Fall 2021 Programme

Politics of co-creation research seminar (PYAM-9142, 5 study credits)

This is a research seminar under the Doctoral programme in political, societal and regional (PYAM) at the University of Helsinki. The seminar is open to researchers, PhD and master’s students as well as other experts interested in the related issues to co-creation and its introduction as a new type of paradigm in knowledge production, politics and innovation.

Contact: Bokyong (Bo) Shin – bokyong.shin(at)helsinki.fi

Autumn 2021 theme: Governance, co-creation and collaboration

Since the 2000s, we have witnessed the upsurge of online collaboration as digital technologies develop. People collaborate online for collective knowledge (e.g., Wikipedia), fund-raising (e.g., Kickstarter), sharing economy (e.g., Uber and Airbnb), participatory budgeting (e.g., OmaStadi), open hearing (e.g., Tell your stock), information sharing/discussion (e.g., Twitter and Reddit), and so on. While digital platforms open new spaces for collaboration between people from different regions, the dark side has emerged in fake news, right-wing populism, cyberbullying, and digital exclusion that polarises our community. The new logics of collaborating in the digital era calls for responses and solutions from academic research in studying these new hybrid environments.

Against this challenge, the Politics of Co-creation seminar invites students and scholars to share their ideas, works, and use-cases of collaboration in the digital era. The seminar will focus on diverse methods and frameworks of online and (or) offline collaboration in the real world. The form of the presentation is free, but we encourage presenters to share the following points:

  • Definition and operationalisation of collaboration
  • Problem orientation and research questions
  • Analytical framework
  • Data collection and methods
  • Summary of preliminary or expected study results

Seminar format

The participants will present their works using PowerPoint presentation (30-45 minutes). PhD students who participate in the course will take a discussant role after the presentation (10 minutes). Discussions are then open to all participants.

Slots for the Autumn 2021 seminar

_

10.9. 13.15–14.45

Doctoral student Natalia Villaman

Facilitation as a means for making politics: Pathways towards a reconfiguration of practice

Natalia belongs to the Doctoral Programme in Social Sciences and focuses on issues of power exertion linked to facilitation and political participation. In this talk, she will be introducing her PhD topic, in which she dives into facilitation and its potential within public governance and the creation of political opportunities.

In her MA thesis work (linked below), Natalia found an interest towards the uses and misuses of facilitation, and the underlying notions of power and politics linked to it. Deriving from configurative disciplines such as design and management, facilitation holds the potential to be both a hegemonic and counter-hegemonic practice, depending on its deployment in participatory instances.

Moving in a multidisciplinary continent between design, mediation, and social sciences, she problematizes facilitation’s claim to be neutral, leading to naive or manipulative misuses of practice (Villaman, 2020), depoliticizing facilitation by minimizing it to a mere series of methods and tools. Hypothesizing that facilitation beholds the potential to be a key component in public governance by mediating clashes of ambition and influence in the making of politics, Natalia will reconceptualize facilitation as a politicized practice, able to take active part in mediations of struggles for power, and focusing on the creation of political opportunities.

Reference: Villaman, Natalia (2020) Fostering resistance: Acknowledging notions of power exertion and politics in design facilitation. Master Thesis. Aalto University.

Discussants:
Lari Karreinen, solution-focused facilitator, Part Ltd
Susanna Vase, PhD candidate, University of Helsinki

Zoom link: https://helsinki.zoom.us/j/69254518332
Presentation file: Facilitation as a means for making politics

_

1.10. 13.15–14.45

Doctoral student Bokyong Shin

Mock doctoral thesis defence: ”Social network analysis for communicative planning research”

Bokyong practices for his upcoming public defence (1 November 2021), with the help of three opponents and the audience. In the thesis, Bokyong examined the applicability of social network analysis in the planning literature, highlighting its contribution in identifying a theoretical bridge (social capital and deliberation) and proposing new network measures and models. In the mock defence, Bokyong exercises a 20-minute Lectio, then answers questions from three opponents. After that, Bokyong also answers questions from the audience.

Opponents:
Mikko Rask, Adjunct Professor, University of Helsinki
Arho Toikka, University lecturer, University of Helsinki
Pekka Tuominen, Postdoctoral researcher, University of Helsinki

Zoom link: https://helsinki.zoom.us/j/67615939040
Manuscript: It will be published later.

_

29.10. 13.15–14.45

Associate professor Hidenori Nakamura, Toyama Prefectural University

”Citizen Dialogue as Collaborative Environmental Governance: An Exploratory Case Study in Post- Fukushima Japan”

I report on an exploratory case study to help facilitate a culture of dialogue in Japan, utilizing part of the method of, and following the philosophy of, Open Dialogue, developed by mental health professionals and researchers in Finland. There is an emphasis on proposing methods for polyphonic dialogue among citizens, and between citizens and experts, to effectively manage the environment. I argue that a culture of dialogue is essential to pluralistic participatory environmental governance. A random sampling-based citizen dialogue—involving experts and citizens—regarding radioactive waste disposal was held in Japanese cities. Three proposed methods —-politeness-based facilitation dialogue, evidence-based and position-explicit presentations by experts with differing views and experts reflecting in tandem with citizens engaged in dialogue—- might lead to enhanced positive attitudes toward dialogue with others holding different views, as well as better internal self-deliberation. Attitudes for dialogue were measured empirically. The current research suggests that explicit treatment of pluralistic positions and views among citizens and experts would be a key factor for quality social learning and resilience for uncertainty. The hypothetical findings imply the applicability and significance of Open Dialogue in the public policy process.

I will also explain the research ideas conducted in Finland as an AF-JSPS postdoctoral fellow at the University of Helsinki.

Zoom link: https://helsinki.zoom.us/j/62036383895

_

5.11. 13.15–14.45

Doctoral student Susanna Vase

From science policy ideas to infrastructures: Understanding the construction of research funding schemes

Susanna is a PhD candidate studying science policy making and its effects on knowledge production practices. In this talk, she will discuss findings of a case study on the emergence of a Strategic Research funding instrument that was established at the Academy of Finland in 2015 as part of the reform of state research institutes. As science policy is shaped by the policy instruments used, it becomes vital to understand the process of their construction. Strategic research funding schemes are centered around notions of relevance, challenge-orientation, and transdisciplinary collaboration. The presentation will focus on the instrument implementation phase after the decision on founding the instrument was made. Susanna examined how policy objectives were translated into governance by interviewing the policy makers closely involved in developing the instrument. She identified and analyzed three dimensions that importantly shaped how the funding scheme was constructed: anticipatory tailoring, templates and sense-making. She discusses how they structured inclusion and exclusion in terms of council member and project selection, research theme formation, assessment, and formal representations of knowledge production. The results indicate how the translation of policy ideas to infrastructures is historically contingent, does not always respond to intuitive conceptions of what is sought after, and can generate paradoxical outcomes to governance practices, such as the disqualification of experts in evaluation. The findings increase understanding of the work that the designing of policy instruments entails, and the factors that make a difference in the outcome of their construction processes.

Zoom link: https://helsinki.zoom.us/j/68611777964

_

26.11. 13.15–14.45

Doctoral student Veronica Ahonen

”Towards zero carbon – governing emission offsetting in Finnish universities”

_

17.12. 13.15–14.45

Postdoctoral researcher Pekka Tuominen and Postdoctoral researcher Anna Zhelnina

”Citizen participation in Helsinki, New York and St. Petersburg: Top-down and bottom-up initiatives”

Discussant:
Veronica Ahonen, PhD candidate, University of Helsinki
_

Spring 2021 Programme

Politics of Co-Creation seminar (PYAM-9142, 5 study credits)

This is a research seminar under the Doctoral programme in political, societal and regional (PYAM) at the University of Helsinki. The seminar is open to researchers, PhD and master’s students as well as other experts interested in the issues related to co-creation and its introduction as a new type of paradigm in knowledge production, politics and innovation.

The seminar has run, since 2015, by the Politics of co-creation team at the Centre for Consumer Society Research. The idea of the seminar is to i) provide a multidisciplinary platform for the discussion and critical reflection on related phenoma, ii) introduce on-going and emerging research projects, and iii) link researchers with users of knowledge, thus supporting societal relevance and value to research based knowledge. During spring 2021, the seminar will continue to be arranged online due to Covid-19 restrictions. In case you want to formally complete the course, you should enroll to it in Weboodi. A presentation and active participation are requested to acquire 5 study credits. Otherwise, you are welcome to participate and listen to the presentations that will take place in Zoom.

The seminar will continue to build on the “collective intelligence” theme. Collective intelligence refers to processes and capacities through which humans can interact with each other, many times facilitated by machines and the Internet, resulting in better quality of decisions or knowledge than would be possible to achieve by any individual actor. This special theme will feed into, and benefit from the NordForsk funded project COLDIGIT “Collective Intelligence through Digital Tools” which started in November 2020. In addition to this special theme, other research contributions to the theme “politics of co-creation” are welcome, and you can approach any of the organizers, Mikko Rask, Nina Kahma and Titiana Ertiö, to ask for an opportunity to either participate or give a talk.

Programme for Spring 2021

April 23 at 13:15 – 14:45 Dr. Michele Cantarella (University of Helsinki): Impact evaluation of startup innovation policies: evidence from a natural experiment

Zoom venue:
https://helsinki.zoom.us/j/67203519846?pwd=aGZRaStPcmkrK09kMDRTVlp4dzRSQT09

Many countries around the world have developed policy packages aimed at supporting innovation among young firms. Assessing the effectiveness of such policies is, however, rather difficult: self-selection issues usually prevent the researcher from establishing whether a firm would have been equally successful without the aid of these initiatives. In Italy, the Startup Act came into force in December 2012, and set up a scheme of benefits which young firms could access by registering as ”innovative startup” on a voluntary basis, as long as certain pre-requisites were met.

In this paper, we look at a natural experiment from the Italian region of Trentino Alto-Adige/Südtirol to find quasi-experimental evidence on the effect of startup policies on firm performance. We find that informational asymmetries arising from assignment into different language groups affects firm registration as an innovative startup conditional on the etymological origins of the surname of the CEO. Firms whose CEOs have a surname of German origin are more likely not to register as startups, while no differences in terms of outcomes between with firms with Italian-named CEOs are to be noted during the years preceding the introduction of the policy. We exploit these asymmetries as an exogenous source of access to the benefit scheme. Our findings suggest that acquiring innovative startup status increases R&D expenses and facilitates access to loans from shareholders, but that the effects on employment, revenues and access to bank credit are null.

 

Previous presentations

5th of March at 13:15 – 14:45 Dr. Salvatore Ruggiero (UH): Current research interests

Zoom venue: https://helsinki.zoom.us/j/68166129175?pwd=OFdZbHUwOVJXOGVrZWMyYmRZOVhYUT09

Dr. Salvatore Ruggiero has recently joined the Centre for Consumer Society Research as a post-doctoral researcher. Previously he worked as a postdoctoral researcher at Aalto University where he conducted research on business model innovation processes in organizations operating at the intersection of the ICT and energy sectors. In addition, he also investigated the role of community energy initiatives in diffusing grassroots innovations and promoting cultural change in sustainability transitions. Currently, Salvatore is still partially affiliated to Aalto University as he leads the D.Game project. This is a project funded by EIT Climate-KIC focusing on sustainable education and co-creation processes to promote collaboration between secondary schools, academia, businesses and civil society sector in local sustainability projects. In the near future, Salvatore plans to conduct research in the following two research areas:

(i) civil society organizations (CSOs) and legitimacy of environmental governance processes — to better understand when the participation of CSOs has positive, negative, or even irrelevant implications for large processes of societal transformation towards sustainability

(ii) young people and sustainability education — explore the role of new forms of
environmental governance based on the active participation of children/young people in local decision making processes related to the transition towards a more sustainable future

 

12th of February at 13:15 – 14:45

Dr. Maija Jäske (Åbo Akademi): Two-way street: Involving politicians in a deliberative mini-public

Co-creation seminar_Maija Jäske_12022021

Abstract

Democracy scholars are currently trying to come up with models for connecting deliberative mini-publics with the institutions of electoral democracy. One proposed model is involving elected representatives in mini-public deliberations with lay citizens. It has been argued that the involvement of politicians may increase the commitment among politicians and boost the impact of mini-publics.

We designed a deliberative mini-public engaging politicians in half of the small groups. The mini-public took place in a Finnish city, Turku/Åbo, and involved 171 citizens and 21 local councillors. The participants deliberated on three expert scenarios for the future traffic arrangements in the city. We examine how councillors’ participation influenced deliberations. We also study councillors’ experiences of deliberation and their attitudes toward direct public engagement in general. The study takes a mixed-methods approach using interviews of 11 councillors who participated in the mini-public, councillors’ (N=17) and citizens’ answers to a post deliberation survey (N=171).

The results indicate that the involvement of councillors did not have a negative impact on deliberations. The mini-public provided councillors with new ways to listen and understand the needs and concerns of ordinary citizens. Furthermore, it increased councillors’ understanding and appreciation of citizens’ local knowledge and competence. The councillors felt positive about using mini-publics in the context of democratic decision-making.

22nd of January  at 13:15 – 14:45

Dr. Nina Kahma (UH): Dark Patterns in the Design of Challenge Competitions 

University-based science competitions are a recent example of orchestrated effort binding together researchers, universities, private corporations and societal stakeholders in attempts to develop solutions for societal problems as well as to develop new innovations – and from the researchers’ point of view to disseminate research knowledge to the wider publics. In her presentation that is linked to an on-going PhD study at Aalto University,Kahma will depict the adverse effects of participatory and multi-stakeholder processes in university-based challenge competitions using interview data from interviews with participants, organisers and other stakeholders who have been involved in recent challenge competitions. Leaving from the viewpoint of design ethics in challenge competition design, the presentation will proceed to the direction of dark patterns identified as situations where differences between the actors involved in challenge competitions (in terms of values and expectations, power and resources) become visible. The preliminary results from the study reveal both dark patterns related to the everyday inequalities in the academic world as well as imbalances between the participants and the organisers involved. It is to be questioned, whether positive user experience for all parties involved can be ensured? And which ones of the identified dark patterns can be addressed by design of an individual competition, and which ones extend beyond them.

 

 

Fall 2020 programme

Politics of Co-Creation seminar (PYAM-9142, 5 study credits)

This is a research seminar under the Doctoral programme in political, societal and regional (PYAM) at the University of Helsinki. The seminar is open to researchers, PhD and master’s students as well as other experts interested in the issues related to co-creation and its introduction as a new type of paradigm in knowledge production, politics and innovation.

The seminar has run, since 2015, by the Politics of co-creation team at the Centre for Consumer Society Research. The idea of the seminar is to i) provide a multidisciplinary platform for the discussion and critical reflection on related phenoma, ii) introduce on-going and emerging research projects, and iii) link researchers with users of knowledge, thus supporting societal relevance and value to research based knowledge. In the fall 2020 the seminar will be arranged on-line, due to Covid-19 restrictions. In case you want to formally complete the course, you should enroll to it in Weboodi. A presentation and active participation are requested to acquire 5 study credits. Otherwise, you are welcome to participate and listen to the presentations that you will find at Zoom.

There is a special theme in the fall, 2020, which is “collective intelligence”. Collective intelligence refers to processes and capacities through which humans can interact with each other, many times facilitated by machines and the Internet, resulting in better quality of decisions or knowledge than would be possible to achieve by any individual actor. This special theme will feed into, and benefit from the NordForsk funded project COLDIGIT “Collective Intelligence through Digital Tools” which will start in November 2020. In addition to this special theme, other research contributions to the theme “politics of co-creation” are welcome, and you can approach any of the organizers, Mikko Rask, Nina Kahma and Titiana Ertiö, to ask for an opportunity to either participate or give a talk.

Programme for fall 2020

September, 4  at 13.15-14.45
Mikko Rask and Titiana Ertiö (UH): Co-creation team fall 2020 research update and reflections on the NESTA’s Collective Intelligence Playbook. In the first meeting of the seminar we will have an upadate on on-going and soon starting research projects plus a presentation and discussion on the Collective Intelligence Playbook: What is meant by collective intelligence? How can it be facilitated? How could you mobilize collective intelligence to support your own research?
Resource: https://media.nesta.org.uk/documents/Nesta_Playbook_001_Web.pdfJoin

Venue: Zoom Meeting:
https://helsinki.zoom.us/j/64611328726
Meeting ID: 646 1132 8726

September 25 at 13.15-14.45
Doctoral student Bokyong Shin (UH): Citizen participation as social capital and big data. Bokyong studies deliberation and social capital in the context of citizen participation. As recent participatory practices generate new forms of empirical data (i.e., network data and big data), his Doctoral thesis aims to apply new methods (i.e., statistical network models and topic modeling) for utilizing these data and assessing democratic processes. In this presentation, he will overview his thesis and ask audiences for critical comments or practical tips. It will help him to draft the introduction of a thesis.

Venue: Zoom meeting:
https://helsinki.zoom.us/j/62024574844
Meeting ID: 620 2457 4844

Presentation slides Bokyong_250920_slides

October 16 at 13.15-14.45
Doctoral student Veronica Ahonen (UH): Trends and strategies of sustainable mobility in Finnish Universities. Veronica is from the Department of Geosciences and Geography. She studies flight emissions in an organizational context. Universities play a dual role in climate change, actively offering climate solutions, but simultaneously producing substantial emissions through academic travel, in a phenomena known as the ”academic paradox.” This presentation delves into sustainable mobility in 14 Finnish universities, aiming to understand the current strategies, trends and pathways of the future. Is emission offsetting a solution, or should organizations aim for a more holistic approach? Could co-creation help draft more sustainable university strategies for academic mobility?

Venue: Zoom meeting

https://helsinki.zoom.us/j/65989156647
Meeting ID: 659 8915 6647

Postponed! October 30 at 13.15-14.45

Dr. Nina Kahma (UH): Dark Patterns in the Design of Challenge Competitions. University-based science competitions are a recent example of orchestrated effort binding together researchers, universities, private corporations and societal stakeholders in attempts to develop solutions for societal problems as well as to develop new innovations – and from the researchers’ point of view to disseminate research knowledge to the wider publics. In her presentation that is linked to an on-going PhD study at Aalto University,Kahma will depict the adverse effects of participatory and multi-stakeholder processes in university-based challenge competitions using interview data from interviews with participants, organisers and other stakeholders who have been involved in recent challenge competitions. Leaving from the viewpoint of design ethics in challenge competition design, the presentation will proceed to the direction of dark patterns identified as situations where differences between the actors involved in challenge competitions (in terms of values and expectations, power and resources) become visible. The preliminary results from the study reveal both dark patterns related to the everyday inequalities in the academic world as well as imbalances between the participants and the organisers involved. It is to be questioned, whetherpositive user experience for all parties involved can be ensured? And which ones of the identified dark patterns can be addressed by design of an individual competition, and which ones extend beyond them.

November 20 at 13.15-14.45
Dr. Jaakko Kuosmanen (Finnish Academy of Science and Letters) and Dr. Mikko Rask (UH): Exploring collective intelligence and understanding its role in the development of the public sector Dr. Kuosmanen will discuss the demand of collective intelligence in the Finnish public sector development and Dr. Rask will present the newly started COLDIGIT (Collective Intelligence through Digital Tools) project. The audience is welcome to propose issues and questions that should be included in the research agenda of this major project lasting for the next three years.

December 11 at 13.15-15.15 NB: Super long session on participatory budgeting!
MA student Anniina Riikonen (UH): Does participatory budgeting promote youth political participation? This presentation will examine the possible effects of Helsinki’s participatory budgeting (OmaStadi) on youth political participation. Anniina Riikonen is currently writing her master’s thesis on the topic.
MA student Karim Pelkonen (UH): Environmental governance through participatory budgeting: case Helsinki
MA student Erik Nyroos (UH): Ecological ideas in Finnish participatory budgeting processes
MA student Andreas Sode (Aalto): OmaStadi Budgeting Game – An evaluation framework for working towards more inclusive participation through design games

Venue: Zoom Meeting
https://helsinki.zoom.us/j/69358679188

Meeting ID: 693 5867 9188

The emerging fourth sector & Trade union organizing and changing civic activism in the early 2000s

Understanding the Emerging Fourth Sector and Its Governance Implications

A literature review by Mikko Rask

Abstract: The fourth sector has traditionally been said to include families, households, neighbours, and friends; however, recently competing definitions have begun to emerge. Three different strands can be observed in the fourth-sector literature. The first strand centres on the notion of one-to-one aid. The second strand of the fourth-sector literature centres on self-organizing civic activism. The third strand focuses on hybrid organizations. The main purpose of this paper is to devise a ‘working model’ of fourth-sector involvement. The model will include a) a definition of the fourth sector that will acknowledge the different academic traditions involved with the fourth-sector phenomenon, b) an interpretation of the main characteristics and driving forces of the phenomenon, and c) identification of the main governance issues and challenges emerging around fourth-sector involvement. Using a general activity theoretical framework as a heuristic tool focusing attention on the actors, tools, objectives, and outcomes of any form of activity, four criteria for the definition of the fourth sector are proposed.

MR_Fourth Sector

*

Trade union organizing and changing civic activism in the early 2000s

Anna Malinen will present the research plan of the PhD dissertation

Abstract: The latest decades have seen the emergence of individual and collective forms of action that do not easily conform to top-down approaches or the current, established idea of the third sector – if defined as an organization-dominated sphere (as is the case in Finland). There is a growing literature on the theme of a fourth sector, which has also been defined as actors and activities “outside of organizations”.

These developments pose a real challenge to traditional organizations, among them trade unions. In the upcoming research project, the main idea is to apply the evolving concept of the fourth sector to a Finnish trade union context. The project is taken up against a background of falling trade union membership levels in Finland as well as internationally. There is a need to examine to what extent trade unions of today are perceived as relevant actors for channeling people’s concerns, and what kind of  changes might be needed in the relation between unions and their (potential) membership.

The more specific focus will be on current trade union efforts to renew the ways in which members are recruited and invited to participate at local and workplace levels. The employment of this so-called organizing model has been spreading in Finnish trade unions during the last decade. Its aim is to create a “snowflake” structure of trade union activism networks.

The research will be set within the subject of Political history. An historical perspective will be useful, as trade unions have a well-established position in Finnish society. From a third/fourth sector perspective, they can be characterized as both rooted in a very traditional form of social movement and “bureaucracy-heavy” organizations (and, as such firmly located within the scope of the third sector). The current forms of organizing are also perceived as both revolutionizing and a “return-to-basics” way of conducting trade union work, a divide which further necessitates a historical understanding.

Of particular interest are the meanings that trade union organizers and decision makers on the one hand, and union members on the other hand, give to the organizing efforts of their unions. To achieve a fourth sector/organizing comparison, attention will be given to the types of actor and action that emerge from fourth sector theory vs. experiences and accounts concerning organizing efforts.

AM 28.2.2020_Politics of co-creation

Welcome!

Time: Friday, 28.2.2020 at 13:15-14:45, Metsätalo (Unioninkatu 40) Sali 29

Utopian, dystopian and realist perspectives on the models of participatory budgeting

Participatory budgeting (PB) has spread throughout world in recent years. Finnish municipalities are also in a process of introducing this method among their tool of participatory planning and decision making. However, there is much room for thinking about alternative designs, with different implications for practice. In this presentation Mikko Rask will first distinguish between six main models as implicitly introduced in the Finnish context of PB, and then discuss some major issues related to the utopian, dystopian and realist evaluations of this approach: How can it be regarded as a tool for making cities more democratic and enhancing the quality of life of their citizens; how it can be regarded as an instrument of power that just cements existing structures of inequalities; or how it can be selectively and flexibly used an instrument of policy making, citizen participation, and even that of knowledge co-creation. The talk will be based on recent evaluation studies and engagement with several municipalities in Finland. The seminar will be highly reflective and calling for discussions with experts and researchers interested in this topic.

Time: Friday, 7.2.2020 at 13:15-14:45, Metsätalo (Unioninkatu 40) Sali 29

Presentation slides Utopian&dystopian&realist

Seminar 17.1.2020: Effect of the city’s intervention on online public engagement: A case study of participatory budgeting using stochastic actor-oriented models

Despite the burgeoning literature on online deliberation, few studies have empirically examined the effectiveness of policy design and behavior intervention. Most previous studies tend to focus on new technology and evaluate the quality of deliberation and opinion change based on interviews, surveys, and experiments. However, the author argues that the role of governments is still crucial regardless of technology, and attention needs to be paid to research how citizens actually engage in online deliberative settings. Against the backdrop, the author will present preliminary results of a case study that aims to analyze the effect of interventions on online engagement. The analysis selected a case of Omastadi, a pilot participatory budgeting project initiated by the City of Helsinki that used a digital platform in which citizens proposed and developed ideas into feasible plans in collaboration with citizens and experts. The raw data were collected by parsing the web pages of all proposals and plans, then reconstructed into longitudinal network data. The relationship between interventions and significant change of engagement will be analyzed through stochastic actor-oriented models.

Time: Friday, 17.1.2020 at 13:15-14:45, Metsätalo (Unioninkatu 40) Sali 29

The presenter Bokyong (Bo) Shin is a PhD student in Urban Studies, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Helsinki. He is interested in studying governance arrangements, where multiple stakeholders, who have different interests, resources, and power are incorporated into collective decision-making processes. Based on the communicative planning theory and social capital theory, he attempts to use statistical network models and topic modeling to investigate how actors build collective capacity and engage in deliberation under specific institutional settings.

Bokyong is a member of the Helsinki School of Critical Urban Studies

Presentation.17.01.20

Politics of Co-creation Seminar – Yhteisluomisen politiikat seminaari

Next Friday, Master’s student Pauli Saloranta (University of Helsinki) and MA Andreas Sobe (Aalto University, School of Arts, Design and Architecture) will discuss participatory budgeting in Helsinki with discussants Post-doc researcher Titi Ertiö and Adjunct Professor Mikko Rask (University of Helsinki/ KTK). Pauli’s presentation will be held in Finnish with a preliminary title: ”Miksi budjetoidaan? Helsingin osallistuvan budjetoinnin tarkoitus ja tehtävä”. Andreas’ presentation is in English with the title ”Assessing design in a governmental organisation – A study on the impact of OmaStadi’s participatory budgeting design game on the City of Helsinki.”

Time: 3.5.2019, 13:15-14:45

Place: Unioninkatu 37, hall 1055

 

 

Lue loppuun

Yhteisluominen lainvalmistelussa 18.5.2018

Tutkimustiedon hyödyntäminen päätöksenteossa tunnistetaan yleensä yhdeksi onnistuneen ja laadukkaan päätöksenteon kriteeriksi. Aiemman lainvalmistelukirjallisuuden mukaan on kuitenkin havaittu, että tutkimustiedon merkitys lainvalmistelussa on puutteellista. Lainvalmistelulle asetettujen ihanteiden toteutumista estävinä seikkoina mainitaan usein vähäiset resurssit ja kiire sekä voimakas poliittinen ohjaus. Vähemmälle huomiolle on kenties jäänyt vaikutusarviointien politiikka-arviointien ja vaikutusten rajaaminen. Muun muassa edellä mainittuja näkökulmia seminaarissa avaa Suomen ympäristökeskuksen erikoistutkija Petrus Kautto, jolla on monipuolinen kokemus säädösten vaikutusten arvioinnista, politiikka-arvioinnin menetelmien kehittämisestä ja tiedon käytön tutkimuksesta.

Esityksessä tekninen avustaja Noora Alasuutari Kriminologian ja oikeuspolitiikan instituutista esittelee lisäksi vastikään käynnistynyttä hanketta ”Tutkimustiedon hyödyntämisen hyvät käytännöt lainvalmistelussa: kohti parempaa sääntelyä?”, jonka tutkimuskonsortioon sekä Kautto että Alasuutari kuuluvat. Tutkimuksen tavoitteena on tunnistaa, mitkä tekijät tai ongelmat vaikeuttavat tutkimustiedon hyödyntämistä käytännön lainvalmistelutyössä.

Kirjallisuutta

Slant, O., Rantala, K. & Kautto, P. (2014). Vaikuttavaa vaikutusarviointia? Vaikutusarvioinnin merkitys lainvalmisteluprosessissa. Oikeuspoliittisen tutkimuslaitoksen tutkimustiedonantoja 125. Helsinki 2014. Linkki artikkeliin: https://helda.helsinki.fi/bitstream/handle/10138/152506/TTA125_Slant_ym_2014.pdf?sequence=2

Kautto, P. (2009). Nokia as an Environmental Policy Actor: Evolution of Collaborative Corporate Political Activity in a Multinational Company. Journal of Common Market Studies, 47 (1), 103-125. Linkki artikkeliin: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1468-5965.2008.01834.x

Ajankohta: Pe 18.5. klo 13-15

Paikka: Unioninkatu 40 C (Metsätalo/Kuluttajatutkimuskeskus), seminaarihuone C216

Co-creation as a strategy for universities May 4, 2018

Universities are increasingly needed to address global challenges. In particular, the humanities and social sciences have played an important role in anticipating social changes and solving problems alongside traditional technological solutions. These are the starting points and observations in a brand new publication “Co-creation. A Guide to Deepening Collaboration between Universities and Business Companies”.

In this seminar we will hear an introduction on the recent publication from one of its authors, Head of UH research services, Maarit Haataja, with a commentary from University Lecturer Leena Ripatti-Torniainen. The themes to be discussed during the seminar include but are not limited to the following topics:

  • Strategies of co-creation at the UH – what are they?
  • What are the rationales for promoting co-creation in the university context?
  • What are the practical methods and approaches for advancing co-creation and how do they work?

The seminar will take place on Friday, May 4th, at 13-15 o’clock at the Consumer Society Research Centre (Unioninkatu 40, Helsinki), seminar room C216.

Literature

Haataja, M., Hautamäki, A., Holm, E., Pulkkinen, K. ja Suni, T. (2018). Yhteisluominen. Opas yliopiston ja yritysten yhteistyön syventämiseen. Helsingin ylipisto. Toim. Antti Hautamäki.

Pfadenhauer, Michaela (2013). Competence – more than just a buzzword and a provocative term? Toward an internal perspective on situated problem-solving capacity. In Sigrid Blömeke, Olga Zlatkin-Troitschanskaia, Christiane Kuhn & Judith Fege (eds.), Modeling and measuring competences in higher education: Tasks and challenges. Rotterdam: Sense.

 

Yhteisluominen vastuullisen tiedepolitiikan välineenä – ajankohtaisia tutkimusteemoja

20.4.2018

Päätökset tieteen rahoituksesta, sen perusteista, luonteesta ja tavoitteista vaikuttavat niin tiedeyhteisön työhön kuin myös muuhun yhteiskuntaan monitasoisesti. Puhe yhteiskunnallisesta vaikuttavuudesta ja vastuullisuudesta on lisääntynyt tiede- ja innovaatiopolitiikassa ja sitä tavoitellaan yhä useammin erilaisin yhteisluomisen keinoin. Vastuullinen tiede- ja innovaatiopolitiikka (Responsible Research and Innovation) on noussut etenkin EU-tasolla näkyväksi käsitteeksi, jonka kautta pyritään vastuullisempiin ja kestävämpiin kehityskulkuihin niin tutkimuksessa, innovaatioiden kehityksessä ja laajemmin yhteiskunnassa. Yhteisluominen eri toimijoiden välillä on oleellinen aspekti tässä vastuullisuuden tavoitteessa. Siihen liittyy mahdollisuuksien lisäksi monenlaisia haasteita, joista olisi tärkeää käydä laaja-alaista keskustelua.

Tässä seminaarissa Helsingin yliopiston Kuluttajatutkimuskeskuksen yliopistotutkija Mikko Rask kertoo Helsingin yliopiston sosiologian maisteriopiskelijan ja KTK:n harjoittelijan Susanna Vasen kanssa tutkimusteemoista, jotka nousevat vastuullisuuden tavoitteesta ja sen välineenä käytettävästä yhteisluomisesta tiede-ja innovaatiopolitiikassa. Luennolla esitellään ja reflektoidaan muun muassa ”Philosophy of Responsible Innovation”- kurssin teemoja, joista Susanna oli oppimassa tammikuussa Hollannissa ja ”Promoting Societal Engagement in Research and Innovation” konferenssissa, jossa Mikko oli puhumassa helmikuussa.

Keskustelua ohjaavat seuraavat kysymykset:

  • Lisääkö yhteisluominen (co-creation) tiedepolitiikan vastuullisuutta, ja jos lisää, miten?
  • Millä tavoin yhteisluominen voi voimaannuttaa tutkijoita ja muita toimijoita?
  • Mitä haasteita yhteisluominen asettaa vastuulliselle tutkimus- ja innovaatiotoiminnalle?

Kirjallisuus

Van den Hoven, J., G.-J. Lokhorst, and I. Van de Poel 2012. Engineering and the Problem of Moral Overload. Science and Engineering Ethics 18(1): 143-55.

Rask, M, Mačiukaitė-Žvinienė, S, Tauginienė, L, Dikčius, V, Matschoss, K, Aarrevaara, T and d’Andrea, L (2018). Public Participation, Science and Society: Tools for Dynamic and Responsible Governance of Research and Innovation. Routledge, London UK and New York, U.S. Chapter 1.

Rip, A., The past and future of RRI. Life sciences, society and policy 2014, 10

Ajankohta: pe 20. huhtikuuta klo 13-15

Paikka: Unioninkatu 40, C216 (Metsätalo, Kuluttajatutkimuskeskus)