@article {1353,
	title = {More for Less? Sharing Economy as a Driver of Public Welfare Innovation},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {10},
	year = {2020},
	month = {05/2020},
	pages = {19-27},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	chapter = {19},
	address = {Ottawa},
	abstract = {This article investigates sharing economy as a path to welfare innovation. It is based on a case where a digital platform is activated in order to support sharing among citizens with lung disease, and thereby increase health and well-being. The case exemplifies how sharing economy currently is taken up by public actors in the attempt to prolong the goals of the public sector beyond itself. This implies drawing everyday sharing practices into a new middle between formal organization and private relations. In a critical response to literature on sharing economy that tends to reduce "sharing" to "transaction", the article draws attention to how sharing entangles with hopes, fears, and affectual engagements of everyday life, and to how it interacts with technology in unforeseen ways and beyond anticipated outcomes. Based on the analysis, the article concludes that there may be good reasons for public welfare authorities to engage in facilitating sharing among citizens. This is not because it is likely to provide "more for less" in relation to predetermined goals, but rather because it can open up other kinds of welfare outcomes that cannot be produced by public organizations themselves.},
	keywords = {innovation, public sector, sharing economy, technology, welfare state},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1353},
	url = {timreview.ca/article/1353},
	author = {Eva Pallesen and Marie Aakj{\ae}r}
}
@article {1045,
	title = {Innovation in the Public Sector: Exploring the Characteristics and Potential of Living Labs and Innovation Labs},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {7},
	year = {2017},
	month = {01/2017},
	pages = {7-14},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	abstract = {Living labs and innovation labs share many common traits and characteristics. Both concepts are linked to the public sector, and both concepts can be regarded as coping mechanisms to deal with contemporary changes in the innovation landscape and within society as a whole. Both build on past initiatives and practices, but are also struggling to find their own clear identity and {\textquotedblleft}raison d{\textquoteright}{\^e}tre{\textquotedblright}. Because both concepts are largely practice-driven, their theoretical underpinnings and foundations are mostly established after the fact: making sense of current practice rather than carefully researching and planning the further development. However, despite their similarities and common ground, most researchers treat living labs and innovation labs as separate literature streams. Here, starting from a review of the current issues and challenges with innovation in the public sector, we look for links between both concepts by analyzing the current definitions, the predecessors, and the {\textquotedblleft}state of the art{\textquotedblright} in terms of empirical research. Based on these findings, we summarize a set of similarities and differences between both concepts and propose a model towards more collaboration, mutual exchange, and integration of practices between innovation labs, which can be regarded as initiators of innovation, and living labs, which can be regarded as executors of innovation. Thus, we add to the conceptual development of both concepts and propose a roadmap for the further integration of both the theory and practice of living labs and innovation labs.},
	keywords = {collaborative innovation, innovation labs, living labs, Open innovation, public sector, user innovation},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1045},
	url = {http://timreview.ca/article/1045},
	author = {Dimitri Schuurman and Piret T{\~o}nurist}
}
@article {727,
	title = {Q\&A. What Are the Components of Canada{\textquoteright}s Innovation Ecosystem and How Well Is it Performing?},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {3},
	year = {2013},
	month = {09/2013},
	pages = {38-41},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	keywords = {academia, commercialization, innovation, innovation ecosystem, performance, policy, private sector, public sector},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/727},
	url = {http://timreview.ca/article/727},
	author = {David B. Watters}
}
