Section A
CHERRIES Project aims at improving the framework conditions for responsible healthcare innovations. Before intervening in such complex systems of general economic and domain-specific policies one must take stock of what is already out there, what is working well and what could hinder the proper operation of such systems. The challenge CHERRIES is facing is to integrate into one analytical framework the innovation outputs (product, service, organisational, social innovations), subsystems (preventive, promotive, therapeutic, assistive care) and sources of innovation needs (patients, practitioners, payers, and policymakers). Such a framework will allow to identify actor constellations, innovation dynamics, knowledge bases, innovation modes, and the like.
For this reason, the first category of the Toolbox contains resources useful to frame the scene for RRI and demand-driven innovation pilots in healthcare by mapping the regional innovation systems and learning about regional specifics as a first step for transforming healthcare innovation policy instruments to foster responsible and problem-oriented healthcare policies and practices.
This mapping exercise is also instrumental in pursuing another important element of CHERRIES approach i.e., that of activating a process of change towards a more open, inclusive, and responsive innovation ecosystem in health, by embedding RRI in healthcare. Indeed, implementing Responsible Research and Innovation, which is a context-dependent process, requires mapping and analysis of any given ecosystem, which is a complex system including actors and stakeholders, infrastructures, policies, resources, innovation and RRI practices, trends, and drivers and obstacles.
In this sense, another element to keep in mind is related to the conditions and requirements for a group of organisations to act for promoting and implementing a participatory process of change, requiring the engagement of different stakeholders, including citizens. In fact, in the entire RRI demand-driven innovation approach, stakeholders and partnerships/coalitions of different local actors play a very important role in each step of its implementation. Starting the process of embedding RRI in organisations or in ecosystems requires the establishment and the activation of partnerships and coalitions of actors in core teams, able to steer the process. For this reason, the category includes specific resources on framing the scene, on stakeholders mapping and analysis, on public/private partnerships and territorial coalitions, and on requirements and ways to start a process of change.
Therefore, the resources collected in this category have been grouped into the following four subcategories:
A1
Mapping territorial ecosystemsIn implementing the RRI demand-driven approach, mapping the territorial ecosystem represents the first step. The mapping is aimed at providing a vision of the context, allowing the identification of priorities, needs, and challenges to which the three CHERRIES pilots have to provide a solution. A territorial ecosystem includes different elements, also depending on the issues addressed, such as infrastructures, actors, and stakeholders (see next subcategory), programs and policies (in particular innovation policies, healthcare policies, regional innovation policies such as the Smart Specialisation Strategy, Responsible Research and Innovation policies, and the like).
This subcategory contains resources on how to carry out the mapping of a given ecosystem. Such an exercise requires to identify, collect, and analyse, with different approaches, data, documents, and information on some elements as, for example: social, economic, demographic, environmental, health trends; regional base indicators on these trends; data on the research and innovation local/regional systems (for example, data on publications, patents, R&D projects, number of scientific and technological organisations, etc); active and relevant policies (on innovation, on healthcare, on RRI, etc.); good or innovative practices in healthcare; infrastructures; obstacles, facilitating and hindering factors; priorities; actors, stakeholders, active partnerships and territorial coalitions; etc. In order to identify and record some of these items, the involvement of stakeholders might be required by means of interviews, focus groups, workshops, etc.
Some resources have been prepared and used in the context of European projects focused on territorial governance or co-creation approaches and described in deliverables and reports (such as TeRRItoria, SeeRRI, Siscode, etc.). Other resources describe the mapping exercises carried out in the framework of empirical studies or reflections. Some resources are focused on the Smart Specialisation Strategy (its assessment, implementation and its possible integration with RRI). Finally, other resources provide suggestions about possible sources to be considered when mapping a given ecosystem, like country reports, national and official studies, platforms, etc.
In CHERRIES the territorial mapping of the three regions of Murcia (Spain), Örebro (Sweden), and Cyprus includes some of the elements mentioned above. The territorial context has been described on the basis of three elements: territorial healthcare structures and priorities; stakeholder groups and societal actors; policy frameworks & instruments for innovation support systems on three policy issues (RRI, Smart Specialisation Strategy, and healthcare). In particular, CHERRIES carried out two interconnected actions in mapping the territories: one action was focused on innovation territorial policies and in particular on the Smart Specialisation Strategy and the other was geared towards mapping stakeholders and policy ecosystem and their relationships. In CHERRIES the mapping activity is being complemented with a study on innovation biographies of health pilots and with a reflection on territorial RRI implementation and future potential in healthcare.
The fourth episode of the “CHERRIE webinar series 2020 Exploring responsible healthcare ecosystems in Europe” was devoted to a reflection on “Regional innovation ecosystems for healthcare”, with the contribution of Gaston Heimeriks (Leiden and Utrecht University) and Anett Ruszanov (ERRIN). In particular, the webinar provides an important occasion to reflect on the possible integration of RRI with Regional Innovation Smart Specialisation Strategies (RIS3) and how European Regions leverage their diversities to boost innovation.
Part of interest: The entire webinar
Target groups: Policymakers, RPOs, CSO, Innovation Business, Funding organisations, Intermediaries, Higher Education Institutions
These are the Guidelines for territorial mapping, drafted and used by CHERRIES (Deliverable D2.1) for framing the scene of the three territorial ecosystems of Örebro (Sweden), Murcia (Spain), and Cyprus (2020). Mapping policies (on innovation and research, on healthcare, on Smart Specialisation Strategies, etc) and stakeholders are of vital interest for the preparation of the three pilots. The purpose of the document is to guide territorial partners through the territorial mapping exercise in a straightforward manner. The three main sections addressed in the guidelines, namely Stakeholders’ identification and prioritisation, Gathering and screening policy instruments and strategies, and Research and Innovation Strategies for Smart Specialisation Framework, are indeed conceptually and in practical terms connected. The document describes steps by step the implementation of this complex mapping exercise. The methodology used a mixed-method ranging from desk research, expert interviews to bibliometrics indicators and networks.
Part of interest: The entire document.
Target groups: Policymakers, RPOs, CSO, Innovation Business, Funding organisations, Intermediaries, Higher Education Institutions
These are three CHERRIES regional mapping reports on the territorial R&I ecosystems of Örebro (Sweden), Murcia (Spain), and Rep. Cyprus (Cyprus), set up following the mapping guidelines (see previous resource 2). In each Mapping report are presented the main findings about mapping the central actors in the territorial healthcare systems, their innovation behaviour and capabilities, priorities, needs and observable trends. Further, also insights from the analysis the policy instruments determining the innovation policy mix in each region, are provided. of CHERRIES.
Part of interest: The entire document.
Target groups: Policymakers, RPOs, CSO, Innovation Business, Funding organisations, Intermediaries, Higher Education Institutions
The document (See SeeRRI Project, Deliverable D2.1, 2019) describes the quantitative and qualitative procedures implemented for mapping the R&I stakeholder ecosystems, aimed at including RRI in regional policies. The quantitative methodology consists of the identification of the R&I actors that are mostly active in regional research projects within the R&I ecosystems, by analysing existing R&I databases (i.e., EUPRO, PATSTAT), and then by using a ‘Quantitative Data Collection Form’. The qualitative methodology consists of the qualitative evaluation of the RRI state-of-the-art into the regional development policies and tools.
Part of interest: See in particular Chapter 2 “Methodological guidelines for mapping R&I ecosystems” and the two annexes.
Target groups: Policymakers, RPOs, Innovation business, Higher Education institutions, Intermediaries, CSOs, Funding organisations
The document (TeRRItoria Project, Deliverable D2.1, 2019) contains indications and tools applied for mapping the territorial ecosystems of the five experiments of territorial RRI of the project. It describes the methodology and criteria adopted. It also gives a good overview of how to use observation grids and shows results achieved by using this grid technique.
Part of interest: The entire document, and in particular, Pp. 9-23 showing the methodology, observation grids and which questions to ask about stakeholders during the mapping process.
Target groups: Policymakers, RPOs, CSO, Innovation Business, Funding organisations, Intermediaries, Higher Education Institutions
In the framework of the TeRRitoria project (Deliverable D2.2, 2019) a Map of Territorial Milieux has been developed. It contains the mapping outcomes of key societal milieu stakeholders; RRI-oriented or compatible practices and initiatives; the main “territorial policies” developed by actors at different levels of governance. The map also contains examples of “territorial factors”, i.e., social, economic, demographic and cultural risks and emerging opportunities for each of the considered territories.
Part of interest: The part of interest (Pp. 8-37) includes the summary reports of the five experiments.
Target groups: Policymakers, RPOs, Innovation business, Higher Education institutions, Intermediaries, CSOs, Funding organisations
The SISCODE Toolbox aims to facilitate the design and implementation of co-creation journeys for the SISCODE laboratories, focussing on better understanding and prioritisation of the particularities of each context. Context analysis is the first and crucial starting point of co-creation and action. In particular, on this aspect, the SISCODE Toolbox contains tools and resources on how to define the challenge, the lab capabilities, and the policy environment.
Part of interest: In particular, see the section “Analyse the context”.
Target groups: RPOs, CSOs, Innovation Business, Policymakers, CSOs
The document (Sörvik, & Kleibrink, 2015) gives a guideline on how to approach the mapping of innovation priorities and specialisation patterns in Europe. It is also helpful for promoting collaborations among regions. The mapping exercise is based on Eye@RIS3, an interactive open data tool that gives an overview of the envisaged RIS3 priorities of regions and countries in Europe.
Part of interest: The entire document.
Target groups: Policymakers, RPOs, Innovation Business
This document (TeRRItoria Project, Deliverable D3.2, 2019) is an inventory of 43 RRI Governance Innovation Practices detected in RRI projects conducted in Europe and beyond, proposing relevant and new models of RRI governance innovation practices. Four of the examined projects are dealing with healthcare issues. Many projects include an ecosystem mapping exercise functional to RRI implementation using different approaches, requiring also different levels of stakeholder engagement. One of these projects is FoTRRIS whose context mapping work is described. In particular, FoTRRIS carried out the context mapping exercise by the implementation of working groups, described, among other things, in the inventory. Another interesting project is the Interreg MARIE focused on the integration of RRI into the Smart Specialisation Strategy in 8 European regions.
Part of interest: See in particular Part 4.6, Pp. 74-88 devoted to FoTRRIS; and the part 4.11 Pp. 131-137 devoted to MARIE. See also parts 4.7 on INHERIT project on health and environment; 4.9 on Responsible Industry project on RRI in the industry; 4.11 on MARIE Interreg project on RRI and RIS3; and 4.15 EnRICH project on RRI education.
Target groups: Policymakers, Providers, Professional, Patients and civil society, RPOs, Innovative business, intermediaries
The paper (by Larisch, Amer-Wåhlin, and Hidefjäll, 2016) contains a new method (functional dynamics approach) for analysing the wider socio-economic context and conditions for innovation processes addressing healthcare challenges in the Stockholm Region, using the functional dynamics approach to innovation systems (ISs). The analysis is based on triangulation using data from 16 in-depth interviews, two workshops, and additional documents. The analysis revealed several mechanisms blocking innovation processes such as fragmentation, lack of clear leadership, as well as insufficient involvement of patients and healthcare professionals. Furthermore, restrictive rules for collaboration with industry, reimbursement, and procurement mechanisms limit entrepreneurial experimentation, commercialisation, and the spread of innovations.
Part of interest: The entire article (and in particular the figures).
Target groups: Policymakers, Providers, Patients, Payers, Innovation Business, RPOs, Higher Education Institute
The resource is an INNOVCARE project document (Deliverable D9.4, 2018). Scaling up refers to identifying opportunities and barriers at broad institutional scales, with the goal of changing the system that created the social problem. The report discusses possible ways to up-scale elements of integrated, person-centred, and holistic care for people with complex and/or rare conditions to other member states and other regions. The roadmaps focus on potential priority areas as well as possible next steps that can be taken towards holistic care models, improving the care situation for patients. The document describes the implementation of care holistic approach Road map in Spain, Austria, and Romania at macro, meso, and micro levels. The identification of priorities of the territories at the three levels was made also by interviews with stakeholders and expert workshops.
Part of interest: Pp. 1-8 about road mapping.
Target groups: Policymakers, Providers, Professionals, Patients, CSOs, RPOs, Innovative businesse
Cyprus is undergoing a major reform, namely the introduction of primary care driven national healthcare system. The aim of the present study (by Pallari, Samoutis, Rudd, 2020) was to assess the existing state of training, support, quality, guidelines, and infrastructure towards a better healthcare system in Cyprus. This is a mixed-methods study combining statistical data until October 2016 and workshop discussions delivered in Cyprus in November 2015.
Part of interest: The entire article.
Target groups: Policymakers, Providers, Professionals
The document (WHO, European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies, Bernal-Delgado et al., 2018) analyses the Spanish health system taking into account recent developments in organisation and governance, health financing, health care provision, health reforms and health system performance, healthcare challenges (for example related to lifestyle and obesity). It contains also data and indicators.
Part of interest: The entire document.
Target groups: Policymakers, Providers
This is a portal of EC, OECD, and European Observatory providing country reports on Health systems and policies updated in 2019. Each country report contains: the list of the highlights on health issues ; basic data on Health; the risk factors; some data and reflections about the performance of the health system (effectiveness, accessibility, resilience), and finally the key findings.
Part of interest: To be selected for the country of interest.
Target groups: Policymakers, Providers
A2
Actors’ mapping and analysisThis subcategory contains some resources specifically focused on mapping and analysis of stakeholders (that might be individual or collective entities), an exercise that represents a first step in the more complex stakeholder engagement process (see also category C.). The aim of the analysis is to provide information, on the basis of a classification of stakeholders with respect to different elements, such as their interests, influence, and power, readiness to be involved, resources, competencies, links to networks, etc. This information is useful to prioritize the stakeholders and to define a tailored strategy of involvement for each of them in the pilot or in the project. The classification allows the promoter of the pilot/project/initiative to identify for each of them different levels of involvement. The stakeholder identification and mapping might be made following different approaches. Some approaches foresee also the organisation of workshops specifically devoted to stakeholder identification and analysis.
The resources of this subcategory, based on different approaches, have been set up by other projects, international organisations, universities, organisations active in the field of management.
In CHERRIES stakeholder mapping and identification was one important element of the context analysis (see also the subcategory A1), which contains also the classification of stakeholders on the basis of the four P model (Policymakers, Providers, Patients, and Payers). The CHERRIES stakeholder analysis within the mapping ecosystem is described in the Guideline for territorial mapping (Deliverable D2.1), while the three maps of the three ecosystems are contained in Deliverable D2.2. Furthermore, a tool for stakeholder analysis has been set up in preparation for the training workshop.
This is the stakeholder identification and involvement tool set up by CHERRIES for the stakeholder identification and analysis for the Training Workshops (Task 3.2) carried out in preparing and accompanying the process of need identification and Calls for solutions. It is suggested to use the tool by the involvement of the local territorial partners in a meeting. The tool can be very helpful not only for the identification of the stakeholders to be involved in the territorial RRI Training Workshops but also during the different phases of implementation of the pilots (co-design and preparation, implementation, sustainability, evaluation). The tool can be used for defining influence, relevance, interests, and involvement strategy for each identified stakeholder.
Part of interest: The entire document.
Target groups: Policymakers, RPOs, CSO, Innovation Business, Funding organisations, Intermediaries, Higher Education Institutions
The document presents the Guidelines on how to perform a stakeholder analysis (by Schmeer, 1999). Stakeholder analysis is a process of systematically gathering and analysing qualitative information to determine whose interests should be taken into account when developing and/or implementing a policy or program. The Guidelines describe the 8 steps needed for stakeholder analysis.
Part of interest: The entire document
Target groups: Policymakers, CSOs, RPOs, Payers, Innovation Business, Providers
This is a short guide of the World Health Organisation aimed at mapping potential key stakeholders in reproductive health and family planning service delivery. The guide describes the four steps of stakeholder mapping: identify stakeholders; analyse stakeholders; map relationships; prioritize the level of engagement.
Part of interest: The entire document.
Target groups: Policymakers, CSOs, RPOs, Higher education institutions, Providers, Professionals, Payers, Intermediaries
PPD Public-Private Dialogue is a structured engagement among an inclusive group of relevant and local stakeholders that seeks to identify, prioritise, and recommend consensus as well as fact-based based solutions to a specific need, challenge, or problem. PPDs go well beyond standard stakeholder consultation or a simple exchange of opinion. The Guide has been prepared by the World Bank with the involvement of PPD practitioners to provide them with an option for stakeholder mapping by adapting a Network Mapping (NM) method and allow them to design dialogue platform and determine the participants at the concept stage; promote dialogue, ensure that the right people are invited in the dialogue; facilitate the dialogue among different partners of the dialogue. Three are the steps in stakeholder mapping: identify the purpose of the mapping; doing stakeholder mapping using the NMmethod; stakeholder analysis. The NM method has 6 steps: frame the right question, identify the actors involved; work through the links; determine motivations, discuss levels of influence; harvest observation and possible actions. The document contains also examples of applications.
Part of interest: The entire document.
Target groups: Policymakers, CSOs, RPOs, Higher education institutions, Providers, Payers
This Stakeholder analysis matrix was set up by www.tools4dev.org a repository of tools to be used and adapted to different projects and initiatives. The matrix allows to collect, for each stakeholder, information about impact, influence, what is important for the stakeholder, how the stakeholders contribute to the project, how could the stakeholder block the project; and the strategy for engaging.
Part of interest: The entire document.
Target groups: Policymakers, CSOs, RPOs, Higher education institutions, Providers, Payers, Intermediaries
The Handbook includes a chapter on stakeholder analysis: why do it, which are risks and pitfalls. The Handbook suggests how to do stakeholder analysis using a workshop. The guide contains also tools and a matrix that might be used for stakeholder mapping and analysis.
Part of interest: Part 2 on stakeholder analysis.
Target groups: Policymakers, RPOs, Higher education institutions, Providers, Innovation business, Payers, Intermediaries
This toolkit contains information on: why and how to carry out stakeholder analysis in small, medium, and big project initiatives. It contains also suggestions on a possible strategy of stakeholders’ involvement, taking into account their capacity of supporting or opposing the project. The toolkit provides examples related to university initiatives.
Part of interest: The entire document.
Target groups: Higher education institutions, RPOs, Policymakers, CSOs
This short document provides indications on what and what for stakeholder analysis and mapping; who are the stakeholders; the benefits of stakeholder analysis and mapping and how to do it. In particular, it describes the 7 steps for doing stakeholder mapping and analysis.
Part of interest: The entire document.
Target groups: Policymakers, RPOs, CSOs, Higher education institutions, Innovation business, Providers, Payers, Intermediaries
This is the Stakeholder matrix to be used for the stakeholder analysis for developing a useful engagement plan. The matrix has been drafted and used by the Department of Health and Human Service of Tasmania.
Part of interest: The entire document.
Target groups: Policymakers, Providers, Patients, CSOs, RPOs
The document (Made4You Project, Deliverable D1.1, 2019) shows the stakeholder mapping process that Careables project has undertaken as well as its detailed stakeholder engagement strategies. Two elements are interesting of this resource: the need to identify and describe the community to engage; and the need to distinguish between individual and collective stakeholders. The resource describes different methods of engagement.
Part of interest: In particular Pp. 5-21.
Target groups: Providers, Professionals, Patients, and CSOs
The article (by Katz, R. et al., 2018) provides an overview of policies triggered by Deliberate Biological Events (DBE) and gives a methodology to map policies (and stakeholders) in response to DBE, that use for visualisation a web-based tool.
Part of interest: The entire article.
Target groups: RPOs, Policymakers
This source provides Guidelines on the implementation of the stakeholder participation process, by defining the principles, the reasons and the forms of stakeholder involvement. The Guidelines have been used in MINATURA project aimed at stakeholder involvement in the preservation of mineral resources. The Guidelines describes also the process of stakeholder mapping and identification.
Part of interest: See for stakeholder identification, Pp.22-26.
Target groups: Policymakers, CSOs, RPOs, Innovation business, intermediaries
This toolkit (created in 2015 in response to a report titled ‘Global Mental Health from a Policy Perspective: A Context Analysis’ made by the Research and Policy in Development (RAPID) team at the Overseas Development Institute ODI) was developed for the Grand Challenges Canada (GCC) ‘community of innovators’. It aims to provide researchers testing innovations in mental health with a set of tools to help them develop their policy influence or engagement strategy towards desired/expected changes. The toolkit is designed to be used by project teams during planning days, team strategy workshops or in day to day planning activities. The Toolkit includes four main tools: 1 − AIIM – Alignment, Interest and Influence Matrix; 2 − Creating a policy influence plan; 3 − Being a knowledge broker; Identifying and accessing ‘champions’. In particular, the tool 3 is useful for knowledge management and communication for a plan.
Part of interest: The entire document.
Target groups: Policymakers, CSOs, RPOs, Innovation business, intermediaries
The LIVERUR project’s short-term objective is to improve knowledge of business models that grow in rural areas, including the understanding of their potential using living labs. LIVERUR created a platform RAIN for improving innovation business model in rural areas. The deliverable (D5.1) titled “Circular rural business hub: database for piloting and stakeholder involvement” contains some useful suggestions on stakeholder mapping. One of the resources of the platform is the LIVERUR toolbox on the use of living labs in rural areas. This toolbox is inspired by the Harmonisation Cube model. One of the faces of the cube is users’ involvement. The toolbox describes the aspects to consider, the task to be accomplished in stakeholder involvement, and provide some specific tools to be used.
Part of interest: Both documents: the annexes of deliverable D5.1 and the part on user involvement, Pp.31-54 of the toolbox.
Target groups: Policymakers, Providers, CSOs, Innovation business, RPOs, Payers, Intermediaries
A3
Partnerships and territorial coalitionsIn defining the scene for RRI demand-driven innovation pilot in health one important element to be taken into account is the presence of structure and action of partnerships, networks and/or coalitions of actors active on common issues, such as healthcare, community wellbeing, local development, environmental sustainability, etc.
Facing up to complex challenges and needs, in fact, requires the involvement and engagement of different actors, with different experiences and knowledge. Partnerships (public-private ones but also multi-stakeholder partnerships) and networks represent an institutional way for different organisations to work together for a common objective, while maintaining one’s own autonomy. Territorial coalitions are collective bodies (formal or informal ones) that share a common vision of the situation at hand, of the problems and challenges to be confronted, of the objectives to be pursued, and of the strategies and actions to reach them. This shared vision produces a common will to change the status quo by overcoming pre-established interests and the possible contrasts between the diverse actors involved. On the basis of the choice to operate through partnerships, networks or coalitions there is the awareness that acting individually each actor would not be able to manage complex societal challenges or to reach important social, economic and environmental goals. Therefore, territorial coalitions and partnerships might play a central role in promoting change or in facing up to complex challenges and needs of an ecosystem or a territory.
The resources collected under this subcategory provide information on practices and experiences based on partnerships and territorial coalitions and on how to promote their constitution and their management. Some of the resources are focused on the issue of effectively involving citizens and patient organisations in the partnerships.
In the CHERRIES project, the establishment of territorial coalitions and partnerships for responsible innovation in health is a goal to achieve within the three regions involved in the project. In fact, different coalitions are or will be activated for: carrying out the pilots in the three territories; work on co-constructing the solution of the identified need; activating a change process towards a more open and inclusive healthcare innovation system. One of the main aims of CHERRIES, indeed, is to design a responsible and demand-oriented territorial policy mix, on the basis of the three RRI demand-driven innovation pilots, to embed them in the territorial policies and strategies while giving the territorial stakeholder groups an active role in shaping their environment.
The tool guide has been set up by Wageningen University & Research for promoting and supporting the establishment of Multi-Stakeholders Partnerships (MSP). The tool contains 60 methods for stakeholder partnerships, grouped by six purposes – connection, issue exploration, and shared language, divergence, co-creation, convergence, and commitment. The guide has been written for those directly involved in MSPs – as a stakeholder, leader, action researcher, facilitator, or funder – to provide both the conceptual foundations and practical tools that underpin successful partnerships.
Part of interest: The entire document.
Target groups: RPOs, Policymakers, Innovation Business, Professionals, Providers, Patients, CSOs
This article (by Greenhalgh et al., 2017) presents an organisational study on the Biomedical Research Centres (BRCs) model of partnerships (using various approaches). BRCs are partnerships between healthcare organisations and universities in England. ‘Partnerships for Health, Wealth and Innovation’ has been established with multiple sub-themes (drug development, device development, business support and commercialisation, research methodology and statistics, health economics, bioethics, patient and public involvement and engagement, knowledge translation, and education and training) to support individual BRC research themes and generate cross-theme learning. The ‘Partnerships’ theme will support the BRC’s goals by facilitating six types of partnerships through a range of engagement platforms and activities.
Part of interest: The entire article.
Target groups: Policymakers, RPOs, Innovation business, Patients, Providers, Payers, CSOs
The article (by Malva et al., 2018) describes the Ageing@Coimbra community case as a reference site of the European Innovation Partnership on Active Health Ageing based on the involvement of quadruple helix and its impact in Portugal. Ageing@Coimbra partners support a regional network of 70 stakeholders that build a holistic ecosystem in health and social care, taking into consideration the specificities of the territories, living environments, and cultural resources. Good practices in reducing the burden of brain diseases that affect cognition and memory impairment in older people and tackling social isolation in urban and rural areas are among the top priorities of Ageing@Coimbra. Profiting from the collaborative work of academia, business companies, civil society, and authorities, the quadruple helix of Ageing@Coimbra support: early diagnosis of frailty and disease; care and cure; and active, assisted, and independent living. This experience is based on an innovative formula of development of federation of stakeholders and network inspired by the quadruple helix concept.
Part of interest: The entire document.
Target groups: RPOs, Policymakers, Innovation Business, Professionals, Providers, Patients, CSOs, Payers
This Report (by Cavallini, Committee of the Regions, 2016) investigates the theory and the operationalisation of the so-called ‘helices models’ were the main protagonists of innovation-generating processes (industry, university, government, and, at a later stage, civil society) interact for accelerating the transfer of research and innovation results to regional growth. The analysis is principally carried out from the perspective of local and regional authorities (LRAs) and in the light of the potential impacts that the operationalisation at the regional level of such models may have on growth, in particular as reference for the development of Research and Innovation Strategies for Smart Specialisation (RIS3). The Report describes the practices and experiences of application.
Part of interest: The entire document and in particular the case GP7 case (Pp. 98-100).
Target groups: Policymakers, RPOs, Business Innovation, Patients and CSOs
This paper (by Hasche, Höglund, and Gabriel Linton, 2019) describes and analyses a specific regional smart specialisation initiative taking place in Örebro (Sweden) on robotics that is investigated from a quadruple helix framework (industry, government, academia, and users/civil society). The aim is to understand the relationships and the value created between the different actors. From the results, the authors conclude that the fourth helix should be viewed as a whole – an arena where triple helix actors in different value-adding relationships take on different roles – where they create value to civil society, for example, new jobs or products for improved elderly care. Users in the quadruple helix framework can also be defined in several ways depending on the context of the arena (the fourth helix) and what value-adding activities they bring to civil society. Thus, users can be businesses, organisations, citizens, society, and many more things.
Part of interest: The second part of the article applies the quadruple helix framework to “Robotdalen” case.
Target groups: Policymakers, Payers, RPOs, Innovative Business, Providers, Patients, and CSOs
This is the Progress Report on quadruple helix social labs carried out in the framework of Riconfigure project (Deliverable D6.5, 2020). It presents important questions such as the theory and the practices of quadruple helix collaboration; the integration of quadruple helix and RRI. The Report describes also barriers and obstacles to quadruple helix collaboration, such as s funding, role distribution, incentives, power structures, and path dependency. The general considerations arisen in the report are relevant also for social labs implemented in the healthcare sector.
Part of interest: The entire document.
Target groups: Policymakers, Providers, Professionals, Patients, CSOs, RPOs, Innovation business
The resource (2019) describes the partnership between Karolinska Hospital and Philipps in providing imagining devices and in reorganising the hospital care services. The new organisation for the Hospital of Solna is organized in patient care flows. For example, patients with heart and vascular conditions are treated in an integrated manner, with specialists from functions such as emergency medicine, imaging, and cardiology working together – often in the same building or corridor. In this framework, Karolinska and Philips agreed on a managed equipment services model: Philips coordinated the procurement and commissioning of all required imaging equipments; took on responsibility for the coordination of transport, installation, and commissioning of equipment, and for the training of staff.
Part of interest: The entire document,
Target groups: Providers, Professionals, Innovation Business
This document (TeRRItoria Project, Deliverable D3.1, 2019) contains an Inventory of 30 bottom-up governance innovation practices. The Inventory focuses on those governance innovations, promoted by different kinds of coalitions, that activate a process of “re-territorialisation”, i.e., they work for reversing de-territorialisation trends and thus to foster local development and social cohesion. In particular, the Inventory collects the experiences in which research and innovation actors, in different ways, exercise responsibility toward their territory as they play a pivotal role in governance innovation. The territorial coalitions promoted and implemented practices aimed at: re-rooting economic and social activities; recovering and fostering local knowledge; establishing new regulatory frameworks; preventing and managing environmental, social, and economic risks; setting the agenda for defining strategies and actions to solve local problems. The introduction describes the methodology used to set up the Inventory. Some of the practices identified are dealing with healthcare and in particular the practice #11 − Permanent living lab for the governance of city issues including health; #30 − Use of dialogue model for health research agenda-setting process; as well as #31 (but not related to partnership strictu sensu) humanizing healthcare in hospital by art and technology.
Part of interest: The entire document and in particular the Inventory, Pp.14-107.
Target groups: Policymakers, Providers, Professional, Patients, CSOs, RPOs, Innovative business, intermediaries
Challenge Driven Innovation (CDI) is a research and innovation-funding programme developed by the Vinnova’s Swedish Innovation Agency to fund collaboration in research and innovation that address societal challenges (including future healthcare) addressing Agenda 2030 goals, involving consortia of partners from different parts of society. The program foresees the inclusion of different actors in the project; supports a problem-oriented and demand-driven approach that necessitates anticipation and reflection; encourages learning by doing and responsiveness and capacity of changing and adapting. Gender equality is an important element of CDI. Participation in the CDI program requires the constitution of consortia, involving different kinds of stakeholders during the entire duration of the project, for co-creating and implementing a solution to an identified need/challenge.
Part of interest: The entire document.
Target groups: Payers, RPOs, Innovation Business, Policymakers
SPARKS is an awareness-raising and engagement project to promote RRI across 29 European countries (EU members plus Switzerland and the UK) and science engagement activities on RRI in health and medicine. This resource is focused on participatory activities for organizing exhibitions and events, and it is articulated in the following parts: rethinking innovation together; innovative participatory activities on RRI (science cafés, pop-up Science Shops, incubation activities and scenario workshops); capturing the scene; guidelines to plan of the work, establishment of local partnerships; different kind of activities, templates for the organizers. The resource contains also experiences and practices. The Handbook provide also advice on how organise and manage a local partnership for the design and the development of an exhibition assigning to the local partners a role as RRI ambassadors.
Part of interest: See the part on the establishment of a local partnership.
Target groups: Policymakers, RPOs, Patients and CSOs, Innovation business, Science centres and Museums
The article (by Bainbridge, Potts, O’Higgins, 2011) offers a method for policy network analysis referred to as “Rapid Policy Network Mapping”, which gives insights into relationships and dependencies of policy development in the environmental domain. The resource describes the application of its method to the definition of the Marine Strategy Framework Directive and the Water Framework Directive in the UK, in which local policymakers and civil society organisations and citizens worked together. This tool should assist civil society in its ability to understand and influence policymaking and implementation. The proposed method facilitates the understanding in a network the relations among policy actors and policy instruments.
Part of interest: The entire article.
Target groups: Policymakers, RPOs
Ängen is a collaboration with researchers, innovators, caregivers, elderly, and people with disabilities and constitutes a platform where developers and users can meet. Ängen is running several development projects. The purpose is to develop new technical solutions/assistive devices that allow the elderly and disabled to stay longer in the home environment while maintaining independence and integrity. Ängen is a so-called PPP (Private/Public Partnership) and is funded by Örebro University, Örebro municipality, Alfred Nobel Science Park, Länsgården real estates AB and EU.
Part of interest: The entire document.
Target groups: Providers, Innovation business, RPOs
The report describes a collaborative project between Karlskoga Municipality, the healthcare in the western healthcare district of Örebro county, and Möckelnföreningarna, an umbrella organisation for civil society organisations. The project has aimed to find new ways to collaborate and to find new solutions for societal issues through extended cooperation. The project was funded by Vinnova (Sweden’s innovation agency) within the Challenge-Driven Innovation calls: in particular, it received the fund for the Stage 1 initiation and is being funded also for Stage 2.
Part of interest: The entire document.
Target groups: Providers, Innovation business, RPOs
* This resource is available on request, contacting the CHERRIES
A4
How to start the processAs stated before, CHERRIES project aims to promote a process of change in the way of doing innovation in healthcare in order to be able to better respond also to unmet needs of society and to align science to society, by embedding RRI keys (ethics, science education, gender equality, public engagement, open access, and governance) and dimensions (anticipation, inclusion, reflexivity, responsiveness). In other words, the aim is to promote a more open, innovative, and inclusive healthcare ecosystem in the three territories involved in the pilots. This will require to start a process of institutional change in the procedures, practices, rules, and values. In order to achieve a systemic change, the process should involve key organisations of the territorial healthcare and innovation ecosystem.
Institutional change is related not only to modify rules and procedures, or to set up new institutional frameworks or a platform for multi-stakeholder dialogue and citizen engagement. Institutional change requires also to transform the behaviour and culture of the involved actors. Such changes require time, learning initiatives, incentives, and support. Furthermore, the process of change might meet obstacles and resistances as well as enabling factors and opportunities.
The resources collected in this sub-category provide suggestions and indications for interpreting the complex process of institutional change and for answering the fundamental questions on how to start this process. They address issues such as, among others: understanding the situation and identifying the objective of the change; create a team capable of leading the change process; carry out design and planning activities; guaranteeing multi-stakeholder dialogue and citizen engagement; involve the organisation’s leadership in supporting the process. The resources have been produced mainly in the context of those EU projects that during the last ten years have tested several approaches and methods to start and implement institutional change processes in research organisations, funding and intermediary organisations, higher education institutions, in industry and SMEs companies. Some additional resources document also a more recent trend in European projects, aimed to apply RRI approach to territorial governance.
The document (Fit4RRI Project, Deliverable D5.1, 2019) contains Guidelines for interpretation, decision, and action aimed at implementing RRI in research organisations, with particular attention to governance settings aspects. It provides recommendations about the triggering factors for institutionalising RRI, enabling factors and obstacles, stakeholders to be involved, etc. The Guidelines contain also links and references to resources to be used for implementing RRI.
Part of interest: The entire document.
Target groups: RPOs
The document (STARBIOS2 Project, Deliverable D9.1, 2019) contains a model and Guidelines for promoting structural change to attain RRI in bioscience research organisations. The model has been set up on the basis of the implementation of Action Plans for RRI structural change within 9 biosciences organisations in the following countries: Italy, Poland, UK, Slovenia, Germany, Bulgaria, USA, Brazil, and South Africa.
Part of interest: See in particular part 4 “The structural change process in practice”.
Target groups: RPOs, Innovation Business, Higher Education Institution
The document (by Elster, Barendziak, Birkholz, 2019) provides, on the basis of the implementation of an Action Plan with the University of Bremen carried out in the framework of STARBIOS2 Project, recommendations and suggestions in the RRI field of education. Each recommendation contains links to resources and documents.
Part of interest: The entire document.
Target groups: RPO, Innovation Business
The Map (TeRRItoria Project, Deliverable D3.3, 2019) highlights what are the core issues related to a territorial RRI: the transformations in society; the “de-territorialisation” process; the “territory-making” practices aiming at dealing with de-territorialisation and activating a re-territorialisation (i.e., the development of new meaningful relations among actors and between them and their territory); the territorial dynamics in European landscape; etc. The Map is based on two inventories: on RRI governance innovation practices and on bottom-up governance innovation practices. On the basis of the practices collected, the first list of approaches to Territorial RRI has been set-up. Some practical reference tools (guides, toolkits, regulations, books, articles, etc.) for embedding Territorial RRI are also presented, together with many examples of practices.
Part of interest: See in particular chapters #3, #4, and #5 on Territorial RRI; chapter #6 on tools.
Target groups: Policymakers, Providers, Professional, Patients and civil society, RPOs, Innovative business, intermediaries, Funding organisations, payers
This article (by Fitjar, Benneworth, Asheim, 2019) develops a model for a regional RRI policy, integrating existing European Union policies on RRI in Smart Specialisation Strategy (RIS3). In particular, it contains the inclusion of the geographical element in RRI and a responsible approach of RIS3 based in general on a more inclusive stakeholder engagement and the application of four dimensions of RRI: anticipation, inclusion, reflexiveness, responsiveness. In particular, the approach foresees the inclusion in the RIS3 phases of analysis, governance, vision, prioritisation, policy mix, and monitoring the four dimensions of RRI.
Part of interest: The entire article.
Target groups: Policymakers, RPOs, Innovation Business, Intermediaries, Higher Education Institutions, CSOs
The NUCLEUS project focuses on identification of key factors for successfully embedding RRI in academic practices. The Implementation Roadmap (Deliverable D3.6, 2017) introduces steps and actions to install 10 embedded Nuclei and 20 mobile Nuclei as innovative and reflective RRI test-beds. It provides also recommendations based on NUCLEUS first phase of activities. This resource might be useful in general for embedding RRI in organisations and contextualisation, but also for building the community/partnership that will be involved.
Part of interest: See, Summary (Pp. 5-6), and Part 1 building the community (Pp. 10-11).
Target groups: Policymakers, Patients and CSO, RPOs, Innovation Business, Higher Education Institutions, Intermediaries, Providers
This document (FoTRRIS Project, Deliverable D4.4, 2018) collects all the tools FoTRRIS produced that are necessary to inspire and to guide an interested quadruple helix actor to set up a co-RRI competence cell or to orchestrate a co-RRI transition experiment. In particular, the following tools produced by FoTRRIS are interesting: how to set up a competence cell; how to use the FoTRRIS online platform; Cookbook is included: how to co-create RRI projects.
Part of interest: See in particular “Cookbook: how to co-create RRI projects.
Target groups: Policymakers, RPOs, Business, CSOs, Higher Education Institute
This document (drafted in the framework of FoTRRIS project Deliverable D4.3, 2018) contains, in the first part, a definition of co-RRI (co-created Responsible Research and Innovation) and, in the second part, recommendations for implementing Co-RRI at the level of the country system. The co-RRI is an adaptation of RRI at the territorial and glocal challenges.
Part of interest: See the first part devoted to the presentation of co-RRI.
Target groups: RPOs, Innovation business, intermediaries, Higher education institutions
This is the Executive Brief of Responsible Industry project (by Porcari et al., 2015). Responsible Industry aims to integrate principles and methodologies of RRI into the research and innovation processes developed by industries active in the domain of ICT for an ageing society. The resource contains a Framework for the Implementation of RRI providing strategic options and recommendations for industrial actors engaged in R&I to enable them to pursue responsible practices and behaviours in developing devices, products, and services.
Part of interest: See in particular Part 2 on the RRI framework to be implemented in R&I industry.
Target groups: RPOs, Innovation business, CSOs, Providers
This kit set up in the framework of COMPASS project (Deliverable D2.5) is for the use of Business Support Organisations or others keen to support companies in designing Roadmaps towards Responsible Innovation (RI) in the areas of nanotechnology and/or healthcare innovation. The toolkit presents in a clear and easily readable form how to set up phone calls which last about 20 minutes with company leaders and how to introduce them to RI and how to get them involved and how to use findings from these interviews to build custom web forums and webinars. The methods presented are tailored towards SMEs, for example by emphasizing the benefit of the inclusion of RI principles into daily SME practices. SMEs are taught foresight techniques and are aided in constructing a road map.
Part of interest: In particular, from Pg. 6 to Pg. 43.
Target groups: RPOs, Innovation Business, Start-ups
This document (2019) provides guidelines to develop long-term strategies (roadmaps) to innovate responsibly, integrating technical, ethical, social, environmental, and economic issues into research and innovation practices, by improving the ethical and social impacts of their outcomes. The focus is on transformative and enabling technologies. The road mapping includes 6 steps: commitment and leadership; context analysis; materiality, experiment, and engagement; validation; road map design. The road map uses the 4 dimensions of RRI; the key elements are: product research and innovation; vision of RRI in implementing the product; time scale; drivers, challenges and barriers; actions to be pursued, resources, and process needed.
Part of interest: See in particular Section 6.6. “Validation”.
Target groups: Innovation business
The document was drafted in the context of the ACT for gender equality project Community of practices (CoP). The toolkit describes 20 different participatory methods, online methods, and visual methods. It shows how and which tools and methods the CoPs might operate, develop, implement gender equality plans (GEP), gender equality (GE) measures and activities, and facilitate institutional change concerning GE in HE and R&I. Such methods might be useful in implementing the 6 steps for the process of setting up, implementing, monitoring and evaluating GEPs. It contains also information about success factors, life cycle, and activities of a COPs that requiring the participation and involvement of different actors.
Part of interest: The entire document, and in particular chapters #7, #8, and #9.
Target groups: RPOs, Higher Education Institutions, CSOs, Payers, Innovation Business
GRACE’s mission is to develop a set of specific Grounding Actions in six performing and funding organisations (Implementing Organisations). These actions are the basis for the development of a tailored 8-year RRI Roadmap within these organisations to ensure its sustainability and full implementation over the long-term. On its page “Resources” there are resources developed by GRACE and other initiatives related to implementing Grounding RRI Actions to Achieve Institutional Changes. Among others, it presents six guidance on the six keys of RRI, a state of the art review of documented experiences as a basic scheme for self-assessment, a questionnaire about the use of the guidance, and a reflection tool for starting RRI initiative.
Part of interest: The six guidance and the reflection tool.
Target groups: RPOs, Higher Education Institutes, Innovation Business, Payers
The document (PRAGES Project, 2009) contains the outcome of the project, whose main objective has been to take stock of programmes and initiatives found in specific institutional settings (such as universities, institutes, faculties, and departments, but also networks, associations, and S&T-related enterprises) aimed at promoting gender equality in S&T. The Guidelines are composed by 5 parts: part A Women and science: problems at issues at stake; part B Strategy one: a friendly environment; part C Strategy two: gender-aware science; part D, Strategy three – women’s leadership of science in a changing society; part E Programmes that work.
Part of interest: See in particular, the summary charts, Part E “Programmes that work”.
Target groups: RPOs, Higher Education Institute
The document (Stages Project, Deliverable D8.3, 2015) contains a description of action plans for promoting institutional change towards equal opportunity in science and provide useful recommendations for implementing structural change action plans.
Part of interest: The entire document. In particular recommendations I “Collecting data and monitoring gender equality” and II “Engaging leadership”.
Target groups: RPOs, Innovation Business, Higher Education Institution
The Guidelines (Trigger Project, Deliverable D7.5, 2017) provides orientations and analyses to manage what may happen when, in a given research organisation, a gender action plan is launched (be it promoted by a specific project team, the HR Department, the Rector, the Head of a department or other internal stakeholders). The Guidelines take into account also a wider debate on institutional change towards gender equality involving representatives of other 8 EC-funded structural change projects.
Part of interest: The entire document. In particular part 1 “Transformational agent”.
Target groups: RPOs, Higher Education Institute
The Guidelines (SET-DEV Project, 2011) are the result of dialogue and cooperation between representatives of three major scientific cultures of Europe, India, and Africa. The Guidelines are a practical contribution about how can be promoted effective collective responsibility in science and technology and how scientific and technological research can better integrate into society and be more relevant to society’s needs. In particular, the document is centred on the concept of socialisation of scientific and technological research and its areas (scientific practice; scientific mediation, scientific communication; evaluation; innovation; governance; gender; substantive approaches). For each of these areas, several frames of responsibility are outlined which act as reference points for identifying problems and finding solutions concerning the relationship between science technology, and society.
Part of interest: In particular, see the general summary with the list of frames of each area, at Pp.21-35.
Target groups: Policy Makers, RPOs, Innovation Business, Intermediaries, Higher Education Institutions