Public innovation is a peculiar form of innovation that provides new policies, new products, new services, and new infrastructures to increase public value. Many barriers can prevent this kind of innovation, so it cannot be taken for granted. Consequently, it is important to understand the conditions that can produce it. The present article is a case study on SIMAGE, a collaborative public innovation that has no equivalent in Europe and was developed in the Italian petrochemical site of Porto Marghera (in the municipality of Venice) for industrial risk prevention and crisis management. Based on sociological research conducted with qualitative techniques, I aim at accounting for the genesis and development of the process that led the public and the private sector to build jointly an effective public innovation through collaboration. The conclusion focuses on innovation processes, on the production of public goods by the public and the private sector, and on risk and crisis governance.
AggerASørensenE (2014) Designing collaborative policy innovation: Lessons from a Danish municipality. In: AnsellCTorfingJ (eds) Public Innovation through Collaboration and Design. New York, NY: Routledge, 188–208.
2.
AgollaJEVan LillJB (2013) Public sector innovation drivers: A process model. Journal of Social Sciences34(2): 165–176.
3.
AgranoffR (2014) Reconstructing bureaucracy for service: Innovation in the governance era. In: AnsellCTorfingJ. (eds) Public Innovation through Collaboration and Design. New York, NY: Routledge, 41–69.
4.
AlburyD (2005) Fostering innovation in public services. Public Money & Management25(1): 51–56.
5.
AltshulerAAZegansM (1997) Innovation and public management: Notes from the state house to city hall. In: AltshulerAABehnRD (eds) Innovation in American Government. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution, 68–80.
6.
AnsellCGashA (2008) Collaborative governance in theory and practice. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory18(4): 543–571.
7.
ArmstrongJFordR (2001) Public sector innovations and public interest issues. The Innovation Journal: The Public Sector Innovation Journal6(1): 1–22.
8.
BasonC (2010) Leading Public Sector Innovation: Co-creation for a Better Society. Bristol, UK: Policy Press.
9.
BekkersVJJMHomburgVFM (2005) The Information Ecology of E-government: E-government and Institutional and Technological Innovation in Public Administration. Amsterdam: IOS Press.
10.
BessantJ (2003) High Involvement Innovation. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons.
BirklandT (1998) Focusing events, mobilization, and agenda setting. Journal of Public Policy18(1): 53–74
13.
BlandTBrukBKimDLeeKT (2010) Enhancing public sector innovation: Examining the network-innovation relationship. The Innovation Journal: The Public Sector Innovation Journal15(3): 1–18.
14.
BlochCBuggeM (2013) Public sector innovation: From theory to measurement. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics27: 133–145.
15.
BobbioL (1996) La Democrazia non abita a Gordio. Milan, Italy: Franco Angeli.
16.
BommertB (2010) Collaborative innovation in the public sector. International Public Management Review11(1): 15–33.
17.
BonnaudLMartinaisE (2008) Les Leçons d’AZF. Chronique d’une loi sur les risques naturels. Paris: La documentation française.
18.
BorinsS (ed) (2008) Innovations in Government: Research, Recognition, and Replication. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
19.
BortolozzoG (1998) L’Erba ha voglia di vita: autobiografia e storia politica tra laguna e petrolchimico. Venezia Mestre, Italy: Associazione Gabriele Bortolozzo.
20.
BressersN (2014) The impact of collaboration on innovative projects: A study on Dutch management. In: AnsellCTorfingJ (eds) Public Innovation through Collaboration and Design. New York, NY: Routledge, 89–105.
21.
BrownLOsborneSP (2013) Risk and innovation: Towards a framework for risk governance in public services. Public Management Review15(2): 186–208.
22.
CallonM (1994) L’Innovation technologique et ses mythes. Gérer et comprendre34: 5–29.
23.
CarstensenHVBasonC (2012) Powering collaborative policy innovation: Can innovation labs help?The Innovation Journal: The Public Sector Innovation Journal17(1): 2–26.
24.
ChinelloC (1996) Sindacato, Pci, movimenti negli anni sessanta: Porto Marghera-Venezia, 1955–1970. Milan, Italy: Franco Angeli.
25.
CorwinLCorbinJHMittelmarkMB (2012) Producing synergy in collaborations: A successful hospital innovation. The Innovation Journal: The Public Sector Innovation Journal17(1): article 5.
26.
CrivellariP (2015) Le système intégré pour le monitorage environnemental et la gestion de l’émergence (SIMAGE) du site chimique de Porto Marghera (Italie) : dispositif technologique ou outil de communication (partiel)? In: CentemeriCDaumalinX (eds) Pollutions industrielles et espaces méditerranéens. Paris: Karthala, 197–212.
27.
CrivellariP (2016) La governance territoriale del rischio industriale : collaborazione, negoziazioni e territorio nella realizzazione del dispositivo SIMAGE di Porto Marghera. Rivista Italiana di Politiche Pubbliche11(2): 251–278.
28.
Da RonchBDe PietroLManninoIMattiuzzoE (2010) Strategie e approcci per la gestione del rischio industriale. L’esperienza di Porto Marghera. Milan, Italy: Franco Angeli.
29.
De VriesHBekkersVTummersL (2016) Innovation in the public sector: A systematic review and future research agenda. Public Administration94(1): 146–166.
30.
DobryM (1986) Sociologie des crises politiques. La dynamique des mobilisations multisectorielles. Paris: Presses de Sciences Po.
31.
Dossou-YovoATremblayDG (2012) Public policy, intermediaries and innovation system performance: A comparative analysis of Quebec and Ontario. The Innovation Journal: The Public Sector Innovation Journal17(1): article 3.
32.
DoughertyDDunneDD (2011) Organizing ecologies of complex innovation. Organization Science22(5): 1214–1223.
33.
EdnerHRagnarsonPSpännareSSvanbergS (1993) Differential optical absorption spectroscopy (DOAS) system for urban atmospheric pollution monitoring. Applied Optics32(3): 327–333.
34.
EggersBKumar SinghS (2009) The Public Innovators Playbook. Washington, DC: Harvard Kennedy School of Government.
FlemigSOsborneSKinderT (2014) Risk definition and risk governance in social innovation processes: A conceptual framework. LIPSE Project Working Paper 4. Available at : www.lipse.org.
37.
FuglsangL (2010) Bricolage and invisible innovation in public service innovation. Journal of Innovation Economics & Management5(1): 67–87.
38.
GaglioF (2011) Sociologie de l’innovation. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.
39.
GilbertC (ed) (2002) Risques collectifs et situations de crise. Paris: L’Harmattan.
40.
GilbertCHenryE (2012) La définition des problèmes publics : entre publicité et discrétion. Revue française de sociologie53(1): 35–59.
41.
GodinB (2015) Innovation contested: The idea of innovation over the centuries. London: Routledge.
42.
GodinB (2016) Making sense of innovation: From weapon to instrument to buzzword. Quaderni90(2): 21–40.
43.
HartleyJ (2005) Innovation in governance and public services: Past and present. Public Money & Management25(1): 27–34.
44.
HartleyJSørensenETorfingJ (2013) Collaborative innovation: A viable alternative to market competition and organizational entrepreneurship. Public Administration Review73(6): 821–830.
45.
KimberleyJ (1976) Issues in the design of longitudinal organizational research. Sociological Methods & Research4(3): 321–348.
46.
KroghAHTorfingJ (2015) Leading collaborative innovation: Developing innovative solution to wicked gang problems. In: AggerADamgaardBKroghAHSørensenE (eds) Collaborative Governance and Public Innovation in Northern Europe. U.A.E.: Bentham, 91–110.
47.
LagadecP (1990) States of Emergency. Technological Failures and Social Destabilization. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.
48.
LandeauJ (1993) Organizational change and barriers to innovation: A case study in the Italian public sector. Human Relations46(12): 1411–1429.
49.
LascoumesPLe GalèsP (2005) Introduction. L’action publique saisie par ses instruments. In: LascoumesPLe GalèsP (eds) Gouverner par les instruments. Paris: Presses de Sciences Po, 11–44.
50.
LeachJ (2004) A Course in Public Economics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
51.
Le GalèsP (2010) Gouvernance. In: BoussaguetLJaquotSRavinetP (eds) Dictionnaire des politiques publiques. Paris: Presses de Sciences Po, 299–308.
52.
LiLGoodchildMF (2010) The role of social networks in emergency management: A research Agenda. International Journal of Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management2(4): 49–59.
53.
MontinSJohanssonMForsemalmJ (2014) Understanding innovative regional collaboration: Metagovernance and boundary objects as mechanisms. In: AnsellCTorfingJ (eds.) Public Innovation through Collaboration and Design. New York, NY: Routledge, 106–124.
54.
MooreMH (1995) Creating Public Value. Strategic Management in Government. Cambridge, US: Harvard University Press.
55.
MooreMH (2009) Networked Government. In: GoldsmithSKettleD (eds) Unlocking the Power of Networks: Keys to High-Performance Government. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press, 190–228.
OsborneSPBrownL (2013a) Introduction: Innovation in public services. In: OsborneSPBrownL (eds) Handbook of Innovation in Public Services. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar, 1–11.
59.
OsborneSPBrownL (2013b) Innovation and public services: Engaging with risk. In: OsborneSPBrownL (eds) Handbook of Innovation in Public Services. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar, 157–160.
60.
OsborneSPBrownL (eds) (2013c) Handbook of Innovation in Public Services. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
61.
PedersenARJohansenMB (2012) Strategic and everyday innovative narratives. Translating ideas into everyday life in organizations. The Innovation Journal: The Public Sector Innovation Journal17(1): article 2.
62.
PetersTWatermanR (1982) In Search of Excellence. New York: Harper & Row.
63.
PlattU (2006) Differential Optical Absorption Spectroscopy, Air Monitoring by Environment: Trace Gas Monitoring. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons.
64.
PollittCBouckaertG (2011) Public Management Reform: A Comparative Analysis. New Public Management, Governance, and the Neo-Weberian State. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
65.
RittelHWebberM (1973) Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences4(2): 155–169.
66.
SørensenE (2012) Governance and innovation in the public sector. In: Levi-FaurD (ed.) The Oxford Handbook of Governance. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 215–227.
67.
SørensenETorfingJ (2011) Enhancing collaborative innovation in the public sector. Administration & Society43(8): 842–868.
68.
SørensenETorfingJ (eds) (2012a) Special issue on collaborative innovation in the public sector. The Innovation Journal. The Public Sector Innovation Journal17(1). Available at: https://www.innovation.cc/volumes-issues/vol17-no1.htm
69.
SørensenETorfingJ (2012b) Collaborative innovation in the public sector. The Innovation Journal: The Public Sector Innovation Journal17(1): 1–14.
70.
SwanJScarbroughH (2005) The politics of networked innovation. Human Relations58(7): 913–943.
71.
TorfingJ (2013) Collaborative innovation in the public sector. In: OsborneSBrownL (eds) Handbook of Innovation in Public Services. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar, 301–316.
72.
TorfingJ (2016) Collaborative Innovation in the Public Sector. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
73.
TouatiNDenisJ-L (2013) Analyse critique de la littérature scientifique portant sur l’innovation dans le secteur public : bilan et perspectives de recherche prometteuses. Télescope19(2): 1–22. Available at: http://archives.enap.ca/bibliotheques/telescope/Telv19n2a1.pdf
74.
TsaiW (2001) Knowledge transfer in intraorganizational networks: Effects of network position and absorptive capacity on business unit innovation and performance. The Academy of Management Journal44(5): 996–1004.
ZieglerR (2017) Social innovation as a collaborative concept. Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research30(4): 388–405.
79.
ZucconiG (2009) Marghera e la scommessa industriale di Venezia. In: AdornoSNeri SerneriS (eds) Industria, ambiente e territorio. Per una storia ambientale delle aree industriali in Italia. Bologna, Italy: Il Mulino, 133–148.
