• Creating a digital network designed to identify, showcase, and facilitate collaboration among community-driven social impact projects. These projects will collaborate not only amongst themselves but also with universities worldwide, fostering research, education, and student engagement.

6. Networking

• International Competitions: Engaging in existing competitions in the realm of social innovation development offered by universities abroad (e.g., Map the System competition by the University of Oxford).

• Participating in global networks of young innovators and establishing their own networks (an example being the Yenching Academy of Peking University). Established in 2016, this forum operates as a global young innovators network, guided by leaders from both the public and private sectors. Its mission is to facilitate cooperation, cross-cultural understanding, and innovative learning to address and share solutions for some of the most pressing social challenges facing China and the world.

• Regional, national, federal and international cooperation. As evident from the networking examples presented in this study, given the previously noted characteristic of universities’ “open-source” approach to social innovation, existing alliances, consortia, networks, and forums offer substantial opportunities for participation. Additionally, drawing from Sweden and the Malmö University Forum as an example, the notion of establishing a national network for innovation and social entrepreneurship is also a viable option.

It is crucial to highlight key attributes of this forum, which may serve as the foundation for introducing a similar framework in other countries:

• The Forum gathers and disseminates both national and international data pertaining to social innovation development, while spearheading research and development initiatives.

• It vigilantly tracks events and news in the field of innovation development at national and international levels. Furthermore, it promotes the growth, exchange, and application of knowledge and expertise.

• It encourages representatives from the academic, private, public, and non-governmental sectors to participate.

• The Forum maintains a nationwide presence.

• It seeks to build capacity for innovation and ideas that address social challenges through collaboration with stakeholders from academia, private industry, government, and non-profit organizations. Additionally, the Forum aims to bring together new groups of partners from academia, business, nonprofits, and government agencies that support the advancement of social innovation.

• Its ultimate objective is to leverage the resources, knowledge, and funds available to the participants to serve the local community in an innovative, efficient, and sustainable manner.

CONCLUSION

Universities play a pivotal role in the realm of social innovation development, catalyzing growth in both educational and motivational capacities. Well-established and resilient practices of organized collaboration in social innovation development can be seen across the globe today. These practices encompass the engagement of local communities, NGOs, businesses, and, in some instances, governmental bodies, and are often initiated and orchestrated by universities.

One (and certainly not the only one) prominent avenue for fostering social innovation is through university-based social entrepreneurship. Certain universities have integrated social entrepreneurship courses into their academic curricula, and entrepreneurial endeavors receive backing from the universities’ internal innovation infrastructure. In many cases, universities are establishing social innovation incubators, created explicitly to nurture social entrepreneurship. The establishment of such incubators invariably facilitates collaboration with non-profit and international organizations dedicated to supporting social initiatives.

Simultaneously, a more prevalent mode of executing intersectoral projects aimed at addressing social challenges involves collaborative and interdisciplinary initiatives that engage local communities, students, and representatives from academic institutions. The activities in this sphere typically include a research component and occasionally drive curriculum adaptations to better align with the needs and complexities of the project at hand.

It is also noteworthy that executing projects within the domain of social innovation at a systemic level often necessitates the establishment of specialized coordination or management centers within the university structure. These may take the form of specialized departments, think tanks, social innovation labs, or comprehensive innovation hubs akin to Vanderbilt University’s model.

The key trend underpinning the evolution of social innovation practices is networking. Virtually all the cases examined in this study incorporate elements of collaboration, from stakeholder involvement to inter-university and international endeavors. In essence, networking in social innovation is an advanced form of university engagement, fostering profound global interaction and the exchange of best practices.

By analyzing diverse interaction modalities, we have identified 6 key models for social innovation development within universities. These models are mainly characterized by expanding the notion of social innovation, transitioning from implementing individual social entrepreneurial projects to establishing innovative territorial hubs; local community engagement and territorial development; adoption of interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary methodologies; and embracing open-source principles and fostering networking.

In conclusion, we would like to say that the advancement of social innovation constitutes a distinctive challenge for universities. Beyond their core roles in education and research, universities are increasingly tasked with an additional societal function, which entails forging meaningful connections with non-academic sectors and organizations. We are encouraged by seeing a diverse array of successful practices, approaches, and experiences that have emerged from universities rising to meet this formidable challenge. These endeavors share a universal goal of leveraging the knowledge and resources at their disposal to serve local communities in the most effective and sustainable manner possible.

REFERENCES

1. Dodson, M. (2019). Vanderbilt’s Wond’ry receives grant to bolster Social Innovations and launch Social Innovation Think Tank. 17.01.2019. Vanderbilt University. Retrieved from: https://www.vanderbilt.edu/thewondry/ vanderbilts-wondry-receives-grant-to-bolster-social-innovations-and-launch-social-innovation-think-tank/. (accessed: 05.09.2023).

2. Cruz, P. R., Rebourseau, V. & Luisi, A. (2018). Social Innovation and Higher Education in the BRICS (1):

;a background overview. BPC Papers, 5(2). Retrieved from: https://nkibrics.ru/system/asset_publications/ data/5b24/17b8/6272/6944/df48/0000/ original/1747208992.pdf?1529092024. (accessed: 05.09.2023).

3. Göransson, B. (2017). Role of Universities for Inclusive Development and Social Innovation: Experiences from Sweden. In: Brundenius, C., Göransson, B., Carvalho de Mello, J. (eds) Universities, Inclusive Development and Social Innovation. Springer, Cham. https://doi. org/10.1007/978–3–319–43700–2_14

4. Schnurbus, V. & Edvardsson, I. (2020). The Third Mission Among Nordic Universities: A Systematic Literature Review. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 66. https://doi.org /10.1080/00313831.2020.1816577

5. Cawood, R. (2019). What can universities do to support social innovation? 24.05.2019. SIKE. Retrieved from: https://sike-eu.org/2019/05/24/what-can-universities-do-to-support-social-innovation/. (accessed: 05.09.2023).

«Третья миссия» через призму науки: обзор русскоязычных публикаций за период 2021–2023 гг

Анна Мовчан