conducting a review
Phase 3 - Identification of research
Phase 4 - Selection of studies
Phase 5 - Study quality assessment
Phase 6 - Data extraction and monitoring progress
Phase 7 - Data synthesis
Stage in: Reporting and dissemination
Phase 8 - The report and recommendations
Phase 9 - Getting evidence into practice

4
Source: Tranfield, D., Denyer, D. & Smart, P. (2003).Towards a Methodology for Developing
Evidence-Informed Management Knowledge by Means of Systematic Review. Cranfield, United
Kingdom: British Journal of Management, 14, 207-222.

Identification for the need for a review

Since this dissertation is a research advance but it is not the culmination of the process, it is part
of the thesis in development «Systematic review of the literature on social innovation as a
framework of the project “innovation for a participative civic culture”», which in turn is part of
the root project entitled “Innovation for a participatory civic culture through the research of social
behavior supported in ICT in the Metropolitan area of Bucaramanga and Barrancabermeja,
Department of Santander”, project carried out by the research group INNOTEC from the School
of Industrial and Business Studies of the Industrial University of Santander (UIS); which in turn
is developed within the agreement framework of cooperation in science and technology between
the Department of Santander and UIS. The study began with a review of the project in order to
investigate why a conceptualization of social innovation was necessary. From this reflection the
research question emerged, which is critical for the review. Following this and already having
carried out a preliminary review of the literature in order to identify the keywords, the need for a
systematic review of the literature on the subject of SI was identified as the number of studies in
the matter makes it unmanageable and without an appropriate review methodology is difficult to
ensure the review of the best evidence, the objectivity in the results, and the replicability of the
methodology.

Preparation of a proposal for the review

Establishing the purpose and scope of the systematic review in the investigation, a review team
was formed, integrated by Professor Efrén Romero Riaño, who has a role of research and
administration within the agreement UIS- Government in the root project, the associate professor
of the School of Social Work Ruth Zárate Rueda, who is disciplining of the social area and has
been developing research and extension projects on social innovation and the researcher Silvia
Alejandra Poveda Ardila, student of Industrial Engineering. All members belonging to the
5
research group INNOTEC of the School of Industrial and Business Studies from the Industrial
University of Santander.
Given the objective of the root project, the review team formed the research question. then
proceeded to conduct a preliminary search at the database of Web of Knowledge, specifically in
the Core Collection of Web of Science, using the terms “social innovation” from this were
identified some authors and other terms related to the central theme of the investigation. From the
full reading of certain articles selected considering the title and keywords used by the authors, a
set of terms relevant for the construction of the search query was established, taking into account
that it would respond to the objective of the investigation. The software Vantage Point was also
used, because it allowed to recognize other keywords useful in the search. This stage of the
methodology in which search terms were selected was carried out carefully as it allowed in the
words of Perez (2012) to "shield" the search and the extraction of evidence from issues that did
not represent exclusively the phenomenon of interest, which guaranteed to start the review with
the right foot.
From this preliminary search, terms like: “social change”, “social movement”, “social impact”
and “social transformation” were found, which are used by different authors when referring to
social innovations. Other terms like “urban mobility”, “civic culture”, “citizen culture” and
“smart cities” were identified as necessary to meet the objectives of the root project.
Having the list of keywords to use in the construction of the search query, the Boolean operators
to employ and their position in the same was defined. The first operator established was “AND”
which guaranteed the search of all studies containing the terms “social innovation” and “social
innovations”. The second operator used was “OR” in order to ensure that the search included the
terms related to social innovation, as well as the key terms of the research “mobility”, “quality of
life”, “coexistence” and “security” among others. Once this process was done, the search query
was structured. The order of the terms in the query was random as the main term is “social
innovation” and this one is related to the rest of the terms by the Boolean operator “AND”.
Subsequently, the search query was structured and it continued to evolve as the research team
inquired more on the subject, by reading scientific articles on the matter. The director of the
research, Professor Efrén Romero reviewed the evolution of the equation and suggested certain
terms to be added. After the changes were implemented, the search query was validated to
experts in the field, participants of the First Latin American Meeting of Social Innovation from
the public sector, which took place in Bogotá, Colombia in December 2015. The experts were
Brenton Caffin, Director of innovation Skills from Nesta, UK and Pablo Acuña, consultant on
innovation and added value of the Ministry of Foreign Trade of Costa Rica, and leader of the
6
presidential table in social innovation. Then the equation was presented to Dr. Edna Bravo with
great career in the study of innovation from the School of Industrial and Business Studies of the
UIS, who in turn validated it.
Table 2 shows the search terms classified according to their association with each of the major
areas identified for the research. Additionally the search query included the terms: “SOCIAL
POTENTIAL”, “SOCIAL CHALLENGES”, “SOCIAL SECTOR”, “SOCIAL BUSINESS”,
“SOCIAL ENTERPRISE”, “SOCIAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP” and “SOCIAL SERVICES”,
which cannot be narrow in one of the areas outlined in Table 2 but have a high frequency among
scientific articles recommended by experts and therefore they were considered important within
the search query.

Table 2. Associated search terms according to identified areas of the research.

IDENTIFIED AREAS TERMS

 SOCIAL CHANGE
 SOCIAL MOVEMENT
 SOCIAL IMPACT
SOCIAL INNOVATION  SOCIAL TRANSFORMATION
 MOVEMENTS OF CHANGE
 SOCIAL PROGRESS
 SOCIAL SOLUTIONS
 MOBILITY
 URBAN MOBILITY
MOBILITY  SUSTAINABLE MOBILITY
 SUSTAINABLE URBAN MOBILITY

 SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT
QUALITY OF LIFE  QUALITY OF LIFE
 SOCIAL PROBLEMS
 COEXISTENCE
COEXISTENCE  CITIZEN COEXISTENCE
 CONNIVANCE
 LIVE IN HARMONY
 SAFE
SECURITY  SECURITY
 PUBLIC SAFETY

7
  CITIZEN CULTURE
 CIVIC CULTURE
CIVIC CULTURE  PEOPLE PARTICIPATION
 LIVING LAB
 CO-CREATE VALUE
 CITIZEN RELATIONS
 CITIZEN INTERACTIONS
 URBAN PLANNING
 URBAN DEVELOPMENT
 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
SMART CITIES  TERRITORIAL DEVELOPMENT
 SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
 SMART CITY
 REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT

 PUBLIC INNOVATION
 PUBLIC SECTOR
 PUBLIC ORGANIZATIONS
 CIVIL SOCIETY
 POLICY
 POLITICS
 POLICY DESIGN
GOVERNANCE
 PUBLIC POLICY
 GOVERNMENT POLICY
 SOCIAL POLICY
 SOCIAL INCLUSION
 POLITICS OF SOCIETAL LEARNING
 LOCAL GOVERNANCE
 GOVERNANCE
 LOCAL GOVERNMENT

 SOCIAL PRACTICE
PRACTICES  PRACTICE
 BEST PRACTICE

Source: the authors.

Development of a review protocol

8
The review protocol is a previous plan to the states of the review, which helps protect the
objectivity by providing explicit description of the steps in the investigation, because is there
where the criteria for inclusion and exclusion of studies are defined, the search strategy and
description of the methods used. All this in order to ensure the review of the best evidence
possible (Tranfield et al., 2003).
Next is presented the research question, the database used for the research, the criteria for
inclusion and exclusion in Table 3, followed by the quality criteria and the selection protocol of
articles described in Figure 1.

Research question:
How can social innovation contribute to solve the problems of the city of Bucaramanga in the
fields of mobility, coexistence and security?

Database:
It was defined to perform the literature review on the database Web of Knowledge, specifically in
the Core Collection of Web of Science, because it is an integrated online platform that enables
the acquisition and management of reliable multidisciplinary scientific information on all
databases indexed in the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI). Web of Science, developed by
Thomson Scientific, has dominated the field of reference academy, primarily through its annual
journal impact factor, a tool to assess the importance and influence of publications. Citation
analysis presented by this database offers better graphics and it is more detailed than the Scopus
citation analysis, probably because the first one has been designed with the intention to satisfy
users in citation analysis. Web of Science also covers the oldest publications, because their
indexed and archived records date back to 1900 (Falagas, Pitsouni, Malietzis & Pappas, 2008).

Table 3. Inclusion and exclusion criteria.

9
 1. They were included all documents registered in all databases (Science Citation Index
Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED), Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI), Arts &
Humanities Citation Index (A&HCI) and Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI)
that form the Core Collection of web of Science found in the virtual platform web of
Inclusion Science (ISI WOS).
criteria
2. They were included all documents registered in the Core Collection of Web of
Science in the interval of time between the years 2005 and 2015.
3. They were only included the types of documents that were articles and reviews.
4. Only documents in English were included.

1. Documents recorded from 2016 were excluded.

2. All studies that were not written in English were excluded.
Exclusion
criteria All those articles and reviews that despite of containing the search terms do not contain
information related to the focus of the project were excluded. Given this, the following
exclusion criteria were determined:
3. All those articles or reviews that have no direct connection with social innovations in
the fields of mobility, quality of life, coexistence, security, governance, policies and
case studies were excluded.
4. Those articles that address issues of social innovation only in areas like: sustainable
consumption, renewable energy, subcontracting, non-profit organization, design,
sports, finance, health, environment and food, not directly related to the focus of the
investigation were excluded.
5. Articles dealing with public policy but not directly with the promotion of social
innovation were excluded.
6. Articles dealing with the topic of social innovation from a competitive and business
marketing perspective were excluded.

Source: the authors.

Quality criteria:
These criteria are implemented based on the experience and contributions of the director, co-
director and researcher of this research work.
 The article should provide a significant theoretical contribution to the research that is
directly related with the theory of social innovation, factors that promote or hinder it or
with the effect the development of a SI has on a society and its economy.

10
  The article must identify, support and describe cases of solving social problems by
developing a social innovation.
 The article should contribute to the integration between the theory and practice of social
innovation, their environment, the process lived and the results.
 The article should identify and describe the environmental conditions that promote or
inhibit the development of a social innovation in a region.
 The article should establish or provide the practices to be carried out to ensure the
survival and success of the social innovation.
 The article must capture the trends of global social innovation.
 The article should identify social innovation strategies that strengthen a participatory civic
culture.

The protocol selection of articles it´s explained in Figure 1, where the process followed to
conduct the systematic review of the literature is presented.

Conducting a review

The identification, selection and evaluation of the documents was carried out under the criteria of
inclusion, exclusion and quality previously established, which ended with the selection of the
scientific documents considered relevant to the conceptualization of the topic, taking into account
the action plan developed at the planning stage. Also the bibliometric analysis of the relevant
studies and an advance of the respective literature review are presented.

Identification of research

According to Perez (2012), identification is the first step in the process of the systematic review,
the purpose of this is to locate the relevant literary space (ELR) and quantify how much of this
represents the “bit vital”, that is to say how many of the found studies answer the research
question.

11
For the identification of studies, started from the development of the search strategy, which
involved the search query previously structured by the review group and its subsequent
implementation in the virtual platform of the database Web of Science, from where a number of
scientific studies were generated to be selected. After the implementation of the search query in
the Core Collection of database Web of Science and applying the inclusion criteria 1 and 2, 262
scientific papers were obtained.

Selection of studies

After the implementation of the search query in the Core Collection of the database Web of
Science and applying the inclusion criteria 1 and 2 where 262 scientific papers were obtained, to
these results were applied the inclusion criteria 3 and 4 through a process of refinement that the
virtual platform of the database web of Science allows with which the number of studies
decreased to 223 divided between articles and reviews only in English.
The pre-selection of the articles was conducted by a review of title and abstract of all documents
previously filtered with the inclusion criteria and applying to the aforementioned the exclusion
criteria 1, 2 and 3. This led the universe reduced to 117 articles related to SI.
A second review by title and abstract was conducted to the 117 articles, applying to these the
exclusion criteria 4, 5 and 6, which reduced the number of studies to 89. Subsequently, a third
review to the abstracts was performed, applying for the first time the quality criteria established,
whereby the number of scientific papers decreased to 73.
The approval of the selected articles was in charge of the research director, Professor Efrén
Romero Riaño and the co-director, Professor Ruth Zárate Rueda, who approved the final result of
73 articles referring to SI, studies that contribute to answer the research question initially raised.

12
 Figure 1. Protocol selection of articles for the systematic literature review.

• Application of the inclusion criteria 1 and 2 to the total of records obtained as a result of the
1 implementation of the search query in the Core Collection of the database Web of Science.

• Application of inclusion criteria 3 and 4 to the scientific papers resulted from the filter in the
2 previous step. Obtaining a decrease in the universe of articles.

• First review by title and abstract of all documents previously filtered with the inclusion criteria
and application of the exclusion criteria 1, 2 and 3 to them. Reduction of the number of studies.
3 • This first pre-selection was carried out manually by the researcher Silvia Alejandra Poveda
Ardila.

• Second review by title and abstract of the pre-selected articles in the previous stage.
Application of the exclusion criteria 4, 5 and 6. Obtaining a reduction of the universe.
4 • This second pre-selection was carried out manually by the researcher Silvia Alejandra Poveda
Ardila.

• Third and final review of the abstracts. Application for the first time of the quality criteria
established. Decrease in the number of scientific articles. Constitution of the number of studies
selected for the review.
5
• This selection was carried out manually by the researcher Silvia Alejandra Poveda Ardila. The
approval of the selected articles was in charge of the director and co-director of the research,
professors Efrén Romero Riaño and Ruth Zárate Rueda.

Source: the authors.

RESULTS

Bibliometric analysis

13
In this process the 73 selected articles in the period between 2005 and 2015 were analyzed using
the software VantagePoint, which is a powerful text mining tool for the knowledge discovery in
text databases. It helps to understand and navigate quickly through large volumes of text-based
information, providing a better way to see the information and turn it into knowledge. The
perspective provided by VantagePoint helps a quick understanding of the concepts and
significant search results entities, allowing to clarify the relationships and find critical patterns.
VantagePoint is used by large and small businesses, government agencies and academic
institutions around the world for the Competitive Technical Intelligence, Patent Analysis, and
Technology Management to mine the intelligence of online data repositories (VantagePoint
User's Guide ...).
According to published records, the participation of several countries with the articles of studies
selected was identified as shown in Figure 2, where it can be observed the name of the country
and the number of studies it has in the matter. From this it can be seen a large influence in the
study of social innovation in Europe, highlighting the involvement in the subject of United
Kingdom (UK) compared to the other countries, with a total of 23 articles published from the 73
studies selected for this research, followed by Germany, Italy and the United States each
respectively participating with 7 articles.

Figure 2. Distribution of publications by country.

Source: the authors.

14
Graphic 1 presents the number of articles published by journal. As shown in Graphic 1, studies
have been published in Urban Studies which has 5 publications, Innovation-The European
Journal of Social Science Research with 4 publications, European Urban and Regional Studies,
Information Systems Management and International Journal of Technology Management, each
with 3 publications of the total of the 55 journals that registered having published on the topic of
social innovation from the selected articles.
The 165 authors have published their studies with institutions from 5 of the 6 continents
(America, Africa, Asia, Europe and Oceania). It was found in the selected studies that they were
performed in collaborations between authors; most articles handled a group of two to three
collaborators. The number of articles published by the authors is presented in Graphic 2.

Graphic 1. Number of articles published by journal.

Teach. Teach.
Sociol. Rural.
S. Afr. J. Sci.
Public Manag. Rev. N° OF ARTICLES
Lex Localis-J. Local Self-Gov. PUBLISHED BY
JOURNAL
JOURNALS

J. Asian Pac. Commun.

Hist. Soc. Res. 1
Eur. Rev.
Educ. Train.
Des. J.
Asia Pac. J. Soc. Work Dev.
Int. Small Bus. J. 2
Int. J. Technol. Manage. 3
4 5
Urban Stud.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6

Source: the authors.

As it can be seen in Graphic 3, eight authors are highlighted by the number of publications, each
one with 2 published articles, these authors are: Eva Bund candidate Ph.D. at the Institute of
Geography and associated researcher at the German Federal Office for Migration and Refugees in

15
Nürnberg, Georg Mildenberger head of research at the Center for Social Investment, leader in
projects of citizen participation, social entrepreneurship and social innovation; both from the
University of Heidelberg, Germany. Professor Christopher Fox, Director of the unit of Policy
Evaluation and Research, Robert Grimm PhD in European urban cultures; both of the
Department of Sociology at Manchester Metropolitan University, UK. Sara Gonzales, PhD in
Sociology and Political sciences and associated researcher in the Global Unit of Urban Research,
Frank Moulaert, PhD in Regional Science, researcher and professor of the development and
management of European territory in the regions and cities; both from the University of
Newcastle, UK. Kazushi Ishigaki expert researcher at Fujitsu Laboratories Ltd, specialized in
human interface, human-centered design and design of the social system and Erik Swyngedouw
PhD in Environmental Engineering and Geography, professor and researcher at the Environment
and Geography School from the University of Oxford, UK.

Graphic 2. Number of articles published by author.

Witkamp, Marten J
Virkamaki, Venla
Sulaiman, Wan Idros Wan
Schroeder, Antonius
Rahmat, Noorazwa
Parekh, Menka
Nemerzitski, S
McGlade, Jacqueline N° OF ARTICLES
AUTHORS

Loogma, K PUBLISHED BY
Lassur, Silja AUTHOR
1
Jing, Yijia
Heinla, E
Ghobadian, Abby
El-Haddadeh, Ramzi
Daniel, Lisa
Cajaiba-Santana, Giovany
Bhatt, Punita
Albertson, Kevin
Bund, Eva 2
0 0,5 1 1,5 2 2,5

Source: the authors.

16
The number of publications on the subject of social innovation through the years 2005 to 2015
was relatively in ascent, with some declines in the years 2006, 2008 and 2011 as shown in
Graphic 4, in which a maximum occurred in the 2015 with 19 articles published. Therefore it can
be seen that the study of social innovation is a booming issue and which each year is being
studied more. According to Murray et al. (2010), the main reason for this is that existing
structures and policies have failed to solve some of the pressing problems of our time. Examples
of these unsolved problems could be climate change, the global epidemic of chronic diseases and
the rising inequality.
Graphic 3. The authors with the largest number of published articles.

Baines, Susan 1
Armellini, Alejandro 1
Altinay, Levent N° OF ARTICLES
1
PUBLISHED BY
Alsudairi, Mohammed A T 1
AUTHOR
Alcantara, Enrique 1
Albertson, Kevin 1
Adams, David 1
AUTHORS

Swyngedouw, E 2
Moulaert, F 2
Mildenberger, Georg 2
Ishigaki, Kazushi 2
Grimm, Robert 2
Gonzalez, S 2
Fox, Christopher 2
Bund, Eva 2
0 0,5 1 1,5 2 2,5

Source: the authors.

The largest number of publications have been made in the years 2013, 2014 and 2015, as
presented in Graphic 5. The interest shown by scholars for this subject is the result of the
understanding and incorporation of social innovation around the world in the development of
processes, as an alternative that works to meet people‟s needs that have not been satisfied by the
traditional mechanisms. As it can be seen in Graphic 5 where each year has a stronger percentage
than the one before in the number of publications in the subject with the exception of the years

17
2006, 2008 and 2011. This shows that the importance of SI is being validated by various
organisms in the world.
Graphic 4. Number of articles published per year.

20 19
18
16
14 12
11
12
9
10
N° OF ARTICLES

7
8 6
6 4
4 2 2
1
2 0
0
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

PUBLICATION YEAR

Source: the authors.

Graphic 5. Percentage of publications per year.

1%
3% 3%

2015
6%
26% 2014
8% 2013
2012
10% 2010
2005
16% 2011
12%
2009
15% 2007
2008

18
Source: the authors.

The software VantagePoint was used to represent the interaction of the keywords of the 73
articles selected. For managing the keywords the process began by cleaning them with the
aforementioned software, where it identified similar terms that might be equivalent. The cleaning
module used was "Person Names-Aggressive.fuz". Following this the list was reviewed and by
judgment of the researcher there were terms manually associated that for the case of the
investigation represented the same, there were also terms that were manually disassociated
because the software had taken them as equivalent but really for the case of the research they
were not. As a final result of this process the visual representation of the interaction of the
keywords of the articles was obtained in the Aduna presented in Figure 3.
As it can be seen in Figure 3, the words INNOVATION, GOVERNANCE, POLICY, SOCIAL
ENTREPRENEURSHIP and CITIZEN CULTURE were identified as significantly related to
SOCIAL INNOVATION, which in turn is the term that presents the highest frequency. As these
words are key terms in the research and they all present a high frequency and a strong relation
with the main term in the investigation it demonstrates that the same is properly addressed.

19
 Figure 3. Interaction of keywords.

Source: the authors.

20
Analysis of the literature

Social innovation

"Social innovation is a term that almost everyone likes, but nobody is quite sure of what it
means" (Pol & Ville, 2009, p.12).
Innovation according to Rodríguez and Alvarado (2008):
Is the result of a long historical process, an accumulation of failed attempts and small
improvements at a critical time to change the sign of the trend, the direction of a process,
the quality of a product or the technique of a procedure. (P.23)
There are two schools of thought that define social innovation from different perspectives: new
social processes and new social outcomes. The first focuses on changes in social relations and the
second understand SI as the response to the failure of social markets in the provision of public
goods (Nicholls & Dees, 2015).
According to Mulgan et al. (2007), many social innovations “have passed through the three
stages that Schopenhauer identified for any truth: „first, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently
opposed. Third it is accepted as being self-evident‟ ” (p.4).
Social innovation has no fixed limits, reason why is not exclusive of the non-profit sector, on the
contrary it is present in many sectors, such as politics and government, the business and market
sector, social enterprises and the academy. But what is most surprising is that social innovation
thrives best when carried out in collaboration between sectors, it is where in words of Murray,
Caulier-Grice and Mulgan (2010), “the most creative action is happening” (p.3). It is remarkable
to note that for economic growth, social innovation has taken a leading role. This may be because
among other things it allows to deal and overcome issues such as climate change and an aging
population, which could not be cope by conventional methods. In addition to this there is a
growing demand for economic growth which promotes and enhances human relationships and
generates welfare (Mulgan et al., 2007). Social innovations are the driving forces of social
change. That is why it is not surprising to anyone that they occupied a central place in the debate
on the major social challenges and social transformation processes (Howaldt, Kopp & Schwarz,
2013).

21
In words of Mulgan et al. (2007), social innovations are “new ideas that work to meet pressing
unmet needs and improve people‟s lives” (p.7). According to Murray et al. (2010), they are new
ideas (products, services and models) that simultaneously meet social needs and tend to create
new social relationships. That is to say SI are innovations that are good for society and that in
turn promote in society the capacity to act against their problems.
For the State, social innovation reflects a welfare reform based on efficiency and effectiveness.
At the same time can challenge the status quo of the government in society through the
transformation of the structures of power through social relationships that allocate goods and
services ineffective or unevenly (Nicholls & Dees, 2015).
Innovation are new ideas that work, therefore a social innovation refers to new ideas that involve
activities and services whose motivation is based on meeting a social need (Mulgan et al., 2007).
Overall social innovation is a process that generates social changes that cannot be achieved with
the existing practices (Howaldt & Schwarz, 2010). From an organizations perspective, Mulgan et
al. (2007), argues that social innovation refers to “innovative activities and services that are
motivated by the goal of meeting a social need and that are predominantly developed and
diffused through organizations whose primary purposes are social” (p.8).
Social innovations often used to be considered changers of reality both as outcomes and process.
The European commission (2013, p.15), considers these 3 concepts of social innovation: “Social
innovations are new solutions that simultaneously meet a social need and lead to new or
improved capabilities and relationships and better use of assets and resources. In other words,
social innovations are good for society and enhance society‟s capacity to act” (Tepsie). Social
innovation “must be structurally aimed at meeting social need (social challenge); must involve a
new or significantly improved product, process, marketing method, and/or organizational model”
(Selusi). “Social innovation is a process where civil society actors develop new technologies,
strategies, ideas and/or organizations to meet social needs or solve social problems” (SPREAD).

Who does social innovation?

Today, when talking about how social innovation happens, it is inevitable to talk about “one of
the three main lenses for understanding how change happens: individuals, movements or
organizations” (Mulgan et al, 2007, p.13). Seen from the focus of the individual, SI promotes

22
empowerment, enabling people to solve their own problems rather than waiting for the
government or leaders do it for them.
When questioned how social change occurs, according to Mulgan (2006), there are two
approaches: the first is that the maker of social innovation turns out to be a small group of heroic,
energetic and impatient individuals. From this perspective the history of change suggests that this
group is reinventing the world and is responsible for persuading and motivating other people, to
generate the change. The second approach suggests that individuals are the carriers of ideas
instead of those who originated them. This approach is based on the movements that throughout
history have involved millions of people, such as feminism or environmentalism, where
intellectuals and leaders of these are often followers as leaders of the changes enacted in the
public consciousness. Therefore the first perspective brings an individualistic and behaviorist
approach in which SI is generated as a result of the actions an individual takes. The second
perspective perceives SI as the result of an external structural context (Cajaiba-Santana, 2013).
For the eighteenth century the most important social innovator was Robert Owen, who found in
his factories, the power to use them not only to generate dividends but in turn to resolve a latent
social need of the time. Owen questioned himself about the working conditions of the people who
worked there. On the one hand he put end to child labor, which for the time was seen as normal,
he did not recruited children under 10 years old, encouraging in contrast that they received
education. With children from 10 years and older, he handle a job structure that would allow
them to have access to education every day. He also enacted changes in the working conditions
from health to education of working mothers. Beside these things, this social innovator
transforms the work environment and made it enjoyable for people who worked there. For all
this, Owen was certainly a great influential of modern management theories (Mulgan et al.,
2007).
The nineteenth century brought many more social innovators; one of these is Octavia Hill, who
worked with all her determination and skills to transform poverty affected areas into harmonious
communities. Her training programs laid the foundations of modern profession of housing
management and her first organization: the Horace Street Trust (now known as Octavia Housing
and Care), became the model for all housing associations later. In 1895 founded The National
Trust, which now days has 3.4 million members, is arguably the first major modern heritage
organization in the world (Mulgan et al., 2007).
Michael Young (after which bears his name The Young Foundation) was one of the outstanding
social innovators of the twentieth century. His most important skill was the creation of new
organizations and models, a total of 60 independent organizations including the Open University,
23
the Consumers Association, Language Line, Education Extra and the Open College of the Arts.
One of the characteristics of Michael Young, which many pioneers of social innovation share is
in the words of one of his collaborators Tony Flower (as cited in Mulgan et al, 2007, p.14.),
“Sheer persistence, a kind of benign ruthlessness, clutching onto an idea beyond the bitter end,
always taking no as a question”.
Social innovators are present in all fields as described by Mulgan et al. (2007), from politicians,
entrepreneurs, intellectuals to the NGOs activists. There are some well-known, as is the case of
Muhammad Yunus, awarded with the Nobel Peace Prize for developing the Grameen Bank and
be the developer of the microcredit concepts. This organization gives micro credit loans to
impoverished people without demanding collateral, Yunus idea when founding the bank was to
help poor people get out of that situation, by helping them to start a profitable business. This
social innovation project led to a powerful social change in the field of money and transformed
the relationship between lenders and borrowers (Cajaiba-Santana, 2013).

History of Social Innovation

Through history it is difficult to find an area where social innovation has not played an important
role. Even in the area of health, there have been seen improvements that have relied not only on
technological innovation but also on new forms of organization. Progress today requires the
collaborative effort between social, economic, technological and political innovations. (Mulgan et
al., 2007). When inquiring about the success of a social innovator or movement, in the words of
Mulgan et al. (2007), this is because “it has planted the seeds of an idea in many minds. In the
long run ideas are more powerful than individuals or institutions” (p.17).
The main difference between a social and a technical innovation is the immaterial intangible
structure. In words of Howaldt & Schwarz (2010) “the innovation does not occur in the medium
of technical artifact but at the level of social practice”.
In order to fully understand social innovation, it is necessary to know the conditions that promote
or inhibit change. According Mulgan et al. (2007), the barriers to change are: efficiency, people‟s
interests, people‟s minds and relationships. Achieving innovation, altering the established status
quo within an organization is not easy, because people that are in the direction of the
organization, the highest ranked are certainly the last to perceive the deficiencies in the system.
Therefore, those who lead the changes, the new ideas, tend to face several obstacles in the way.
24
How social innovation happens

The history of change teaches us that new ideas must ensure support in order to survive. The
support needed can include from the passion and commitment of the people who generated the
idea and others to the money from sponsors or the government. In other words innovation
depends on an alliance between what Mulgan et al. (2007) calls the “bees” and the “trees”.
Bees are the small organizations, individuals and groups who have the new idea (...). The
trees are big organizations, governments, companies, or large NGOs, which are poor at
creativity but generally good at implementation, and which have the resilience, roots and
scale to make things happen. Both need each other and most social changes come from
alliances between the two. (Mulgan et al., 2007, p.20)
According to Rodríguez and Alvarado (2008), innovations in the social field often arise in
extreme conditions, where neither the state nor the market have intervened with solutions to the
problems, in a scenario where the needs of a society have not been resolved .

Stages of Innovation

The initial stage of an innovation can arise from a need still unresolved, where the change agents
work is to think about some ideas to solve this. It is vital at this stage to listen to people affected
by the problem, since it is very likely that these have already taken the time to analyze it and
devise possible solutions. They may also be aware of what does not work because it was tested
already. Socially innovative models must promote the participation of beneficiaries; this gives the
recipient the perception that it is a citizen. There are few ideas that are born already formed; most
require constant experimentation to see what works and what does not and this way taking shape.
In this process also plays an important role the hunches and experiences of the innovator.
(Mulgan et al., 2007). But all these processes of ideation and formation are necessary as it is vital
that social innovations are known and disseminated, because is imperative its emergence and
multiplication to contrast the economic, social, cultural and political gaps in society (Rodríguez
& Alvarado, 2008).

25
Social innovation in Colombia

Social innovation in Colombia according to the PreCompes Document of the National Social
Innovation Policy is defined as:
The process through which value for society is created through practices, management
models, innovative products or services that meet a need, take advantage of an
opportunity and solve a problem more efficiently and effectively than existing solutions,
resulting in a favorable change in the system in which it operates. The SI is characterized
by having potential scalability, replicability, being sustainable, promoting higher levels of
community empowerment and generating alliances between different actors in the society.
Colombia has a variety of programs and policies for social innovation at both national, regional
and local levels, which have been driven by government entities and in turn have found support
for their promotion by various agencies both private and social sector. It is noteworthy that
Colombia is one of the few countries in the world that has a Social Innovation Center (CIS)
within a public institution, such as the National Agency for Overcoming Extreme Poverty
(ANSPE). In turn, the country has an advanced project of a national public policy of social
innovation (Villa & Melo, 2015).
According to the Platform for the Participatory Construction of the Social Innovation Policy, the
National Planning Department (DNP), the Administrative Department of Science, Technology
and Innovation (COLCIENCIAS) and ANSPE, The CIS, pioneer in Latin America contributes
through the development, co-financing, evaluation and monitoring of projects linking innovative
solutions to social problems in order to generate impact and social transformation. Furthermore,
this entity has been commissioned to design research methodologies for efficient decision-
making of intervention and knowledge management around social innovation.
The history of social innovation extends backwards many years, but the concept of social
innovation appears in the Colombian in the public agenda since 2007 and 2010, when in the
National Development Plan, appears for the first time an explicit mention of that concept. Thanks
to this, international organizations dedicated to social innovation as Acumen Fund, System B and
Socialab, among others have seen a great opportunity in the country and have come attracted by
the political, social and cultural favorability for the development of social innovation projects
(Villa & Melo, 2015).
26
In Colombia the National Node of Social Innovation, according to the Platform for the
Participatory Construction of the Social Innovation Policy, it is under the leadership of
COLCIENCIAS, DNP and the CIS. This large National Node is a space for the construction and
implementation of policies, programs, projects and initiatives of social innovation.
Knowing the different regions of the country, it can be affirmed that the ecosystem of social
innovation has not been developed evenly throughout the Colombian territory. It is in the capital
Bogotá and the city of Medellín where the greatest progress in the subject has occurred. Medellín
started in social innovation since 2003 and has been pioneered of this not only in Colombia but
throughout Latin America (Villa & Melo, 2015).

Civic culture

Under the parameters of this research is taken as the concept of civic culture the one proposed in
the Development Plan Form City 1995 - 1998, Mayoral of Santa Fe of Bogotá DC:
The set of attitudes, habits, actions and minimum rules shared by individuals in a
communit, tha allow coexistence and generate sense belonging. It includes respect for the
common heritage and recognition of citizens‟ rights and duties to the State and other
citizens. (p.35)
Under the Vision Colombia II Centenary 2019, the concept of civic culture is based on the idea
that a government can drive substantial improvements in coexistence, security and democratic
participation of citizens through actions on the culture and not only through legal or monitoring
and control actions. In this context, social innovation plays a crucial role to achieve a positive
change in society and improve people‟s quality of life.
The principle on which the concept of civic culture is based is the existence of three regulatory
systems of behavior: law, morality and culture. In a speech of the Mayor of Bogotá, Bogotá to
live, 2001-2003 (as cited in Vision Colombia II Centenary 2019): “It is possible to make a
distinction -Antanas Mockus pointed out- between three different types of rules or standards: the
legal (laws), the moral (or consciousness) and the cultural (which a community shares
informally)” (p.8). It can be then understood that the acts of an individual may be regulated either
by the respect for the law or fear of the consequences of violating it, personal convictions about
right and wrong (moral), or custom socially sanctioned (culture).

27
In Colombia, daily basic rules of coexistence, including vehicular and pedestrian traffic, public
spaces and environment ones are violated. Which promotes interpersonal conflicts, creating
hostile environments and in the worst scenarios such as traffic accidents or brawls, ends in deaths
and injuries. This in turn affects the perceived of security of the citizens and ultimately affects the
quality of life of people living there. That is the reason why in the root project, The Metropolitan
Area of Bucaramanga was identified as an important geography for a transformation of the civic
culture, in order to solve problems of mobility, coexistence and security presented in the region.

Smart cities

Giffinger et al. (2007) describes a smart city as the one that develops itself with a vision in the
economy, people, governance, mobility, environment and lifestyle, to build on a proper
combination of resources and activities of decision-making, independent and aware citizens.
There are several approaches to define what a smart city is. According to the points made by
Caragliu, Del Bo and Nijkamp (2009), it can be understood for “smart” city the one that promotes
sustainable economic development, investing in human and social capital as well as in the
transport infrastructure and information and communication technologies (ICT). Where through
an intelligent management of the natural resources and the citizen participation and commitment
actions, conduce to a better quality of life for people living there. Meanwhile Kommnios (2006)
defines it as: “Territories with high capacity for learning and innovation, which is built in the
creativity of their population, their institutions of knowledge creation, and their digital
infrastructure for communication and knowledge management” (p.1).
In the literature there can be found architectural and urban planners approaches, as in the case of
Rios (2012), who defines intelligent as that “gives inspiration, shares culture, knowledge and life,
a city that motivates its inhabitants to create and flourish in their own lives” (p.4). On the same
matter Hollands (2008), points out that a community of true smart city should use ICT to promote
a democratic debate on the kind of city it wants and what kind of city people want to live in.
“Cities are densely populated geographic areas, whose natural environments have been
remarkably transformed by man, whose economy depends especially on industrial and services
activities” (Externado University of Colombia, 2013, p.21).
Tecno C (2012) cited by Externado University of Colombia (2013, p.22) defines the intelligent
city as a model city where different currents of urban development converge (sustainable city,
28
innovative city, digital city, city of knowledge) to improve the quality of life and resource
management through the intensive use of technology.
From a perspective in which the citizen participates actively in the process of building their city,
a smart city for “Schaffers H (2012) is an initiative that operates as an accelerator of change, in
which citizens are empowered to contribute to the construction of an innovation system and
urban development” (University Externado de Colombia, 2013, p.21).
A smart city is one that invests in its human capital and infrastructure, seeking sustainable
economic growth and promoting quality of life (Caragliu et al., 2009). As it can be seen there are
different perspectives on what each author defined by smart city. Overall a smart city is one that
aims for the welfare of its citizens, in the economic, social, cultural and environmental fields.
And for that invests in information and communications technology in order to provide an
infrastructure to ensure sustainable development.

CONCLUSIONS

Today, thanks to the information society, an oversupply of information and knowledge is

presented, which exposes the practical infeasibility that exists for researchers to assimilate all the
available information (Pérez, 2012). That is the reason why the systematic review is a great
option when conducting a literature review, since as mentioned by Tranfield et al. (2003)
guarantees the review of the best evidence possible. The systematic review of the literature is an
objective review because it provides information on the number of sources, the search methods
used, the criteria for inclusion and exclusion of the works, the relevance of this ones and the
objective evidence of the reasoning. Whereby is feasible the reproducibility of the method and
the results (Pérez, 2012).
The production dynamics of studies related to the subject of social innovation worldwide
analyzed by countries between 2005 and 2015 shows a significant influence of Europe in the
matter, where the participation of the United Kingdom, as the leading country in publications of
SI stands out from the rest. It is also noteworthy that academic research has been in a growth
stage since 2011 to 2015, rising progressively in number of studies per year, which undoubtedly
shows that is a field in development and its importance for the progress of a society is being
validated by the scientific community.
Under the framework of this research, the concept of SI is the driving force of social change.
29
They are the new ideas that work to meet the urgent unmet needs of a society with the aim of
improving the quality of life of people living in it.
Social innovations are new ways of doing traditional tasks, where the cost/benefit relationship is
better than in traditional models. Therefore it is economically and politically sustainable. In turn
social innovation seeks to impact positively on the determinants of poverty and has the potential
to reduce the discrimination and exclusion that affected many groups from different regions. It
is replicable and therefore it is worthy of becoming public policy, besides this, it promotes
community involvement as a contribution to the construction of citizenship.
For the construction of Peace in Colombia is vital to solve the social problems first. The
government then has a responsibility with the national policy on social innovation and at the
same time has the opportunity to address social issues from a new innovative perspective, thus
achieving a favorable change for society‟s welfare.
As suggest in the Vision Colombia II Centenary 2019, the concept of civic culture is based on
the idea that a government can drive substantial improvements in coexistence, security and
democratic participation of citizens through actions on the culture and not only through legal or
monitoring and control actions. In this context, social innovation plays a crucial role to achieve
a positive change in society and improve the quality of life of the people. To support this it must
be considered that socially innovative models should promote the participation of the citizens,
because they are the ones who have experience the problems and can innovate in a solution an
expert would have never devised.
Finally a smart city is one that is developed from a future vision of economy, people,
government, mobility, environment and life, which is built from conscious citizens and
autonomous decision makers (Giffinger et al., 2007). And here is where lies the importance of
the interaction between social innovation and civic culture as the basis of a sustainable
development given region.

BIBLIOGRAPHIC REFERENCES
Cajaiba-Santana, Giovany. (2014). Social innovation: Moving the field forward. A conceptual framework.
Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 82, 42-51.
Caragliu, A., Del Bo, C. & Nijkamp, P. (2009). Smart cities in Europe. 3rd Central European Conference in
Regional Science – CERS, 2009. Journal of Urban Technology, 18(48), 45-59.

30
EUROPEAN COMMISSION. (2013) Social innovation research in the European Union Approaches, findings and
future directions policy review. Directorate-General for Research and Innovation Socio-economic Sciences
and Humanities.
Externado University of Colombia. (2013) Guía de territorios y ciudades inteligentes. Bogotá, Colombia:
Departamento de Publicaciones de la Universidad Externado de Colombia (2).
Falagas, M., Pitsouni, E., Malietzis, G., Pappas, G. (2008). Comparison of pubmed, scopus, web of science, and
google scholar: strengths and weaknesses. The FASEB Journal, Life Sciences Forum, 22, 338-342.
Fomentar la cultura ciudadana, Visión Colombia II centenario 2019. (2006). Colombia. Departamento Nacional de
Planeación.
Formar ciudad. Plan de desarrollo económico, social y de obras públicas para Santa fe de Bogotá D.C 1995-1998.
Decreto No. 295. De junio 1 de 1995. Departamento Administrativo de Planeación Distrital.
Giffinger, R., Fertner, C., Kramar, H., Kalasek, R., Pichler-Milanovic, N. & Meijers, E. (2007). Smart cities Ranking
of European medium-sized cities. Centre of Regional Science, Vienna UT.
Hollands, R. (2008). Will the real smart city please stand up?. City 12 (3), 303-320. Recuperado de:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/248930334
Howaldt, J. & Schwarz, M. (2010). Social innovation: concepts, research fields and international trends. Dotmund,
Germany. IMO International Monitoring.
Howaldt, J., Kopp, R. & Schwarz, M. (2013) Social innovations as drivers of social change – Tarde´s disregarded
contribution to social innovation theory building. Social Frontiers, The next edge of social innovation
research, 1-15.
Komninos, N. (2006). The Architecture of Intelligent Cities. Intelligent Environments 06, Institution of Engineering
and Technology, 13-20.
Mulgan, Geoff. (2006). The Process of Social Innovation. Innovations. Technology, Governance, Globalization, 1
(2), MIT press, Boston, 145-162.
Mulgan, G., Tucker, S., Ali, R. & Sanders, B. (2007). social innovation what it is, why it matters and how it can be
accelerated. The Young Foundation. Said Business School. University of Oxford.
Murray, R., Caulier-Grice, J. & Mulgan, G. (2010). The open book of social innovation. United Kingdom: The
Young Foundation and National Endowment for Science, Technology and the Arts.
Nicholls, A. & Dees, J. (2015). Social innovation. International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences,
22 (2), 355-361.
Palvia, P., Leary, D., Mao, E., Midha, V., Pinjani, P. y Salam, A.F. (2004). Research methodologies in MIS: an
update. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 14 (1), 526-542.
Pérez, J. (2012). Revisión sistemática de literatura en ingeniería. Colombia: Universidad de Antioquia.
Plataforma para la Construcción Participativa de la Política de Innovación Social. Departamento Nacional de
Planeación de Colombia & Agencia Nacional para la Superación de la Pobreza Extrema.
Pol, E., Ville, S. (2009). Social innovation: buzz word or enduring term?. The Journal of Socio-Economics, 38 (6),
878-885.
Rios, P. (2012). Creating “The Smart City”. University of Detroit Mercy. In:
https://archive.udmercy.edu/handle/10429/393
Rodríguez, A. & Alvarado, H. (2008). Claves de la innovación social en América Latina y el Caribe. Naciones
Unidas, Santiago de Chile. Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe.
The Cochrane Collaboration (2011). Higgins, JPT. & Green, S (editors). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic
Reviews of Interventions. Version 5.1.0. Available from: www.cochrane-handbook.org

31
Tranfield, D., Denyer, D. & Smart, P. (2003).Towards a Methodology for Developing Evidence-Informed
Management Knowledge by Means of Systematic Review. British Journal of Management, 14, 207-222.
VantagePoint user´s guide. Search Technology, Inc. 7.1.
Villa, L. & Melo, J. (2015). Panorama actual de la innovación social en Colombia. Inter-American Development
Bank.
Vision Colombia II Centenary 2019. (2006). Fomentar la cultura ciudadana. Departamento Nacional de Planeación.

32