the third mission in this area, with an emphasis on developing partnerships with the third sector, engaging local communities, and so forth.

2. Territorial Development and Local Community Engagement

This important property emphasizes the importance of universities engaging with their local communities and contributing to territorial development. Universities can open their infrastructure to local residents and organizations to support social innovation initiatives (similar to what the Vanderbilt University did). Additionally, involving students as volunteers in NGOs helps them gain practical experience and understanding of the social issues that require innovative solutions. Contests and competitions offer opportunities for proposing solutions to problems identified by various types of NGOs and the public sector, fostering collaboration between universities and these entities. This cooperation is shared between all the examples discussed.

3. Interdisciplinary and Transdisciplinary Methodology

The emphasis on interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary approaches highlights the diverse nature of project teams and competition groups. These teams typically include individuals from various academic disciplines, which enriches the problem-solving process by bringing in different perspectives. In less common cases, these solutions can be built as part of a single academic program. While private tenders may have specific focuses, such as digitalizing NGOs, this specialization often arises from the initiatives of individuals who recognize the importance of integrating such components into their training programs.

4. Engagement in Educational and Research Activities, their Mutual Penetration

The active integration and mutual penetration of social innovation models with educational and research activities is a significant property of social innovation development models. Apparently, carrying out project activities in the format of innovative projects aimed at addressing specific social and environmental problems is more comprehensible and reasonable. However, this interaction can also follow a more systemic and in-depth format. For example, universities that actively develop social and innovative activities view this direction as a basis for adjusting and enhancing educational programs. This includes supplementing entrepreneurial education programs with courses on social entrepreneurship, creating programs to study specific social and environmental issues, offering courses on social design and social impact assessment, and establishing entire institutes of interdisciplinary courses. These interdisciplinary courses are open to students of all majors, enabling them to better understand the social landscape at regional, national, and global levels.

5. Open Source

An important and not always easily observed property of the social innovation development models is the inclination of universities involved to openly share and disseminate their projects and solutions. It involves creating libraries of best practices and fostering regional and international cooperation. Numerous large-scale examples of multi-country collaboration exist, wherein organizations create local partnerships, then merge them into expansive networks interested in promoting social innovation. Unlike fields such as technology and business, where intellectual property rights and patents often play a protective role, social innovation encourages open sharing and exchange. This approach makes sense because many countries share common social challenges, and open collaboration can accelerate progress by leveraging shared knowledge and solutions.

6. Networking

Another notable aspect involves universities’ commitment to fostering active network collaboration as part of their social innovation development efforts. On the one hand, as mentioned earlier, this entails engaging the third sector and representatives from governmental bodies responsible for formulating and implementing social policies and programs. On the other hand, it encompasses universities working closely with one another and with businesses (both local and global enterprises) and all other potential stakeholders. This collaborative approach becomes entirely feasible when there is a shared commitment to the transparency of the innovative solutions proposed in the realm of social change.

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR SOCIAL INNOVATION DEVELOPMENT

The features of social innovation development models listed above have enabled the researchers to outline a series of recommendations for enhancing social innovation within universities. These recommendations follow a hierarchical approach, from those that require minimal resource allocation, including organizational adjustments, to those that demand extensive transformation of the university’s operations.

1. Diversifying Implementation Formats for Advancing Social Innovation, Maintaining Their Systemic Interaction

• Establishing social innovation incubators with the goal of supporting social entrepreneurs and student startups.

• Creating a “hub” for social innovation development that facilitates interaction among all sectors, including businesses, NGOs, and government agencies, to facilitate the transfer of information, knowledge, and technologies.

• Ultimately, creating an environment for the “innovators’ journey through the realm of social innovation.” Importantly, innovators here are not just students and university staff, but also the broader local community. Many social innovation development centers aspire to enable anyone within the university’s sphere of influence, regardless of their formal affiliation with the institution, to bring forth their innovative ideas and receive support for their implementation, similar to the approach adopted by Vanderbilt University.

2. Territorial Development and Active Engagement of the Local Community

• Implementing the functions of a volunteer hub, providing students with opportunities to participate in NGO projects.

• Engaging local community members and NGOs, offering mentoring, expertise, hackathons, competitions, and practical case studies.

• Making university resources available to innovators from NGOs and the local community, including access to laboratories and equipment.

• Establishing networks of regional social enterprises.

• Developing and implementing social impact programs tailored to address the specific issues facing local territories.

3. Interdisciplinary and Transdisciplinary Methodology

• Fostering collaboration between academic and educational departments within the realm of social innovation development.

• Prioritizing interdisciplinary educational programs that focus on the design and implementation of social innovations.

• Incorporating “social service” spin programs into students’ academic journeys, including leadership development initiatives (an example being the University of Manchester’s Stellify program).

4. Transformation of Educational and Research Activities

• Expanding the offer of entrepreneurship and social entrepreneurship courses as foundational components of the curriculum.

• Introducing disciplines related to social project management, covering aspects such as sustainable development, social impact assessment, climate change, and more.

These courses aim to cultivate critical thinking skills among students as they explore social issues and engage in discussions of concepts such as social and solidarity economies, self-governance, and sustainable social and economic development.

• Developing supplementary educational modules to enhance professional development in the field of social innovation.

5. Open Source

• Promoting unobstructed sharing of experiences and