Sosyal İnovasyon Politikalarında Üniversitelerin Artan Önemi ve Bilim Mağazaları Konseptinin Türk Üniversitelerine Uyarlanması Üzerine Bir Model Önerisi

Öz

Sosyal inovasyon, yeni bir kavram olmamasına rağmen son yıllarda ulusal/uluslarüstü düzeydeki politika tartışmalarının yeniden merkezi hâline gelmiştir. Gelir ve bilgi eşitsizliğindeki hissedilir artış bu durumun nedenleri arasında değerlendirilebilir. Mevcut büyük toplumsal zorlukların çözümünde, sosyal inovasyonun önemli bir aktörü olan üniversitelere de teknolojik yeniliklerin ötesine geçen yenilikçi çözümler yaratma noktasında önemli roller düşmektedir. Günümüzde artık üniversitelerin geleneksel misyonlarının ötesine geçmeleri ve toplumsal fayda temelli inovasyon süreçlerine yön verecek stratejiler izlemeleri gerekmektedir. Bu kapsamda bu çalışmanın temel amacı üniversitelerin üçüncü misyonu olarak adlandırılan topluma hizmet görevini yerine getirirken kullanabilecekleri yeni bir model önerisinde bulunmaktır. Türk yükseköğrenim sistemi içinde hiç denenmemiş ancak Avrupa üniversitelerinde 70’li yıllarda uygulanmaya başlanan ve günümüzde hem önemi hem de etkisi daha da artmış olan Bilim Mağazası modeli katılımcı, sosyal sorunlara duyarlı, toplumsal odaklı bir model olarak değerlendirilerek Türk üniversitelerine yeni bir yapı olarak sunulmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Sosyal inovasyon
• üniversiteler
• inovasyon politikası
• bilim mağazaları
• toplum temelli inovasyon
• toplum temelli inovasyon

The Increasing Importance of Universities in Social Innovation Policies and a Model Proposal on the Implementation of the Science Shops Concept to Turkish Universities

Öz

Although social innovation is not a new concept, it has become the center of policy debates at the national and supranational levels in recent years. The significant increase in income and information inequality can be considered among the reasons for this situation. Universities, which are important actors of social innovation, have an important role in creating innovative solutions that go beyond technological innovations in solving current great social challenges. Today, universities need to go beyond their traditional missions and follow strategies that will guide innovation processes based on social benefit. In this context, the main purpose of this study is to propose a new model that universities can use while fulfilling their duty of service to society, which is called the third mission of universities. The Science Shop model, which has never been tried in the Turkish higher education system, but started to be implemented in European universities in the 70s and has increased both in importance and influence today, is evaluated as a participatory, socially sensitive, socialoriented model and presented to Turkish universities as a new structure.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Social innovation
• universities
• innovation policy
• science shops
• community-based innovation

Kaynakça

1. Anderson, Mark Majewski vd. “Social innovation as a chance and a challenge for higher education institutions.” Atlas of Social Innovation–New Practices for a Better Future, 2018, ss. 50-53.
2. ASBÜ Sosyokent, Ankara Sosyal Bilimler Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Alanında İhtisaslaşmış Teknoloji Geliştirme Bölgesi, ASBÜ Çalışmaları 3, 2018.
3. Bayuno, Blaise Booponoyeng vd. “Unpacking the role of universities in the emergence, development and impact of social innovations – A systematic review of the literatüre.” Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 155(C), 2020, 120030.
4. Benneworth, Paul, ve Jorge Cunha. “Universities’ contributions to social innovation: reflections in theory & practice.” European journal of innovation management, vol. 18, no. 4, 2015, ss. 508-527.
5. Carayannis, Elias G., ve Ruslan Rakhmatullin. “The quadruple/quintuple innovation helixes and smart specialisation strategies for sustainable and inclusive growth in Europe and beyond.” Journal of the Knowledge Economy, vol. 5, 2014, ss. 212-239.
6. Carayannis, Elias, ve Evangelos Grigoroudis. “Quadruple innovation helix and smart specialization: Knowledge production and national competitiveness.” Форсайт, vol. 10.1 (eng), 2016, ss. 31-42.
7. Caulier-Grice, Julie, vd. “Defining social innovation.” A deliverable of the project: “The theoretical, empirical and policy foundations for building social innovation
8. in Europe” (TEPSIE), European Commission–7th Framework Programme, Brussels: European Commission, DG Research, 22, 2012, ss. 1-43.

9. Cavallini, Simona, vd. Using the Quadruple Helix Approach to Accelerate the Transfer of Research and Innovation Results to Regional Growth. European Union-Committee of the Regions. European Union, 2016.
10. Daglio, M., D. Gerson, ve H. Kitchen. “Building organisational capacity for public sector innovation. Background report.” Paris, France: OECD Conference “Innovating the Public Sector: from Ideas to Impact.” 2014. Retrieved from https://www.oecd.org/innovating-the-public-sector/Background-report.pdf.
11. DeBok, Caspar, ve Norbert Steinhaus. “Breaking Out of the Local: International dimensions of science shops.” Gateways: International Journal of Community Research and Engagement, vol. 1, 2008, ss. 165-178.
12. Etzkowitz, Henry, ve Loet Leydesdorff. “Universities and the global knowledge economy: A triple helix of university-industry relations.” Preprint Version of: Etzkowitz, H., & L. Leydesdorff. Universities and the Global Knowledge Economy: A Triple Helix of University-Industry-Government Relations. London: Pinter. [Archival Reprint], 1997.
13. European Commission. “Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on a renewed EU agenda for higher education.” Brussels, 30.5.2017 COM (2017) 247 final, 2017, ss. 1-12.
14. European SI Competiton. “European Social Innovation Competition.” 12.04.2023, https://single-market-economy.ec.europa.eu/industry/strategy/innovation/social_en#: ~:text=Social%20innovations%20are%20new%20ideas,relationships%20and%20form%20new%20collaborations.
15. Galvão, Anderson, vd. “A quadruple helix model of entrepreneurship, innovation and stages of economic development.” Review of International Business and Strategy, vol. 27, no. 2, 2017, ss. 261-282.
16. Gnaiger, Andrea, ve Eileen Martin. “Science shops: Operational options.” SCIPAS report 1, 2001, http://www.livingknowledge.org/fileadmin/Dateien-Living-Knowledge/ Library/Project_reports/SCIPAS_report_nr._1_2001.pdf.
17. Gresle, Anne-Sophie, vd. “Citizen-driven participatory research conducted through knowledge intermediary units. A thematic synthesis of the literature on ‘Science Shops’.” Journal of Science Communication, vol. 20, no. 5, 2021, A02.
18. Hacker, Karen. Community-based participatory research. Sage publications, 2013.
19. Klein, Juan-Luis. “Social innovation and universities: The challenge of social transformation.” Social Innovation as Political Transformation. Edward Elgar Publishing, 2019, ss. 122-127.
20. Koç, İsmail, ve Yardımcıoğlu, Fatih. “Covid-19 pandemi sürecinde uygulamaya konulan mali tedbir ve teşviklerin karşılaştırmalı analizi: Türkiye ve seçilmiş AB ülkeleri karşılaştırması.” Siyaset, Ekonomi ve Yönetim Araştırmaları Dergisi, vol. 8, no. 2, 2020, ss. 123-152.
21. Lürsen, Maaike, ve Dick Sclove. “Living Knowledge: The Network. Accomplishments and Further Opportunities for.” SCIPAS report 7, 2001, 31.
22. Morawska-Jancelewicz, Joanna. “The role of universities in social innovation within quadruple/quintuple helix model: Practical implications from polish experience.” Journal of the Knowledge Economy, vol. 13, no. 3, 2022, ss. 2230-2271.
23. Moulaert, Frank, ve Pieter Van den Broeck. “Social innovation and territorial development.” Social Innovation and Territorial Development, 2009, ss. 11-23.
24. Moulaert, Frank, ed. The international handbook on social innovation: collective action, social learning and transdisciplinary research. Edward Elgar Publishing, 2013.
25. Mulder, Henk AJ vd. Success and failure in starting Science Shops. SCIPAS report 2, 2001.
26. Mulgan, Geoff vd. Social innovation: What it is, why it matters and how it can be accelerated. Skoll Centre for Social Entrepreneurship. Young Foundation, 2007.
27. Murray, Robin vd. The open book of social innovation. Vol. 24. London: Nesta, 2010.
28. Phills, James A. vd. “Rediscovering social innovation.” Stanford Social Innovation Review, 6.4, 2008, ss. 34-43.
29. SciShops. “Enhancing The Responsible and Sustainable Expansion of The Science Shops Ecosystem in Europe.” Science Shops Scenarios Collection, 2018, ss. 1-57.
30. Sanayi ve Teknoloji Bakanlığı Ar-Ge Teşvikleri Genel Müdürlüğü. “Teknoloji Geliştirme Bölgeleri.” Mart 2024, https://www.sanayi.gov.tr/istatistikler/istatistiki-bilgiler/mi 020.301.1501.
31. TEPSIE. “Social Innovation Theory and Research: A Summary of the Findings from TEPSIE.” A deliverable of the project: “The theoretical, empirical and policy foundations for building social innovation in Europe” (TEPSIE), European Commission – 7th Framework Programme, European Commission, DG Research, 2014, 46.
32. Urias, Eduardo, vd. “A framework for Science Shop processes: Results of a modified Delphi study.” Futures, no. 123, 2020, 102613.
33. Westley, Frances, ve Nino Antadze. “Making a difference: Strategies for scaling social innovation for greater impact.” The Innovation Journal: The Public Sector Innovation Journal, vol. 15, no. 2, 2010, Article 2.