IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i16p8790-d609504.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Promotion of Social Innovation through Fab Labs. The Case of ProteinLab UTEM in Chile

Author

Listed:
  • Macarena Valenzuela-Zubiaur

    (Foresight and Technological Innovation Program, ProteinLab UTEM, Metropolitan Technological University (UTEM), Santiago P.O. Box 7800003, Chile)

  • Héctor Torres-Bustos

    (Foresight and Technological Innovation Program, ProteinLab UTEM, Metropolitan Technological University (UTEM), Santiago P.O. Box 7800003, Chile)

  • Mónica Arroyo-Vázquez

    (Project Management, Innovation and Sustainability Research Center (PRINS), Universitat Politècnica de València, 46022 Valencia, Spain)

  • Pablo Ferrer-Gisbert

    (Project Management, Innovation and Sustainability Research Center (PRINS), Universitat Politècnica de València, 46022 Valencia, Spain)

Abstract

Fab Labs as manufacturing laboratories that stimulate innovation and collaboration are nowadays proliferating within universities. Given the new social challenges, framed within the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG), we formulate the following research question: Are Fab Labs an effective tool for the promotion of social innovation from universities? To answer this question, a mixed analysis has been carried out focusing on the case of ProteinLab UTEM. The approach aims to generate a model for the promotion of social innovation from universities through Fab Labs, linking the quadruple helix actors. The objective of this model is to show how Fab Labs can become an effective instrument to promote social innovation from universities. The contribution of this article lies in linking Fab Labs with social innovation through the university’s third mission. Our approach considers Fab Labs as an instrument for the development of social innovations within the university, which contribute, through the third mission, to the social and sustainable development of its environment. As a result of this research, a model is presented for the development of social innovation from universities through Fab Labs. Our research concludes that Fab Labs are an effective instrument for the promotion of social innovation from universities.

Suggested Citation

  • Macarena Valenzuela-Zubiaur & Héctor Torres-Bustos & Mónica Arroyo-Vázquez & Pablo Ferrer-Gisbert, 2021. "Promotion of Social Innovation through Fab Labs. The Case of ProteinLab UTEM in Chile," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-19, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:16:p:8790-:d:609504
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/16/8790/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/16/8790/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Luís Farinha & João Renato Sebastião & Carlos Sampaio & João Lopes, 2020. "Social innovation and social entrepreneurship: discovering origins, exploring current and future trends," International Review on Public and Nonprofit Marketing, Springer;International Association of Public and Non-Profit Marketing, vol. 17(1), pages 77-96, March.
    2. Bryan Campbell, 2010. "Environment And Sustainable Development," CIRANO Papers 2010n-04speciala, CIRANO.
    3. Maravilhas, Sérgio & Martins, Joberto, 2019. "Strategic knowledge management a digital environment: Tacit and explicit knowledge in Fab Labs," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 353-359.
    4. Andrea Vargiu, 2014. "Indicators for the Evaluation of Public Engagement of Higher Education Institutions," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 5(3), pages 562-584, September.
    5. Apoorva Mandavilli, 2006. "Make anything, anywhere," Nature, Nature, vol. 442(7105), pages 862-864, August.
    6. Elias G. Carayannis & David F.J. Campbell, 2010. "Triple Helix, Quadruple Helix and Quintuple Helix and How Do Knowledge, Innovation and the Environment Relate To Each Other? : A Proposed Framework for a Trans-disciplinary Analysis of Sustainable Dev," International Journal of Social Ecology and Sustainable Development (IJSESD), IGI Global, vol. 1(1), pages 41-69, January.
    7. Jeremy Millard & Marie N. Sorivelle & Sarah Deljanin & Elisabeth Unterfrauner & Christian Voigt, 2018. "Is the Maker Movement Contributing to Sustainability?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-29, June.
    8. Loet Leydesdorff, 2012. "The Triple Helix, Quadruple Helix, …, and an N-Tuple of Helices: Explanatory Models for Analyzing the Knowledge-Based Economy?," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 3(1), pages 25-35, March.
    9. Maureen McKelvey & Olof Zaring, 2018. "Co-delivery of social innovations: exploring the university’s role in academic engagement with society," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(6), pages 594-611, July.
    10. Judith Terstriep & Dieter Rehfeld & Maria Kleverbeck, 2020. "Favourable social innovation ecosystem(s)? – An explorative approach," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 28(5), pages 881-905, July.
    11. M. Teresa Anguera & Angel Blanco-Villaseñor & José Luis Losada & Pedro Sánchez-Algarra & Anthony J. Onwuegbuzie, 2018. "Revisiting the difference between mixed methods and multimethods: Is it all in the name?," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 52(6), pages 2757-2770, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Mauro Rodriguez-Marin & José Manuel Saiz-Alvarez & Lizette Huezo-Ponce, 2022. "A Bibliometric Analysis on Pay-per-Click as an Instrument for Digital Entrepreneurship Management Using VOSviewer and SCOPUS Data Analysis Tools," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-14, December.
    2. Ivan Paunović & Cathleen Müller & Klaus Deimel, 2022. "Building a Culture of Entrepreneurial Initiative in Rural Regions Based on Sustainable Development Goals: A Case Study of University of Applied Sciences–Municipality Innovation Partnership," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-19, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Durán-Romero, Gemma & López, Ana M. & Beliaeva, Tatiana & Ferasso, Marcos & Garonne, Christophe & Jones, Paul, 2020. "Bridging the gap between circular economy and climate change mitigation policies through eco-innovations and Quintuple Helix Model," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 160(C).
    2. Xiaoran Zheng & Yuzhuo Cai, 2022. "Transforming Innovation Systems into Innovation Ecosystems: The Role of Public Policy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-26, June.
    3. Elias G. Carayannis & David F. J. Campbell, 2021. "Democracy of Climate and Climate for Democracy: the Evolution of Quadruple and Quintuple Helix Innovation Systems," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 12(4), pages 2050-2082, December.
    4. Loet Leydesdorff & Han Woo Park & Balazs Lengyel, 2014. "A routine for measuring synergy in university–industry–government relations: mutual information as a Triple-Helix and Quadruple-Helix indicator," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 99(1), pages 27-35, April.
    5. Zafeirios Thomakis & Irene Daskalopoulou, 2022. "Entrepreneurial Views and Rural Entrepreneurial Potential: Evidence from Greece," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 13(2), pages 1611-1634, June.
    6. Farshad Momeni & Ali Arab Mazar Yazdi & Seyed Mohammad Sajjad Najafi, 2019. "Changing economic systems and institutional dimensions of the Triple Helix model," Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, Springer, vol. 8(1), pages 1-12, December.
    7. Noriko Yoda & Kenichi Kuwashima, 2020. "Triple Helix of University–Industry–Government Relations in Japan: Transitions of Collaborations and Interactions," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 11(3), pages 1120-1144, September.
    8. Yong Kyu Lew & Jeong‐Yang Park, 2021. "The evolution of N‐helix of the regional innovation system: Implications for sustainability," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(2), pages 453-464, March.
    9. Elias G. Carayannis & David F. J. Campbell & Evangelos Grigoroudis, 2022. "Helix Trilogy: the Triple, Quadruple, and Quintuple Innovation Helices from a Theory, Policy, and Practice Set of Perspectives," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 13(3), pages 2272-2301, September.
    10. Bellandi, Marco & Donati, Letizia & Cataneo, Alessandra, 2021. "Social innovation governance and the role of universities: Cases of quadruple helix partnerships in Italy," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 164(C).
    11. Irena Lacka & Lukasz Brzezicki, 2021. "The Efficiency and Productivity Evaluation of National Innovation Systems in Europe," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(Special 3), pages 471-496.
    12. Elias Carayannis & Luc Hens & Polyxeni Nicolopoulou-Stamati, 2017. "TRANS-DISCIPLINARITY AND GROWTH: Nature and Characteristics of Trans-disciplinary Training Programs on the Human-Environment Interphase," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 8(1), pages 1-22, March.
    13. Elias Carayannis & Evangelos Grigoroudis, 2016. "Quadruple Innovation Helix and Smart Specialization: Knowledge Production and National Competitiveness," Foresight and STI Governance (Foresight-Russia till No. 3/2015), National Research University Higher School of Economics, vol. 10(1), pages 31-42.
    14. Shantha Indrajith Hikkaduwa Liyanage & Fulu Godfrey Netswera, 2022. "Greening Universities with Mode 3 and Quintuple Helix Model of Innovation–Production of Knowledge and Innovation in Knowledge-Based Economy, Botswana," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 13(2), pages 1126-1156, June.
    15. Maria Manuela Natário & João Pedro Couto & Ascensão Maria Braga & Teresa Maria Tiago, 2011. "Dynamics of innovation in European regions," ERSA conference papers ersa11p466, European Regional Science Association.
    16. Markus Erbach, 2016. "Facilitating Targeted Open Innovation by Applying Pragmatic Identity Matching," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 7(1), pages 104-125, March.
    17. Marcin Baron, 2021. "Open Innovation Capacity of the Polish Universities," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 12(1), pages 73-95, March.
    18. Jari Kolehmainen & Joe Irvine & Linda Stewart & Zoltan Karacsonyi & Tünde Szabó & Juha Alarinta & Anders Norberg, 2016. "Quadruple Helix, Innovation and the Knowledge-Based Development: Lessons from Remote, Rural and Less-Favoured Regions," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 7(1), pages 23-42, March.
    19. Inga Ivanova, 2014. "Quadruple Helix Systems and Symmetry: a Step Towards Helix Innovation System Classification," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 5(2), pages 357-369, June.
    20. Elias Carayannis & David Campbell, 2011. "Open Innovation Diplomacy and a 21st Century Fractal Research, Education and Innovation (FREIE) Ecosystem: Building on the Quadruple and Quintuple Helix Innovation Concepts and the “Mode 3” Knowledge ," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 2(3), pages 327-372, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:16:p:8790-:d:609504. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.