PUBLIC, SOCIAL AND SOLIDARITY INNOVATION IN LATIN AMERICA AND THE CARIBBEAN: ASSESSING MULTI-STAKEHOLDER COLLABORATION IN TERRITORIAL DEVELOPMENT
Growth and sustainable development are only possible if changes are achieved in society through innovation and knowledge (Medina, 2020). These seem to be the key words championed by institutions such as the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) when referring to the achievement of modernization and well-being in emerging countries this century (DNP, 2021). However, the COVID-19 crisis exposed the endemic weaknesses of a fractured social contract in need of deep reform. Inequality remains stubbornly high in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC), manifesting in various aspects of life: from unequal opportunities in access to justice, health services, or high-quality education, to enormous disparities in families’ capacity to cope with disasters and other exogenous shocks. At this point in the analysis, one might think that the limited progress in closing gaps and pursuing territorial development stems from serious limitations at the level of government and public policy; indeed, redistributive policies in the region’s countries reduce inequality by less than 5%, while the industrialized world does so by 38% (Busso & Messina, 2020).
In contrast, for two decades the world has been working on the management and innovation of policy in both the private and state spheres (European Commission & Eurostat, 2005). In general terms, innovation has gained significant ground, coinciding with three major transformations. First, in the conception of the State, meaning that the contemporary public sector faces a growing number of additional tasks due to new development challenges; changes in its functions, including the efficient management of its own enterprises; limited resources through direct tax collection; and a widespread negative image associated with lower efficiency and effectiveness, and high corruption (Schröder, 2014). Second, transformations have also occurred in the market, propelling corporate social responsibility (CSR) as a competitiveness strategy for firms amid the exhaustion of traditional markets. And finally, in society itself, given the growing number of actors and their spheres of action (Morales, 2009).
However, despite the contributions of the innovation paradigm involving public, private, and community actors, questions persist such as: Has public innovation contributed to the observed increase in inequality? On the other hand, has public-private engagement, as a type of social innovation, made it possible to advance the design and implementation of collaborative solutions for greater development across the dimensions provided by sustainable development and at the territorial scale? And finally, given the anomalous incentives present in the public and private spheres, what collaborative innovations from the third sector or the solidarity economy have promoted economic democracy and more equitable access to local public goods?
The Symposium recognizes a hybridization between innovation in the public sector and innovations originating from the non-state sphere (social, solidarity and community); it also recognizes that all innovations are conditioned by different environmental or contextual factors; and finally, it considers relevant the existence of rules of the game (institutions), both formal and informal, and their different degrees of maturity.
