scholarly journals Barcelona’s science diplomacy: towards an ecosystem-driven internationalization strategy

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexis Roig ◽  
Jia Liang Sun-Wang ◽  
Juan-Luis Manfredi-Sánchez
Keyword(s):  
Scientific Community ◽  
Public Institutions ◽  
Financial Capital ◽  
Innovation Ecosystem ◽  
Science Diplomacy ◽  
Internationalization Strategy ◽  
Stakeholder Partnerships ◽  
Multi Stakeholder ◽  
Internal Stakeholders

Abstract Urban innovation ecosystems are set to play a prominent role in the internationalization and governance of big cities. By harboring solid scientific and technological assets and attracting both human and financial capital, they are best suited to become the pivotal actors of effective multi-stakeholder partnerships between the scientific community, public institutions, the private sector and civil society. In 2018, Barcelona’s knowledge and innovation ecosystem came together to launch a comprehensive diplomatic strategy to put the city’s science and technology at the forefront of global challenges. This paper presents the case study of Barcelona and discuss the opportunities for city-led science diplomacy as a formal, institutionalized practice aimed to reinforcing the insertion of local interests in the international scene while favouring the open interaction between the internal stakeholders involved.

scholarly journals Science Diplomacy Case Study: The Boston Innovation Ecosystem and its Science & Technology Diplomatic Circle (S&TDC)

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-122
Author(s):  
Konstantina Gota ◽  
Lucius Lichte ◽  
Paul Arthur Berkman
Keyword(s):  
Innovation Ecosystem ◽  
Non Profit ◽  
The Public ◽  
Planetary Scale ◽  
Capstone Project ◽  
Science Diplomacy ◽  
Science Innovation ◽  
Of Greece ◽  
Objective Methodology

This fifth synthesis with the Science Diplomacy Action serial is the product of a capstone project for the Masters of Law and Diplomacy (MALD) degree through the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University that was completed in July 2020. This capstone project focuses on the diplomatic missions of 65+ nations in Boston, Massachusetts, United States, that have been operating collectively as the Science & Technology Diplomatic Circle (S&TDC) within the larger innovation ecosystem of Boston since 2013. Lessons of science diplomacy as an holistic (international, interdisciplinary and inclusive) process are illustrated with the S&TDC Boston, noting the large number of diplomatic missions in a city that is different than capitol of the nation. These local-global lessons with the S&TDC Boston reflect the jurisdictional spectrum with its subnational, national and international levels that are interconnected on a planetary scale. This capstone project applies an objective methodology, using the public websites of the 65+ diplomatic missions in Boston to generate the data from questions that can be replicated and expanded in other cities with diplomatic missions. These data include details about: continents represented; nations represented; types of consulates; office locations and contacts; website language(s); science diplomacy presence; science attaché; website science innovation; government ministerial representation; profit / non-profit representation; and S&TDC membership. The data are listed, mapped and graphed with interpretations to help reveal options (without advocacy), which can be used or ignored explicitly, respecting the relevant decisionmakers, who are self-defined. Engagement with the S&TDC Boston is represented by the Consul General of Greece in Boston, who stimulated this project, and by the S&TDC Co-Chairs, who have written the Foreword and contributed to the co-authorship of this Science Diplomacy Action synthesis. As noted in the Conclusion: “cultivating a network with strong foundations, Science Diplomacy has the potential to build on synergies and capacities that exist in a way that have a broader reach, not only in Boston but around the globe with a universal application.”

scholarly journals Sustainable Financial Partnerships for the SDGs: The Case of Social Impact Bonds

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (13) ◽  
pp. 5362 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alessandro Rizzello ◽  
Abdellah Kabli
Keyword(s):  
Sustainable Development ◽  
Social Impact ◽  
Service Providers ◽  
The Sustainable Development ◽  
Social Impact Bonds ◽  
Development Goals ◽  
Stakeholder Partnerships ◽  
Social Environmental ◽  
Multi Stakeholder

The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development brought the critical challenge of how private capital can support its new goals—the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)—to the attention of finance, business and policy actors. Impact finance instruments, which aim to obtain both financial and positive social/environmental returns simultaneously, can serve as effective institutional mechanisms to support the financing of SDGs. Social impact bonds (SIBs) are part of this emerging field. SIBs represent multi-stakeholder partnerships, built on outcome-based contracts, designed to harness private impact-oriented investors, service providers and public entities to address social or environmental problems. SDG 17 considers partnerships priority instruments for the achievement of SDs targets. This paper provides an exploratory analysis into the field of Social Impact Bonds and aims to (i) understand how such instruments are suitable for involving sustainable economy actors in SDG-based partnerships; (ii) determine the interplay between SIBs and SDGs. In order to address these questions, the article presents a multiple case study that includes a cross case analysis of four SIBs experienced in different social policy areas and different countries. As secondary step, the study matches phases and activities of SDG-based financial partnerships derived from a literature review with those experienced by each SIB case study. The results show that SIBs are fully compliant with SDG-based financial partnership structures derived from the literature, and their architecture reveals a high degree of SDG investment readiness. The originality of the research consists of including SIBs in the analysis of the new financial tools for the achievement of the SDGs, and extending them into the field of partnerships for the Goals, at the center of SDG 17. The paper fills the significant gap in the current research related to the issues of financing sustainable development and financial sector instruments on sustainability.

Sustainable beekeeping, community driven-development, and tri-sector solutions with impact

2020 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Lisa Gring-Pemble ◽  
Germán Perilla
Keyword(s):  
Business Models ◽  
Positive Impact ◽  
Sustainable Business ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Partnership Model ◽  
Stakeholder Partnerships ◽  
Development Approach ◽  
Multi Stakeholder ◽  
Business In Society

Purpose As the Academy for Business in Society considers the theme “Business in Society: Measuring Impact and Creating Change,” one fundamental question emerges and that is how to collaborate with universities to create positive impact and sustainable business models. The purpose of this paper is to address that question and offer one apt illustration for how to collaborate effectively across sectors. Design/methodology/approach This paper offers a case study of the Honey Bee Initiative (HBI) from George Mason University’s School of Business. Findings In this case study, the authors discuss the Initiative’s tri-sector domestic and global partnerships, community-driven development approach and innovative solutions as an exemplar of business as a force for good. Originality/value This paper provides unique insight into how universities can partner with non-profits, business and policy leaders to effect positive change. As such, the HBI program contributes to the growing body of research on the benefits of tri-sector partnership models as a means of addressing global goals and provides a valuable case study to understand better the necessity of multi-stakeholder partnerships. Moreover, the HBI’s tri-sector partnership model offers important insights into what makes these partnerships successful and serves as a replicable model that can be instituted in other regions around the globe.

scholarly journals Assessing national WaSH targets through a water governance lens: a case study of the Sanitation and Water for All partnership commitments

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leonie Schiedek ◽  
Sara Gabrielsson ◽  
Alejandro Jiménez ◽  
Ricard Giné ◽  
Virginia Roaf ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Qualitative Content Analysis ◽  
Water Governance ◽  
National Level ◽  
Target Setting ◽  
Policy And Strategy ◽  
Sanitation And Hygiene ◽  
Stakeholder Partnerships ◽  
Multi Stakeholder ◽  
Mutual Accountability

Abstract Dysfunctional water, sanitation and hygiene (WaSH) systems are mainly determined by poor water governance, exacerbating inequalities and poverty. Multi-stakeholder partnerships provide an approach to more flexible and adaptive governance to explore these problems. In this article, national commitments made to improve WaSH, made through the Sanitation and Water for All (SWA) partnership's Mutual Accountability Mechanism, are examined through qualitative content analysis and guided by the SMART framework to assess the current target-setting. The analysis reveals that there are differences in the participation of the different constituencies regarding the number of stakeholders participating and their performance for measurable and time-bound commitments. This applies especially to research and learning and the private sector. Countries have prioritized commitments related to policy and strategy, efficiency and enabling conditions; further research should understand the linkages of the SWA commitments with other priority-setting processes at the national level. In sum, the commitments leave room for improvement to specify approaches to water governance in more detail and the chance to support the creation of sustainable and resilient systems with more diversified commitments from a wider range of partners.

Strategic Planning and Scenario Planning in Public Institutions: The Case Study of Pacific Alliance

2017 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 26
Author(s):  
Juan Carlos Ladines Azalia ◽  
William Castillo Stein
Keyword(s):  
Strategic Planning ◽  
Scenario Planning ◽  
Public Institutions

Case Study: Rome's House of Memory and History: The Politics of Memory and Public Institutions

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alessandro Portelli
Keyword(s):  
Oral History ◽  
Cultural Policy ◽  
Public Institutions ◽  
Politics Of Memory ◽  
Political Events ◽  
History Of ◽  
Ambitious Program ◽  
The City

This article centers around the case study of Rome's House of Memory and History to understand the politics of memory and public institutions. This case study is about the organization and politics of public memory: the House of Memory and History, established by the city of Rome in 2006, in the framework of an ambitious program of cultural policy. It summarizes the history of the House's conception and founding, describes its activities and the role of oral history in them, and discusses some of the problems it faces. The idea of a House of Memory and History grew in this cultural and political context. This article traces several political events that led to the culmination of the politics of memory and its effect on public institutions. It says that the House of Memory and History can be considered a success. A discussion on a cultural future winds up this article.

COVID-19 and Collective Action

2020 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Todd Sandler
Keyword(s):  
Public Policy ◽  
Collective Action ◽  
Disease Surveillance ◽  
Vaccine Development ◽  
Treatment Practices ◽  
Individual Contributions ◽  
Stakeholder Partnerships ◽  
Multi Stakeholder

AbstractThis conceptual article argues that COVID-19 poses myriad global collective action challenges, some of which are easier than others to address. COVID-19 requires numerous distinct activities – e.g., vaccine development, uncovering treatment practices, imposing quarantines, and disease surveillance. The prognosis for effective collective action rests on the underlying aggregator technologies, which indicate how individual contributions determine the amount of a COVID-19 activity that is available for consumption. Best- and better-shot aggregators are more apt to promote desired outcomes than weakest- and weaker-link aggregators. The roles for public policy and important actors (e.g., multi-stakeholder partnerships) in fostering collective action are indicated.

scholarly journals Tracking Progress from Policy Development to Implementation: A Case Study on Adoption of Mandatory Regulation for Nutrition Labelling in Malaysia

Nutrients ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 457
Author(s):  
SeeHoe Ng ◽  
Bridget Kelly ◽  
Heather Yeatman ◽  
Boyd Swinburn ◽  
Tilakavati Karupaiah
Keyword(s):  
Policy Development ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
Political Activities ◽  
Nutrition Labelling ◽  
Policy Windows ◽  
Industry Engagement ◽  
Stakeholder Partnerships ◽  
Implementation Gaps ◽  
Health Experts

Mandatory nutrition labelling, introduced in Malaysia in 2003, received a “medium implementation” rating from public health experts when previously benchmarked against international best practices by our group. The rating prompted this qualitative case study to explore barriers and facilitators during the policy process. Methods incorporated semi-structured interviews supplemented with cited documents and historical mapping of local and international directions up to 2017. Case participants held senior positions in the Federal government (n = 6), food industry (n = 3) and civil society representations (n = 3). Historical mapping revealed that international directions stimulated policy processes in Malaysia but policy inertia caused implementation gaps. Barriers hindering policy processes included lack of resources, governance complexity, lack of monitoring, technical challenges, policy characteristics linked to costing, lack of sustained efforts in policy advocacy, implementer characteristics and/or industry resistance, including corporate political activities (e.g., lobbying, policy substitution). Facilitators to the policy processes were resource maximization, leadership, stakeholder partnerships or support, policy windows and industry engagement or support. Progressing policy implementation required stronger leadership, resources, inter-ministerial coordination, advocacy partnerships and an accountability monitoring system. This study provides insights for national and global policy entrepreneurs when formulating strategies towards fostering healthy food environments.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document