Skip to main content

The Monitoring of Social Innovation Projects: An Integrated Approach

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Book cover New Perspectives in Multiple Criteria Decision Making

Part of the book series: Multiple Criteria Decision Making ((MCDM))

Abstract

When the Municipality of Turin first decided to invest in social innovation, a public program and a network of partners were created, and a procedure to support social innovation start-ups was developed, and applied for the first time in 2014. After selection and funding of several young social entrepreneur projects, the Municipality activated a monitoring process. Different methodological approaches, including cognitive mapping, actor network analysis and multicriteria analysis, have been combined to analyse the behaviour of these start-ups and to evaluate whether they would address the social needs of their specific fields, and develop business projects as part of an inclusive and sustainable economy. Each element of this analysis has been proposed and discussed in relation to the monitoring and decision processes. The adopted multi-methodology and its results are here presented as a proposal for new models, metrics and methods for the social economy.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    The name of the project, FaciliTO, combines the word facilitation with TO, the acronym of Turin, while Giovani (Italian word that means the young) identifies the young social entrepreneurs who have been the subjects and targets of the project.

References

  • Bana e Costa, C. A. (2001). The use of multi-criteria decision analysis to support the search for less conflicting policy options in a multi-actor context: Case study. Journal of Multi-criteria Decision Analysis, 10, 111–125.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2013). Guide to social innovation. EU Commission, Brussels. https://ec.europa.eu/eip/ageing/library/guide-social-innovation_en.

  • Figueira, J., Mousseau, V., & Roy, B. (2005). ELECTRE methods. In J. Figueira, S. Greco, & M. Ehrgott (Eds.), Multiple criteria decision analysis: State of the art surveys (pp. 133–162). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Genard, J.-L., & Pirlot, M. (2002). Multi-criteria decision-aid in a philosophical perspective. In D. Boyssou, E. Jacquet-Lagrèze, P. Perny, R. Slowinski, D. Vanderpooten, & P. H. Vincke (Eds.), Aiding decisions with multiple criteria: Essays in honour of Bernard Roy (pp. 89–117). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Hermans, L. M., & Thissen, W. A. H. (2009). Actor analysis methods and their use for public policy analysists. European Journal of Operational Research, 196, 808–818.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Law, J. (2007). Actor network theory and material semiotics. Indiana Law Journal, 35, 113–139.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merad, M., Dechy, N., Serir, L., Grabisch, M., & Marcel, F. (2013). Using a multicriteria decision aid methodology to implement sustainable development principles within an Organization. European Journal of Operational Research, 224(3), 603–613.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Norese, M. F. (2009). A multi-criteria decision aiding system to support monitoring in a public administration. International Journal of Decision Support System Technology, 1(4), 59–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Norese, M. F. (2010). How to support decisions and guarantee robustness in Multi Criteria Decision Aid when the preference system is not “accessible”. In C. Zopounidis, M. Doumpos, N. F. Matsatsinis, & E. Grigoroudis (Eds.), Multiple criteria decision aiding (pp. 1–16). New York: Nova Science Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Norese, M. F., & Torta, V. (2014). A decision support system in order to facilitate new financing actions in the public sector. Territorio Italia, 2, 85–100.

    Google Scholar 

  • Norese, M. F., & Salassa, F. (2014). Structuring fragmented knowledge: A case study. Knowledge Management Research & Practice, 12(4), 454–463.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Norese, M. F. (2016a). A model-based process to improve robustness in multi criteria decision aiding interventions. Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis, 23(5–6), 183–196.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Norese, M. F. (2016b). Decision aid in public administration: From evidence-based decision making to organizational learning. In C. Zopounidis & M. Doumpos (Eds.), Multiple criteria decision making: Applications in management and engineering (pp. 1–29). Heidelberg: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Norese, M. F., Mustafa, A., & Scarelli A. (2016). New frontiers for MCDA: From several indicators to structured models and decision aid processes. Newsletter of the European Working Group “Multiple Criteria Decision Aiding”, 3(34), Fall 2016, 1–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenhead, J., & Mingers, J. (Eds.). (2001). Rational analysis for a problematic world revisited: Problem structuring methods for complexity, uncertainty and conflict. Chichester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roy, B. (1990). The outranking approach and the foundations of ELECTRE methods, In: C. A. Bana e Costa (Ed.), Readings in multiple criteria decision aid (pp. 155–184). Heidelberg: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roy, B. (1996). Multicriteria methodology for decision aiding. Dordrecht: Kluwer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Roy, B., & Bertier, P. (1973). La methode ELECTRE II—une application au media-planning. In M. Ross (Ed.), OR’72 (pp. 291–302). Amsterdam: North-Holland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roy, B., & Bouyssou, D. (1993). Aide multicritère à la décision: mèthodes et cas. Collection Gestion, Paris: Economica.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsoukias, A., Montibeller, G., Lucertini, G., & Belton, V. (2013). Policy analytics: An agenda for research and practice. EURO Journal Decision Processes, 1, 115–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yu, W. (1992). ELECTRE TRI: Aspects mèthodologiques et manuel d’utilization. Document du LAMSADE n°74 LAMSADE Université Paris-Dauphine.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to M. F. Norese .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Norese, M.F., Barbiero, F., Corazza, L., Sacco, L. (2019). The Monitoring of Social Innovation Projects: An Integrated Approach. In: Doumpos, M., Figueira, J., Greco, S., Zopounidis, C. (eds) New Perspectives in Multiple Criteria Decision Making. Multiple Criteria Decision Making. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-11482-4_13

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics