Abstract

The aim of the article.  The aim of the article is identification of essence and features of application of social innovation in the current economic conditions of the Republic of Hungary. In order to realize this goal, it is necessary to solve the following problem: find the essence of social innovation, to develop a methodology of its creation and to determine the algorithm for its implementation. The results of the analysis. The authors of the study allow us to conclude that the traditional focus of innovation (banking, manufacturing, management reform, etc.) not always with the same efficiency are perceived in various regions of the country. In some regions, these innovations do not lead to social improvement, which is a prerequisite necessary for the generation and implementation of separate unit for social innovation. The article substantiates the necessity of social innovation. For example, the functioning of the Centre for social innovation city of Miskolc for the first time developed a scientific and methodical approach to their implementation. As the main structural blocks of this approach, the authors offered the following: a) definition of the relationship of local economic development and social innovation; b) formation of key areas of the social improvements of the region (employment, added value, improved health and social conditions, improvement of infrastructure, development of the settlement); с) the development of social innovation on the basis of regional system engineering knowledge; g) selection of key social innovation based on the innovation matrix, and special techniques; d) develop programs for the practical implementation of innovation social orientation. Research and guidelines proposed in the article, were tested by the authors over the last two years. As a result a General conclusion that the biggest obstacle to social innovation is not lack of resources but lack of ideas and desires from a local and Central managerial elite. Conclusions and perspectives for further researches. The article presents scientific and methodical basesfunctioning of the engineering knowledge base to create a Bank of social innovations in the regions of Hungary. The authors were tested by in 2015-2016. As a result of these actions was sdelany the following conclusions: −     the biggest obstacle to social innovation is not lack of resources, and the lack of ideas and desires of the local and Central authorities; −     for social issues, development and implementation of social innovations are encouraged, first, substantially to raise the role and importance of local and regional government, activity and commitment to increasing local innovation capacity, and second, to increase the economic feasibility of management decisions in the field of social innovation; −     social innovation is encouraged to consider differentially that will lead to greater efficiency in their implementation, since a comprehensive solution will require significant investment and time. Prospects for further research on this topic should refer to the formation of methodological approaches to the identification of needs in social innovation. The authors suggest the extension of these studies to other countries, as well as consideration in terms of social innovation projects for the industry.

Keywords: innovation activity, region, social innovation, innovation potential, knowledge creation, innovation matrix

JEL Classification: D4, D21, L1, M19.

Cite as: Kocziszky G. & VeresnéSomosi, M. (2017). Supporting the creation and installation of regional social innovations with knowledge engineering system. Marketing and Management of Innovations, 1, 126-134. https://doi.org/10.21272/mmi.2017.1-11

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License

References

1. Autio, E. (1998). Evaluation of RTD in Regional Systems of Innovation. European Planning Studies, Vol. 6, 2, 131-140 [in English].
2. Bund, E. et.al. (2013). Report on Innovation Metrics. Capturing Theoretical, Conceptual and Operational Insights for the Measurement of Social Innovation. University of Heidel- berg, Centre for Social Investment [in English].
3. Clar, G., Corkapis, D., & Landabaso, M. (2001). Mobilizing Regional Foresight Actors to Strengthen the Strategic Basis of the European Research Area. IPTS Report, 59, 38-45 [in English].
4. Cook, P., & di Marchi, B. (2002). Generative Growth, Knowledge Economies und Sustainable Development: Implications for Regional Foresight Policy. EC STRATA ETAN Working Group Papers [in English].
5. EC. (1995). Green Paper on Innovation. European Commission, Brussels. 1995. December. EC (1996). Assessment  of the Regional  Innovation Support Infrastructure. Methodology in Design, Construction and Operation of Regional Technology Frameworks. Volume I. EIMS Publication No. 19, DG XIII. Brussels [in English].
6. EC. (2001). Commission Staff Working Paper. 2001 Innovation Scoreboard (SEC-2001-1414). Brussels, 2001. 09. 14 [in English].
7. EC. (2002). EUs innovation performance still needs improvement, but there are encouraging signs for the future. Brussels, December 16 [in English].
8. EC. (2014). Strengthening social innovation in Europe [in English].
9. European Commission. (1992). Towards a Europe of solidarity. Intensifying the struggle against social exclusion, furthering social integration. COM (92) 542 [in English].
10. European Commission. (1993). The Future of European Social Policy: Options for the Union. A Green Paper. COM (93) 551 [in English].
11. European Commission. (2005). Communication from the Commission on the Social Agenda. COM (2005) 33 [in English].
12. FOREN. (2001). A Practical Guide to Regional Foresight, Foresight for Regional Development Network, Brussels: European Commission, Research Directorate General, Strata Programme [in English].
13. Frascati Manual. (1963). OECD, Paris [in English].
14. Gillwald, K. (2000). Konzepte Soziale Innovation. WZB, Berlin [in German].
15. Howaldt, J., & Schwarz, M. (2010). Soziale Innovation im Fokus. Skizze eines gesellschafts-theoretisch inspirierten Forschungskonzepts. Transcript Verlag, Bielefeld [in German].
16. Kocziszky, Gy. (2010). Innomonitor – Regional innovation monitoring and forecasting system. BAROSS-EM07-EM-OMFB research project final report, Miskolc [in English].
17. Moulaert. (2013). The international Handbook Social innovation: collective action, social learning and transdisciplinary research. Cheltenham, Northampton [in English].
18. OECD. (1994). FRASCATI MANUAL: Proposed Standard practice for Surveys of Research and Experimental Development. Paris [in English].
19. Zapf, W. (1989). Über soziale Innovationen. Soziale Welt, 40. H. 1-2. p. 170-183 [in German].
20. Pererva, P.G., Kocziszky, G., Szakaly, D., & Somosi Veres, M. (2012). Technology transfer. Kharkiv-Miskolc: NTU “KhPI” [in English].